Smiling_Jolly_Roger ...was there a little kid wearing a Los Angeles Dodgers cap in one scene? The Dodgers played in Brooklyn until 1958! Other than that, this film was worth watching twice and I'll watch it again next time it's on BOUNCE TV. I enjoyed Paul Harris' performance, although I think BOUNCE does him a disservice in its promos by touting Frank DeKova as the star. (Just as bad is that DeKova doesn't even appear in the promos!) The main reason I watched this movie the first time was to see if Frank DeKova was actually black. I never knew what he really looked like when he played a Native American on "F-Troop," so I was intrigued to find out.

fearmaker2002 In addition to all the modern cars on the street, everyone in the movie keeps making declarative statements that it is 1956, as in "You know, this is 1956!" Also, all the white men have 70s haircuts and sideburns. The mayor would have been considered a bum, a beatnik or a surfer in 1956. Perhaps a missing subplot about a time machine wasn't fully explored. I don't know why they just didn't make it take place in present day except that the film is supposed to be based on a true story--In 1956!If you are into blaxploitation, it's not a bad story--the main characters do their best considering the mangled plot, but Serene's secret wasn't much of a secret--if you can't figure it out right away you aren't paying attention even though it's 1956.The other odd thing (among many odd things) is how this movie ends. It's a real WTF moment. Saying there are loose ends would be an understatement--Especially for 1956.It's available on the "50 Drive-In Movie Classics" collection. At about 50 cents a movie, I can't complain. It's low budget but has some nudity and some cartoon-like violence. This also appears to be the only movie in this pack that takes place in 1956.

lemon_magic When you first see a film like this included in a "Drive-In Movie" 50 pack, you expect it to be fairly crummy, but "Jive Turkey" (as it is titled in this collection) turned out to have some good things going for it. (BTW, I think the "Baby Needs A New Pair Of Shoes" title is a much better one for this film. It's unclear who the Jive Turkey is supposed to be - the Italian boss played by Dekova? The informer? Who?)Some of the acting is surprisingly effective. Fortunately, this includes the lead role. Paul Harris (as the numbers king "Pasha") is the best thing about the movie and the main reason to see it. He really is a pleasure to watch, and he pretty much carries the movie. Most of the supporting actors tend to be stiff and amateurish; but even so,the director can often get a good reading of a nice zippy line of dialog out of his supporting cast when it really counts. There is even some snappy camera work in spots, and Ernie Banks chips in with a couple of nicely understated soul pieces that complement the atmosphere the film wants to generate. This happens often enough that the movie never sinks to the of camp or kitsch. However, the screenplay and low budget production values cripple the director's attempt to generate a compelling experience. After a moderately interesting opening scene which promises a gang war between the black numbers racketeers and "Italian" gangsters, things just settle down into a meandering plod; you never really get the sense that Pasha is in any real trouble. Indeed, it's typical of the movie's problems that Pasha's enforcer 'Serene' kills the Italian bosses right hand man in that opening scene (in a contrived but reasonably compelling way), but nothing seems to come of it, and there seems to be no lasting consequence. Come to think of it, the opening credits feature a (badly staged) massacre by the Italians that also never is mentioned again. The rest of the movie is more of the same. It's obvious that people worked their fingers to the bone to make the most out of a tiny budget; but good camera work and location scouting can't hide the fact that the movie is obviously a 70's production trying to pretend it was set in 1956. And it's a real shame that the producer and director didn't have a good story editor to help them polish their screenplay. The final showdown between Pasha and "Big Tony" doesn't make a lot of sense and doesn't really follow from anything that came before. The "surprise" revelations about 'Serene' and the identity of the informer in Pasha's organization are meant to end the film with a bang, but I saw both those plot twists coming in the first five minutes, and again, they didn't really organically connect with the rest of the plot.Still, I thought it was worth seeing once on the strength of Paul Harris' performance and for some moments of real interest and good film-making. I'd love to see what the Ransoms could have done with a real budget and a ghost writer to help them tighten their story ideas. As a previous reviewer mentioned, a revisionist filmmaker like Quentin Tarentino could work wonders with a remake. Not worth seeking out, but if the "Drive In Move 50 pack" falls into your possession, this movie is worth taking the time to see.

dbborroughs This is a low budget, made on the cheap film that does possess some charm. The problem is that it meanders all over the place and never picks up any real steam. The plot begins with a sit down between Pasha and his Italian gangster counter part Big Tony (played by the top billed Frank DeKova aka Chief Wild Eagle from F-Troop in the first of his two scenes). Tony tells Pasha he has to hand everything over to him and his boys or they will kill him. Pasha's girl kills Tony's man, which you would think woulds spark a gang war, it doesn't, instead it spurs the Mayor to try and close Pasha down. This leads to the numbers operation being moved, police raids and some talk about fighting back. The Italian mob does try to kill Pasha but it never amounts to much. This is a black-ploitation crime drama that is short on action.The problem seems to be that they had almost no money to make this movie. its suppose to be set in 1956 but people wear clothes from the 1970's and the streets are filled with cars made well after 56. I'm guessing that they couldn't afford any money for blanks, or if they did they didn't have very many. What violence there is tends to be fist fights or beatings, which can be very bloody. Its disappointing especially after the opening scene. I had the sense while watching it that this was suppose to be a larger, more detailed story (there are details hanging off the screen that seem to connect to a longer story) and it wasn't filmed because of money or the film was unfinished.Its a messy movie but I liked it. The writing is at times sharp and witty, even if the cast isn't up to it. There are numerous lines of dialog that deserve to be quoted. You have a bunch of interesting characters that seem very real. I also liked that the plot never went where you expected it to go, even though it became clear early this was headed for left field by a completely new route. Its best described as a low budget attempt at something other than your typical crime drama (black or white). No it won't win any awards but if you're an adventurous film goer it deserves to be seen, if for no other reason than to imagine it remade by Mario Van Peebles, Quentin Tarantino or the Hughes Brothers. You probably won't rave, but it will stick in your head.