MovieChat Forums > Billy Jack (1971) Discussion > Wow this is an awful movie

Wow this is an awful movie


I lived during those times and partook of the idealisitc crap in this film. "All you need is love" The Straights are all narrow minded and stupid" It totally embarrasses me now. I was one of those smug little know-it-all smart asses too. Yup just pass out flowers & doobies and all our troubles will disappear. This movie is a mess.

reply

yes, i watched it yesterday as well.it just seems like a 70s drive in flick that would start about 1 a.m. i would have had enough beer by then and would have just headed home.

reply

I guess I missed the scene where they passed out flowers and doobies and all their troubles disappeared. I even missed the part where all the straights were narrow-minded and stupid; I seem to recall a sheriff who was pretty cool.

As you've pointed out, the movie depicted its time well. I can see how hating yourself at that time would make watching this uncomfortable for you.

People rip on this movie for many reasons, and more often than not they make the mistake of judging it by today's standards. Funny how people get so exercised over a movie that's as much a period piece as "Beach Blanket Bingo".

So it must be more than that....this movie gets under people's craw because its idealism reaches people even today. Kind of impressive. Not even "Beach Blanket Bingo" can claim that kind of power. If you're the kind of person who puts "idealistic" and "crap" in the same sentence, yeah, put something else in the DVD player. Personally I can see it and feel great about that time. Great little story, and man, did it capture a spirit and time. To each his own.

reply

[deleted]

I think the message is peace/love/acceptance, but be prepared to kick ass if you have to. It's not an endorsement of a lifestyle of violence at all.

reply

this is exactly the message. pacifism is indeed the best way to live, but you need be prepared to defend yourself/beliefs if it fails. quite simple, really.

reply

The film features a fascinating debate between Billy Jack and Jean as to which tactics are better: A peaceable attitude that only resorts to violence when necessary (i.e. limited pacifism) or absolute pacifism, which refuses to ever turn to violence in response to evil. Contrary to the complaints of the film's critics, this movie is not hypocritical in that it preaches pacifism while occasionally showcasing violence. It's only Jean and, by extension her school, that supports total pacifism whereas Billy advocates limited pacifism, only resorting to violence when justified.

"Billy Jack" (the film) obviously supports Billy Jack's approach.

reply

@Coax and Wuchakk; good posts. It's mind bendingly amazing to me how many people, including nominally intelligent critics, didn't understand such a simple premise, which was even spoken in the scene between Billy and Jean you mention, and reiterated during the shoot out at the end. The film presented two paths; pacifism and violence. The ending of the movie seems to say give peace a chance - in fact that song is used in the sequel. "A chance" doesn't mean it will always work. Anyone who thinks there was any hypocrisy involved really don't get the point of the film.

reply

The ending of the second movie actually had titles saying “Give peace a chance.”

reply

"The ending of the second movie actually had titles saying “Give peace a chance.”

That was less well-received than a visit from social services to The Neverland Ranch

reply

Your points make great, good sense, Wuchakk.

Despite the film Billy Jack's flaws (of which, unfortunately, are many!), this movie carries a rather double-edged, but firm message: Pacifism is best, but can be limited, in that it's sometimes necessary to fight (even physically, at times) for one's own survival.

reply

Thanks. Absolute pacifism is naïve and foolish whereas limited pacifism -- only resorting to violence when necessary and justified -- is common sense wisdom.


My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

You're welcome, Wuchakk. This:

Absolute pacifism is naïve and foolish whereas limited pacifism -- only resorting to violence when necessary and justified -- is common sense wisdom.


is a point that makes great, good sense. However, I hesitate to say that self-defense is violence. It's the people who start fights and confrontations of that kind who are the violent ones, not the ones who defend themselves.

reply

I looked the word up on dictionary.com and there are several definitions. I meant 'violence' simply as a reference to "rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment" or "swift and intense force." Neither definition indicates whether the violent act is justified or unjustified, good or evil.

The initial definition in the British dictionary reinforces this definition: "the exercise or an instance of physical force, usually effecting or intended to effect injuries, destruction, etc."

Take the Battle of the Bulge in WWII. You could say that it was a violent conflict without referring to either the Allied or Axis forces.

That said, I get what you're saying. I'm just explaining my usage of the word, which is simply "the exercise of physical force of some type," good or evil.


My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

This:

this is exactly the message. pacifism is indeed the best way to live, but you need be prepared to defend yourself/beliefs if it fails. quite simple, really.


is a very good point about the message of Billy Jack, but because of a lot of the really campy scenes in this film, it failed to really live up to its real potential.

I admittedly did like the fighting scenes between Billy Jack and the town toughs the best.

reply

You're probably right about this:

I think the message is peace/love/acceptance, but be prepared to kick ass if you have to. It's not an endorsement of a lifestyle of violence at all.


being the message of Billy Jack, Wuchakk, but while this movie was largely enjoyable, it failed to live up to its potential for being a really dynamite film for many reasons.

I did admittedly like the fight scenes, and the idea of the Freedom School, where kids who've had problems of some sort or other could go, was a very interesting one, but the whole thing was overshadowed by too much soap opera, and too many campy scenes that looked like pre-teens having lunch at, and singing cute songs at a day-camp session, if one gets the drift. The acting scenes, too, were too long and drawn out, as well.

reply

while this movie was largely enjoyable, it failed to live up to its potential for being a really dynamite film for many reasons.


I agree that, while it's a historically significant independent film and has numerous strengths, it also has blatant flaws, like the ones you mention. However, it's strengths are so great that they definitely make the film worthwhile. Unfortunately, you have to sit through those really lame and overlong skit performances at the Freedom School. Also, the ending feels padded with the overlong standoff, but the climax sort of makes up for it.

In view of its flaws I couldn't give it higher rating than 6/10. Here's my detailed review, if interested: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066832/reviews-118

My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

Thanks for making some good points, Wuchakk. Due to its flaws, however, I felt that I couldn't give the film Billy Jack any higher than a 5 rating, but that's just me.

reply

I know what you mean; I gave it a 6/10.


My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

Those improv scenes, as well as the town council confrontation, should have been drastically cut or eliminated. Laughlin actually covers this in his bio. The most embarrassingly indulgent scenes involved daughter Teresa badly singing bad songs. Kept hearing Simon Cowell’s voice: “All I could think about is how much I would pay you to stop singing.”

The rest is solid, including most of the performances. This last time I noticed how good some of the kids are: the Indian girl’s icy stare as Bernard dumps flour over her, and particularly Julie Webb’s Barbara. Dialogue is strong and most of it strikes me as cut from real life. Laughlin's presence is undeniable.

reply

Once Upon A Time In Hollywood wouldn't exist without Billy Jack. For that, we must express gratitude

reply

I definitely agree. Amen bro.

reply

This is one of the few movies I have seen more than once where I had the reaction of this is a great movie then saying the same thing as you on a 2nd viewing. The last time I saw it I accepted the movie on its terms, far from a great movie, flawed story telling with really amateurish acting. Personally, I would love to see a inspired remake updated addressing current political issues, a stronger script with more nuanced antagonists and good actors. Tom Hardy as Billy Jack, Emily Blunt as Jean Roberts come to mind as leads.

reply

It was pretty simplistic for sure. But it was typical of the 70's drive in movies of that era. He did start the Kung Fu movement (other than Bruce Lee) in the movies.

reply

Yeah, this movie is one giant conflicted mess. The execution is embarrassing. At the age of 10, I think I overlooked (or maybe didn't fully understand) the mixed messages because I liked the slow build leading to the martial arts sequences. It was too cool and nothing out there like it. I hope Walhberg moves forward with his reboot. He'll do a good job updating the message for today's audience.

reply

[deleted]

I agree, and just think about how much better off the country would be if everyone who thought life was about living in communes, not bathing, protesting military actions against oppressive communist invaders, and taking every drug within reach, had instead gotten a haircut and a job and allowed your own country to win a war.

I thought Billy Jack was cool at the time because it was unusual to see someone pop open a can of martial arts whoopass in the movies. Looking back it hasn't aged well at all. In fact prospective viewers would do well to avoid it and see the SNL spoof with larraine newman and singer Paul Simon instead.
"If only the world were more like this ice cream cone, with all the flavors getting along, Billy Jack wouldn't have to beat so many people up".

I know you are but what am I?

reply

Imagine how much better off you would be if everyone lived in a sustainable commune and grew organic veggies and the war machine was shut down and we all lived in peace and harmony. I shudder at the very idea! Thank god we still have wars.
Anyway you didn't have to invade Viet Nam they ended up quite a nice little capitalist nation today without being forced to. The whole war was for nothing. If the 'Murican dream is so great other places will will follow in your footsteps, forcing them though is just imperialism and makes the world hate you. The world knows you don't want to force democracy on other nations, you couldn't care less, you just want the whole world open for markets.
Good to see Archie Bunker is still alive and hating long hairs on IMDB!

reply

I agree, and just think about how much better off the country would be if everyone who thought life was about living in communes, not bathing, protesting military actions against oppressive communist invaders, and taking every drug within reach, had instead gotten a haircut and a job and allowed your own country to win a war.


where in the movie is this ever shown or suggested? no bathing? really? these kids at the commune are clean and well-behaved. also it's stated clearly that they are not on drugs. and why would they need a haircut? what's wrong with men having long hair? you're kidding, right?

also, as for jobs, they looked very busy doing things around the commune/school. in case you didn't know, a commune is full of jobs for people to learn and do (gardening, auto repair, plumbing, carpentry, etc, etc.) all of those jobs could be put on the market in exchange for money or other items of need.

while, yes, the film hasn't aged well, the message is still incredibly pertinent today. the film's pacing and style is what has dated it.

reply

when all else fails, beat the crap outta them lol

reply

I thought you were going to say it was awful for tech reasons. I fell in with a bunch of film students, when I was in college, when this movie first came out, in '71. We went to the movie theater and they keep pointing out, to me, the different scenes where the boom mike keeping dropping into the scene and how the color values would change in the middle of a scene. And the scenes where you could see the crew or unaware people (not extras actors, just regular people) waking around in the background. I don't remember what scenes those are now (hey it's been 43 years) but they are there.

This is one of my top ten of worse movies ever. What's remarkable about this film was that it made a lot of money for Tom Laughlin, due to it's aggressive ad campaign. ("How many times have you seen Billy Jack?") that used to run on TV. This was back, (in a time far, far away) when movie theaters only had one screen and an individual movie only ran for one week (unless it was a special hit film, like the "Sound of Music" and then it ran for two weeks!).

The film was a real flop on its first run, but Laughlin (who wrote the screenplay, directed and produced the movie under the name T.C. Frank) would rent out theaters in certain areas of the country and run ads where they would asked teens and young adults "How many times have you seen Billy Jack?" and then show a series of people saying "23 times", "59 times" or "90 times"! It was some type of cultural fad where it became the thing to go see Billy Jack many times. I remember when I first the movie in '71 there were about a dozen people in a 200 seat theater. By '72 there were long lines of people waiting to see the movie. Believe me folks that movie was not that good!


reply

Undoubtedly an awful mess. Had it been made in the 2000s it would have won an Mtv Award. That was the target audience--disaffected youth, anti-war, social change.

But taken as a whole, from Born Losers to Billy Jack Goes to Washington, it's a sub-genre: if and only if your peace sign fails may you employ deadly force, hapkido style, as a vigilante.

Walter Wink warns us in his trilogy of the "myth of redemptive violence" and nowhere else is it more accurately personified than in Billy Jack. He's willing to fight for peace, peace at all costs, peace at any price. The story works to convince you that sometimes you just have to put a man down. I know it's wrong but..."and this boy... that I love... sprawled out by this big ape here... and this little girl, who is so special to us we call her "God's little gift of sunshine"... and I think of the number of years that she's going to have to carry in her memory... the savagery of this idiotic moment of yours... I just go BERSERK!"

reply

I am fairly open minded but I was cringing when I saw this. I bet some people were baked making it.

reply