I agree with one reviewer who called this film one of the great unsung classics of American cinematic history. So why is it so obscure? Was it overlooked when released in October 1962 because of the Cuban missile crisis? Or not often shown because some scenes are objectionable e.g. the partial stripping of the bar hostess?
shareWell,
Tivo captured it for me and I watched it and thought it was great. Maltin doesn't say anything about it's history...maybe now that it's on sattelite television more ppl will become acquainted with it.
Marianne
Didn't you comment on PP previously somewhere? Maybe you saw a parallel between the movie and troubled kids you deal with?
shareI don't think so. Not me. I just liked the movie. I steer clear of troubled kids!
Marianne
Why do you like the movie or what do you like best about it? There is much I liked about it.
shareGosh but I find it hard to say WHY I liked a movie. It usually revolves around good acting, good story, and engaging entertainment. I'm not much on slow stuff, like Lost in Translation. This movie had all of the good things and was never dull.
Marianne
I agree that PP was good but why has it been relatively unknown? Anyone have any theories, other than mine? I know one old guy who remembers all kinds of movies from 30-60 years ago but doesn't ever recall seing PP.
shareyeah I agree this movie is an underrted masterpiece...really good, excellent performance and great direction
I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender...
I was fairly young when I first saw it and it has stayed with me. Darin was pretty disturbing!
It's an interesting psychological phenomenon.
Good question.
To this day (2007) I consider this to be one of the best psychological films ever made. Of course it gets "preachy" but it also has a fantastic raw edge and is clearly (and correctly) critical of the blatant racism of that time (and in 1962, when it was filmed).
Bobby Darin is simply superb in this movie.
I want to add an anecdote here. I am a psychologist. When I was the Clinical Director of a therapeutic residential center for delinquent boys near Philadelphia, I briefly ran a series of groups for boys who had committed a variety of sexual offenses. The vast majority of these boys had been molested (mostly by older females) but were in denial of the impact of their experiences. There are several scenes in Pressure Point depicting the patient being blatantly and incestuously "seduced" by his mother. (And of course the patient, played by Darin, is depicted committing a sexual offense in that amazing speakeasy tic-tac-toe scene.) Toward the end of these groups (they usually lasted 8 to 12 sessions) I would show these scenes to these boys. Can you imagine a group of 13-18 year old street-wise Philadelphia kids "from the hood" actually being blown away by that a scene from a 1962 movie!?!? But that is exactly what happened, and I think that speaks more about the brilliance of this movie than all the Oscars it should have won.
I've seen the movie several times but it didn't occur to me that the patient's mother was trying to seduce him, for example by having him massage her. Remember the "oriental potentate" scene where the mother is hauled and held down by guys to be executed by an elephant? Was that in retaliation for the seduction? Naturally the patient hated his father more. I thought he was only contemptuous of his mother for being weak. But I guess if she deserved to die maybe she wronged him too...
shareI've never seen the film "Pressure Point" and am in the process of finally seeing it on TCM. I agree with steve-1553 that it's a very intense, raw and authentic film. I also agree with him about the causation of the patient's many problems. I imagine that the film probably scared the daylights out of the studio heads but the producers (one of whom was Stanley Kramer) released it. I can't blame them as in 1962 racism, as well as fringe hate groups, were quite alive.
Very well acted by Mr. Darin and Mr. Poitier as well as the child actor who plays Mr. Darin as a child. The photography by famed cinematographer Ernest Haller (Conrad Hall may have had something to do with the surreal stuff) is excellent.
I'll stay with the film - once. Too intense for me! Perhaps this is why the film is primarily an unknown one.
I thought the movie was interesting but deeply flawed. First of all the Bobby Darin character doesn't come across as being all that evil. The two incidents of sexual violence(his mother molesting him is implied while the rape after the tic tac toe game is never shown) that are hinted at in the movie are very subtle because of the time period the film was released in, and this may have contributed to creating a milder effect. Also, he seems to be too self aware to be projecting hatred against jews and blacks as Sidney Poitier says he does. If he did hate them for a while after being rejected by the jewish lady, he must have got over it. He is an intelligent man who cannot be stupid enough to hate a whole race because of a single slight. Besides the woman herself wanted to be with him and he had nothing but good things to say about her while narrating the story,in retrospect, after knowing her Jewish ancestry.
He seems more like a shameless opportunist to me, one who rides with the Nazi movement because it gives him rank and allows him fully to be the manipulative thug he is. There is a lot of contradictory traits in this man that do not resolve easily within the narrative of the film. Sidney Poitier's Doctor hates this kid for his beliefs, even after he realises that early psychological damage caused him to be a sadist and a bully.
What rape after the tic tac toe game? Writing all over her was the only abuse; she was stripped for that, but a rape isn't necessarily implied. There are some intelligent bigots. I once knew a very high IQ guy who thought *beep* were inferior and cited their "lack of progress" as proof. By the way, the Jewish lady didn't reject Darin's character; her old man did, because he was "a tramp." I'm not sure he was a shameless opportunist. That might've been true in the heyday of the bund, but by WWII, when the patient-doctor interaction took place, the pro-nazi bund no longer had a chance--too closely identified with America's enemies to have any prospect of success.
shareThe physical and psychological abuse to which she was subjected was bad enough, and should not be trivialized by saying it was "the only abuse." Actually, to anyone who knows the source material of Pressure Point, the rape, while not seen, is implied. The film is based on an incident reported by Robert Lindner in "The Fifty Minute Hour," a published collection of psychiatric case studies. The character whom Darin plays in the film did, according to Lindner, commit rape. He certainly didn't help her bathe or get dressed afterwards!
shareOK thanks for the info. I was aware of "The Fifty Minute Hour" but haven't read it. What I'd like to know is, to what extent does PP replicate that account? Who was the real patient, was he a member of the bund, arrested for sedition, and was he hanged about ten years later--maybe 1952?
shareHe can say "the only abuse" if he wants to. It trivilizes nothing except possibly in your mind. Simply put, it was THE ONLY abuse shown so there is nothing wrong with stating a simple fact in simple English.
Anyway, if there was actually supposed to be a rape after the tic-tac-toe abuse, someone dropped the ball. After the flashback cuts back to the present, I admit the viewer is left to assume a rape was implied. However, the idiot patient is laughing after telling his story, he 'air tic-tac-toes' and says, "We tic-tac-toed everything." If his story ended in a rape, I would think it would somehow be mentioned instead making tic-tac-toe hand gestures and ranting about tic-tac-toeing.
Perhaps he didn't tell the psychiatrist about the rape part, but that would be pretty flimsy. If you want to imply the rape and don't want the patient to outright mention it, at least at the end of the flashback, slowly pan the camera over to the bar-owner husband while the woman quietly says, "no...no...no" a few times. Give us something/anything so we don't need to read source material to know all the facts.
Ashhascats, Wow...great review, thought provoking! I agree with much of what you are saying. You articulated your thoughts so well with what seems like a deep understanding of a complex individual. I still believe the film to be worth merit in many ways. I was impressed with the cinematography and expression and mood of the flashback scenes. This was a film ahead of its time. I also think the performances were top-notch.
shareI'm 55 and I remember seeing it once on TV when I was quite young. For whatever reason, it's just not televised as far as I know. I think TCM may have shown it in the last year but I couldn't stay up til its 2 am showing.
Was you ever bit by a dead bee?
I remember seeing this film when it first came out. It was a United Artist film and was distributed via a Showcase circuit which was a makeshift attempt by the remaining independent neighborhood theatres to survive. They didn't have much room for error and a b&w film with no publicity, no female star, no love story, about a psychopathic raciest didn't last too long and was out of the theatres in a week, or at most, two. No rep meant no revival. Even worse was the neglect of the one time well regarded director Hubert Cornfield. I never forgot Poitier's last speech delivered in controlled rage. I think it was his best performance.
shareI agree wholeheartedly regarding Poitier's performance in Pressure Point. What I remember of the time of the film's initial release is that while it didn't play the neighborhood theaters near where I grew up it was advertised in the newspapers as a kind of "exploitation" piece (raw, shocking, etc.), with Darin and Poitier as "hooks", as it were. I think it played in some drive-ins. That was strong stuff for 1962.
shareIt's so unknown because it's very hard to take, as certain truths are. One of the less obvious truths was what a great actor Darin was in this flick. Also, it had a TV-like facility in its bookending scenes with Falk. In the middle, pure horror and hard-to-take truth.
share[deleted]
This movie requires a bit of thought to understand, and remember, that's not a common thing in America. People don't want to work that hard.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
It is unknown because so many other heralded movies came out in 1962. "Lawrence of Arabia" was the big Oscar-winner of the year. "Dr. No" brought us James Bond. At the Golden Globes each acting category contained about 10 choices each. Some films get lost in the shuffle. Plus, the film may also seem a bit dated in its psychology. Poitier is better known for "The Defiant Ones" and winning an Oscar for "Lilies of the Field" (1963). By the way, both Poitier and Darin were nominated the following year after the release of this film. Poitier for 'Field' and Darin for 'Captain Newman, M.D." but in different categories.
share