BasicLogic
This is a very messy scripted, messy directed so-called "Thriller" but got no thrill at all. When you watched it, you just saw R.M. played the Philip Marlowe character as a private detective did his P.I. business on British soil, fully dressed, just not in tuxedo. He just walked around until later involved in a gun fight. The two daughters of a retired American general were so ridiculously to watch, both duly a poor miscast job. There were so many names and characters involved in this messy film, just like the novel itself. R. Chandler's P.I. Philip Marlowe series although a classic, but it just feel dated and outdated by today's view point standard. Those murder cases were just like what those housewives turned mystery writers, especially the British and American female murder case mystery writers, who dreamed up those laughable murder cases one by one, their police inspectors also looked just laughable but still unbiasedly adapted and made into PBS "Masterpiece" dramas to entertain mucho TV viewers. I've tried to read those so many times but never could have finished one. These are just kitchen dining table writers to me. Chandler might be had so many female apprentices, I guess.
JohnHowardReid
A costly project with lots of star power, this re-make of The Big Sleep was doomed to failure from the start. Critics were honor-bound to compare any new version unfavorably with the original, but the re-make's demise became irremediably inevitable when Michael Winner decided to re-locate the story from 1940s Los Angeles to 1970s London! Nonetheless, this version is not only an interesting movie in its own right, but actually seems far more faithful to both the plot and mood of the Chandler novel.Admittedly, Mitchum is no Bogart, but is more the imperturbable, world-weary, snappy Marlowe that readers love, while Sarah Miles, Candy Clark and James Stewart are so close to the characters in the book as to make comparisons with Bacall and company irrelevant. Richard Boone is far more frightening as Canino, while Oliver Reed creams John Ridgely as Eddie Mars. John Mills has a tiny role as the equivalent of the Regis Toomey character, and Richard Todd an even smaller part as another Scotland Yard man. This movie also features striking photography and compelling sets, and it is available on an excellent 10/10 Geneon DVD.
Woodyanders
1970's England. Aging and cynical private eye Philip Marlowe (superbly played with world-weary grace by Robert Mitchum) gets hired by the frail and crippled General Sternwood (a moving performance by Jimmy Stewart) to investigate a blackmail scheme that proves to be much more complicated than it initially seems to be.Writer/director Michael Winner relates the intricate and involving story at a steady pace, maintains an appropriately seamy tone throughout (such risqué subject matter as porn and homosexuality gets depicted with unwavering explicitness), stages the action set pieces with aplomb, treats the material in a respectful manner without ever resorting to either condescending kitsch or sentimental nostalgia, and makes neat use of the London locations. Sarah Miles really sinks her teeth into the juicy role of tart and conniving gambling addict Charlotte Sternwood. Alas, Candy Clark goes way too over the top with her hysterical portrayal of unstable nymphet Camilla. Fortunately, the strong supporting cast more than compensates for this, with especially stand-out contributions from Richard Boone as the brutish Lash Camino, Oliver Reed as fearsome mobster Eddie Mars, Harry Andrews as loyal butler Norris, Edward Fox as smarmy book maker Joe Brody, and especially Joan Collins as the ruthless Agnes Lozelle. Robert Paynter's slick cinematography provides a pleasing glossy look. Jerry Fielding's funky-throbbing score hits the right-on groovy spot. Worth a watch.
norm-bernstein
Admittedly, this remake can't compare to the original 1946 film starring Humphrey Bogart... but it has a value of it's own.The 1946 version of the film was very artfully scripted. It had to be, because two underlying themes of the plot (relating to homosexuality and pornography) couldn't be made explicit, in the original, owing to the sensibilities of the era. This led to the original film's only flaw: the plot's incomprehensibility, masked only by the brilliance of the direction and acting.By 1975, such social restrictions were gone, and the remake, set in England, instead of California, was able to be fully explicit, making the plot understandable for the first time. Robert Mitchum's subdued and smooth interpretation of Chandler's Phillip Marlowe was well suited to the script. I think this film is well worth watching, if for little other reason than a clear plot line and Mitchum's delightful under-acting of the lead role.
AD
