This movie is not a masterpiece but it is superior to DESPERATE HOURS for two very simple reasons: 1) the on-location shooting for everything in the movie which brought a much-needed credibility and immediacy to the story and 2) contrary to other opinions here, the great casting of the hoodlum trio, especially John Cassavetes and Vince Edwards who were both convincingly psychopathic, much more so than the actors in THE DESPERATE HOURS. DESPERATE HOURS had a stagebound feel to it all the way through the picture and, though I am a huge Bogart fan, his portrayal of the hardened criminal is not as scary as Edwards and Cassavetes (both of whom projected an IN COLD BLOOD-type or Charlie Starkweather-type menace that Bogart did not). Likewise, hostage head of the family Jack Kelly was no Olivier as an actor, but he was always very convincing as an everyday kind of average American Joe and deserved more of a career. His biggest claim to fame turned out to be portraying James Garner's brother in the original "Maverck" TV series.
reply
share
NickNoraCharles
12 years ago
I agree with you, Chris. Once you accept it's not a masterpiece but a nice little ride into a tight script, pragmatic characters and neat location shots, you're in for a good time. There were unintended funny moments in it too, like when the TV reporter decides to drop a few hints on what usually happens to kidnappers in his evening broadcast. You'd almost expect him to go ".... if you know what I mean, of course......" (wink wink)
reply
share