Amazon.com

To call Orson Welles's F For Fake a documentary would be somewhat deceitful, but deceit itself is very much the subject of this curious film essay. Welles ruminates on the nature of artistic fakery through two examples, that of infamous art forger Elmyr de Hory and the writer Clifford Irving, whose bogus autobiography of Howard Hughes set off a minor media flurry in the 1970s. Postmodernist that he is, Wells then proceeds to narrate and edit the film in such a perversely frenetic way as to blur the lines between what is real and what is deception, making for an often confusing but engaging work of art in itself. We even see the footage we've been watching as it's being spliced together in Welles's editing room. The specter of Welles's often maligned later career hangs over the proceedings like a challenge--is he going to actually complete this strange movie about chicanery, or will it become one of the many unfinished experiments of his twilight years? Happily, Welles concludes the proceedings with a delightful sequence about Picasso, lust, and what constitutes real art. F For Fake is a fine example of a master filmmaker who had at least a couple tricks left up his sleeve. --Ryan Boudinot ... Read more

Reviews (17)

G For Great
Orson Welles' "For for Fake" can be at times a very confusing movie. But, if you find yourself confused, the problem is your thinking to hard. You're trying to make sense of a movie that simply doesn't want you to make sense of it. Think of the film as a magic act. You know you're being fooled, but you sit and watch anyways because you are being entertained. To think how the trick was done that's away from the mystery. And just like a magican Welles' doesn't want to reveal his secrets.

"F for Fake" is supposedly about a famous art forger, Elmyr de Hory and the relationship between himself and a man named Clifford Irving. Right from the beginning Welles tells us we are going to watch a movie about lies and deception.

At first the film, notice a called it a film not a documentary, plays off as real. We think we are seeing a movie that is examing how in fact is Elmyr de Hory. At admittedly it is very interesting. Welles comprises this material in a very effective way. Though all the while we are asking ourselves, just how much as this can we trust?

The film zips through three main plot points. One dealing with de Hory another involving Howard Hughes,which leads us back to Clifford Irving, and then finally a segment about Welles himself and some of the tricks he has pulled off, namely his famous "War of the Worlds" radio broadcast.

"F for Fake" I believe was the last film Welles directed, and while it may not be in the same league as his other works; "Citizen Kane", "Touch of Evil", or "Chimes at Midnight" it is still an enjoyable film. In some ways it is quite fitting that this would be his last film. He was a man who had to struggle to find a place in the Hollywood studio system to get his films made and here he has the last laugh.

Bottom-line: Highly entertaining film about lies and deception. The movie has the ability to suck us into its story, and manages to fool us. Worthwhile for fans of Orson Welles.

A rich film, nothing else like it
Orson Welles's F For Fake is a great film, and it's surprising to me that it isn't more widely acclaimed.A brilliant investigation into lying, manipulation, and the chicanery that forms the foundation of high culture, it reminds me of something Michael Moore might do if he were more concerned with metaphysics than politics, or Ross McElwee if he wore a cape and was outwardly self-obsessed.Great stuff, especially for anyone jaded by the b.s. flowing from the art world.
My one complaint-a few too many shots of Kodar prancing around in high heels-Welles's work in those sections was like a twelve year old's idea of what sexually attractive looks like.
Brilliantly shot and edited, narrated with style and panache by Welles, and it has substance to back up the style.
Criterion added some good extras.The unreleased trailer for F For Fake might be even better than the movie itself--it makes promises God himself couldn't keep.The documentary on Welles's late period of unfinished work is enjoyable, but by no means a revelation.The clips that are shown are intriguing, but a more penetrating and honest analysis of his later years by someone more removed from the subject would have been preferable to Kodar's well-intentioned puff piece.The swinging london skit shown in the film is hilarious.
The documentary on De Hory is okay, a bit dry, and has a bit of a smell of "expert" posturing about it.The 60 minutes interview with Clifford Irving is strange.The man reveals nothing that rings sincerely.Based on it, Irving comes off to me as the most dangerous and desperate man involved in the proceedings.There doesn't seem to be anything there beyond an enthusiasm for finding an angle and playing it successfully.Hughes's telephone interview is sad for the promises he makes and the potential he had.
In all, a great package and nearly worth the steep price tag

Fake in the most truthful way possible.
Sure, I saw Citizen Kane. It was pretty good, but despite what all the experts said, it wasn't the best film I'd ever seen, let alone of all time. After seeing Kane I was utterly convinced of Greg Tolland's genius but Orson Welles? Eh, not so much. Having seen him in Kane I thought he was terribly overrated, because I just couldn't see what the whole fuss was about. I wasn't impressed because the first time I saw Kane, it reminded me of the Simpsons episode that paid homage to the movie--and I thought the Simpsons was better! I thought that it was so full of cliches, but then I remembered it's like that joke about the person who went to see Hamlet for the first time and came back pouting that it was full of cliches.

But because I'm a sporting type of person, I finally decided to watch F for Fake just to figure out if Welles really was as good a director as everyone in the world seemed to think he was. I'd give him one more film, I said to myself, but really I'd written him off. I thought I was going to unmask the fake--I'd expose Welles for the overrated, overblown director he was.

Boy, was I wrong. This movie is like nothing else I've ever seen; as someone else remarked, this is MTV before MTV, this is meta before meta, this movie blows Kane out of the water and more. Oja Kodar said that Orson Welles often edited his films with an ear for music, and if that's the case then this film is pure jazz. Such unparalleled virtuoso narration is nothing short of AMAZING. Prior to seeing this film, I'd fallen in love with Michael Winterbottom's 24 Hour Party People released in 2002 which is a pretty good send-up of the Manchester scene, that also takes place in the editing room. But F for Fake came out a full 25 years before that movie and despite the retro feel, it blows it out of the water.

The extra features on the second disc are quite noteworthy, if only because they showcase footage from Kodar and Welles' unfinished movies, a veritable treasure trove of lost masterpieces. Watching Kodar and Welles together, one gets a sense of a real, loving, creative partnership between the two of them.

On a sidenote, I left this film with a great appreciation for Orson's "intractable contrariness" and his great desire to always push the envelope in service of his Art. Though Welles does claim to be a charlatan, a fraud, an utter fake, he was perhaps the very best at using lies to tell the truth.

Genius Stifled
Orson Welles' 1937 "Julius Caesar" is the longest running Broadway production of the play. Welles played Brutus. In 1938, Welles' On-the-Air Mercury Theatre broadcast "War of the Worlds". It was a hoax. But it caused a nationwide panic. Listeners were convinced that the Earth was being invaded by Mars. RKO Studios signed Welles to direct "Citizen Kane" in 1941. It is regarded by many as the Best Film ever made. Welles had conquered stage, radio, and the cinema. Criterion has just released the flawless, two-disc DVD, "F For Fake", an anamorphic, digitally-restored transfer(1.66:1).Disc One is Welles' 1976 essay/documentary; a non-linear, freeze-frame interview of art forger Elmyr De Hory, culled from 35mm and blown-up 16mm. Elmyr's biographer, Clifford Irving, is later exposed as the fraudulent chronicler of Howard Hughes. "F For Fake" features Joseph Cotten, Laurence Harvey, and Welles' mistress, Oja Kodar. Filmed in France, Rome, and southern California, "F For Fake" includes shots of Howard Hughes' bungalow at the Beverly Hills Hotel. It was the last film Welles ever directed. Extras include a Peter Bogdanovich introduction, a nine-minute trailer(curiously un-restored), and a commentary track. Disc Two contains the elusive 88-minute documentary, "One-Man Band". It has never been available before on film, video, or DVD( I saw it once 2 years ago on late-night cable). The 1995 "One-Man Band" examines Welles' lost/unfinished movies. This treasure trove includes scenes from "The Other Side of the Wind", "The Deep", and, reportedly, his mysterious "Don Quixote(A work in progress, on-and-off, for 15 years)". Welles stares into the camera, pauses, and recites Herman Melville in fragments of his "Moby Dick". He is electrifying. The process is staggering; and finally heart-breaking. So much talent, and finally, a sense of loss. Disc Two has another stunning documentary, an essay, a 60 Minutes excerpt, and a Howard Hughes press conference. Director, actor, writer, painter, magician. Orson Welles was, perhaps, the greatest auteur of the 20th Century. Big words. Big man. Big cigar. Welles once said that we are all really 2 or 3 different people inside. Or none of these at all. Was Orson Welles a fake?Welles' classic 1958 "Touch of Evil" ended in these last lines:Tanya: Isn't somebody gonna come and take him away?Schwartz: Yeah, in just a few minutes. You really liked him, didn't you?Tanya: The cop did..the one who killed him...he loved him.Schwartz:Is that all you have to say for him? Tanya:He was some kind of a man...What does it matter what you say about people?

Film Unlike Other Films - A Cinematic Thesis...
Society consists of symbols with a wide range of meanings within the world.The alphabet is one of most commonly used code systems of symbols.The letters in the alphabet have the power to form words and every single word has a meaning.When a number of words such as nouns, verbs, and adjectives fuse together, they form a sentence.The structure of a sentence is to produce a contextual meaning, which sometimes uses symbolism to enhance the sentences in regards to the theme of the topic.Several joined sentences create a paragraph, which usually focuses on one idea that also could be a symbol.A number of ideas compiled into a narrative form makes a thesis for readers to contemplate, which could help the person either assimilate, or adapt the new ideas to previous knowledge and wisdom.This is due to the notion that new ideas comprise a symbolic meaning for the individual.Orson Welles seems to have used this concept when he made the film, F for Fake.

F for Fake playfully utilizes every single scene while maximizing the symbolic value of words, images, and behavior among the individuals portrayed in the film.These scenes offer several representational impressions to the audience, as Welles' meticulous editing seems to have the same meaning a typewriter has to a writer.In this sense, F for Fake does not offer a conventional film or documentary, as Welles uses both authentic film clips edited with stage performances.Instead, Welles advocates his ideas in neither a fictionalized nor a non-documentary manner, as he fuses these two into a notion of deceit, forgery, trickery, and any other way that could deceive the audience.In 1972 over a Parisian lunch with writer and film essayist Jonathan Rosenbaum he expressed that he was working on this film, which Welles referred to as a new kind of film.The structure of the film brings the notion of a thesis where the candidate attempts to support his or her own thesis from a wide range of angles.Each visual symbol has a meaning while the scenes form the visual sentences, as the different acts form paragraphs in this cinematic thesis.The heavy editing, which Welles spent over a year on, describes Welles' cerebrally complexity while trying to defend this extraordinarily cinematic thesis.

In the beginning of the film Welles implies that a key he used for a magic trick "...was not symbolic of anything."This, however, suggests another deceit, as the audience has already seen the sequence and had time to ponder the meaning of the key to which Welles is fully aware.The pondering has already caused the audience to give the key a visual meaning, which the viewer has either assimilated or adapted to previous knowledge.There is also a scene where the audience gets to follow a stunning woman in high heels and a short miniskirt , as several people open their eyes starring while salivating and car horns honk in the background.Suggestively, the scene causes the audience to think that all the men probably are secretively wishing for the woman's company.This too is a clever lie, as Welles simply has edited together a number of scenes which insinuate that people are starring while horns can be heard in the background.Welles seems to suggest that what one sees cannot be believed, as what one sees might only be a fabricated version of the truth.

To comfort the audience Welles informs that the viewers that they will not be victims to deception as he places in writing that "For the next hour everything in this film is strictly based on the available facts."This portion of the film leads the audience through a two-piece sequence about a famous art forger named Elmyr de Hory, Cliff Irving, and the eccentric billionaire Howard Hughes.One focuses on Elmyr while the second part emphasizes Elmyr's biographer Irving who also was into forgery, as he wrote a forged autobiography by Howard Hughes who then lived secretively in a luxury Las Vegas penthouse.This brings several of the previous notions back, as Welles continues to discuss the idea of deceit.One of the interesting ideas in this sequence explains the meaninglessness of experts, as fakers cannot be troubled by experts.One thing that Elmyr advises of is that no one should have the ultimate power to decide quality, as he himself probably fooled many so-called experts with his own forgeries.This also implies that the expert could as well be the faker, if this one person knew what was good.This notion would also suggest that this very review would be a fake, as it also does not express anything unique while it merely retells the design and purpose of the film.

F for Fake offers an intriguing cinematic thesis that crawls within the brain causing an itch that does not seem to want to leave.The film is nothing like anything that Welles has done before, or after this film, which also supports what he has said in regards to the film.One reason that no other film that he created since did not mimic this film could be the concept of the film, as it provides an opportunity for him to play with his own ideas in a visual manner.This film took over a year for him to make, as it also seems to be a film of personal growth and understanding of the world as a whole.The personal aspect of the film seems to saturate the whole experience, as he refers to himself while acting and making comments in regards to the people in film from behind the cutting board.Ultimately, Welles attempts to erase the idea of him being the "expert", as he provides examples of his own forgery from when he provided the War of the Worlds over the radio, which caused mass hysteria throughout the United States. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Lean, lanky Lee Horsley (TV's Matt Houston is hardly the iconicimage of a medieval warrior, but in this cheesy Conan the Barbarianknockoff he makes his swaggering, mercenary Talon a genial smart aleck of abarbarian hero. The plot is pure pulp cliché: evil Cromwell (Richard Lynch)raises a demon to conquer a peaceful kingdom, kill the rulers, and imprison theroyal heirs, and the son of a murdered patriot returns to take his righteous vengeancewith a projectile-loaded, three-bladed sword. First-time director Albert Pyun apprenticedunder Akira Kurosawa and brings with him an eye for handsome images and a fluid senseof action that helps overcome B-movie dialogue ("Unlock this door, wench, and leavethat to us!"), scenery-chewing performances, and bargain-basement budget. In one fightsequence a guard punches a rock wall--and dents it! Kathleen Beller (the dark-eyedbeauty of The Betsy) is the rebel princess who enlists Talon to the cause,Route 66's charming wanderer George Maharis is a conniving traitor under anunflattering mop of greasy hair, and Richard Moll dons a latex monster mask to playthe double-crossed demon. It's utterly silly and often awkward, but it does haveenergy to spare. The sequel promised at the end of the film was never produced andPyun went on to direct some of the best straight-to-video action films of the 1990s,including Nemesis. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (28)

Talon on DVD!
Summary: An Evil King seeks the aid of an evil sorcerer in order to conquer a peaceful kingdom. One of the good king's sons escapes and later seeks vengeance as an adult.

My Opinion: This is a very fun movie. I loved at when I saw it years ago and I'm very glad to have it in my collection now. I loved Lee Horsley as Matt Houston and he is great here as well. This movie is one of those guilty pleasures for Fantasy fans. It may be cheesy and silly but it's so much fun that I don't even notice.

DVD Quality: Pretty much bare bones with a couple of trailers. Hey at least it's on DVD!

What You Should Do: If you are a SciFi or Fantasy fan and a collector, you should buy this DVD. I can't imagine them putting out a Special Edition of this one, so there's no need to wait. If you liked Beastmaster, Krull, Dragonslayer, Conan or anything along those lines, then give it a rent. Otherwise skip it.

Entertaining and action-packed fantasy flick.
This is one of the best, and surprisingly underestimated, fantasy movies of the 80's. It goes along the lines of classics like Beastmaster, Conan, Dragonslayer, Krull and Legend. Its best features are the great dialogues and solidly written characters, the marvelous sets, a surprisingly coherent and original plot, and an excellent soundtrack. The acting on the movie is not so good, but the story is so entertaining and funny that you won't really mind.

Talon, the son of a murdered King, turns into a barbarian hero who tries to end the rule of an evil conqueror and his allied demon. To achieve his goal he must free the heirs of the kingdom and avenge his father. In his quest he will encounter all the elements common in most fantasy stories: sword battles, powerful demons and treacherous villains, beautiful and exotic damsels in distress and dark ancient rituals and magic spells.

After the credits roll by, you will probably be left expecting to see the second installment of this movie: Tales of the Ancient Empire, which unfortunately, was never made.

A word of warning: the image quality of the DVD is not great, nor does this movie have any Special Features, but it's very unlikely it will ever get a better edition.

A must for fantasy film buffs.

A blast from the past
I cannot believe the bad reviews about this film. This was the most entertaining film during the 80's Conan era. What I enjoyed most was that it wasn't all gloom and doom like some of the others, it is, after all, a fantasy film. It has all the sorcery and wizardary of the times and still had it lighthearted moments. I remember watching it over and over. I'm going to order it now so I can watch it again.

Yikes
The opening scene of this fantasy film, in which the sorcerer of the title is called back from the dead, shows promise. But then it's all downhill from there. Every aspect of this terrible production screams amateur-hour, despite the Amazon reviewer's assertion that director Albert Pyun apprenticed under Akira Kurosawa. Richard Lynch makes a reliable villain, and Kathleen Beller is very easy on the eyes, but otherwise the flick is pure torture.

Sucks. Bad,
If you like movies like "Krull" or "Beastmaster," this movie will NOT amuse you. I could barely tell one character from another; the plot was so stupid, at an hour and forty minutes, it felt like work finishing it. There's action, sure, and a few nude scenes to keep morons occupied for a few minutes.

I love sword and sorcery movies, and while this looks like a gem for your DVD collection, belive me, it is not. This is just as bad as "Dungeons and Dragons." I guess I should add, for the sake of fairness, if you liked "Dungeons and Dragons," you'll love this. But if you thought it was another tired attempt by corporate Hollywood to suck dollars from your pockets, stay away from this loser.

Let me put it this way: "Gor" is a better movie than this one.
Luckily, I rented the film, so I could return it. You'd be better off drinking the fifteen bucks you'd spend on this sucky movie. At least you'll feel magical.

My advice, watch Krull 20 times before you see this p.o.s. once. ... Read more

Reviews (39)

Gould is a surprisingly good Marlowe
Director Robert Altman can find a sublimely goofy sort of humor in almost any setting, and he does so here. For one thing, the musical score consists of a single tune played over and over by different performers.

What's amazing is how well this self-conscious jokiness fits with the bleak motivations of the flick's traditionally noir characters.

Gould's Everyman-ish anti-Marlowe is one you'd actually like to hang out with. He's just as good with cats as with comebacks, for instance.

If you've ever wondered how someone like Elliott Gould could be the top box-office draw in America for a short period in the 1970s, you should give "The Long Goodbye" a look. For a brief, shining moment, the man was king.

As Marlowe says, "It's OK with me."

Altman's best film to date...
Raymond Chandler's novel of the same name and the studio had no idea how to market the offbeat movie. It polarized critics and promptly disappeared from theatres. However, the film has survived on video and television, but only in a compromised pan and scan version that butchered Vilmos Zsigmond's superb 2.35:1 widescreen camerawork. Finally, The Long Goodbye receives a proper DVD treatment that it so richly deserves.

The Long Goodbye is much more than a murder mystery. Taking Chandler's novel set in the 1940s and updating it to the 1970s, Altman is also interested in satirizing the superficiality of Los Angeles culture. Marlowe is surrounded by an odd cast of denizens that populate the city: his neighbours are a group of women who spend their time getting high and doing yoga, the security guard for the Wade's estate does impersonations of famous actors like Barbara Stanwyk and Jimmy Stewart, and a nasty gangster who is proud of his Jewish heritage.

The stand-out amongst the extras on this DVD is the "Rip Van Marlowe" featurette. It runs about 24-minute and is an excellent retrospective look at the movie. Robert Altman and Elliot Gould are interviewed and talk about how they got involved with the project. Both men provide all sorts of fascinating information and are refreshingly candid.

The Long Goodbye is one of the best examples of American cinema in the '70s and now it is finally available on DVD in its original aspect ratio. MGM has produced a top-notch transfer and a solid collection of supplemental material that should appeal to fans of the movie and newcomers who are looking for something a little different.

Gumshoe, '60's Style
The screenplay (Leigh Brackett) of The Long Good-bye is unusually well thought out and coherent. For a private-eye movie, that's an exception, and I suspect it's that very tightness which forced the famously anarchic Altman into a disciplined groove. It also helped produce this, his most accomplished, film. Then too, only an audacious film-maker of Altman's calibre could have brought such an irreverent approach to the screen.

Small wonder Chandler purists detest this 1960's version of Phillip Marlowe. Like others of that period, the film sets about subverting an icon of the popular culture. Elliot Gould's Marlowe is anything but the hard-boiled professional audiences have come to admire and expect. Instead, he's grubby, feckless, and seemingly too disengaged to care about Chandler's prized passion: chasing after truth despite an uncaring corrupt society. Worse, one suspects Gould's Marlowe is a hippie at heart, ready to chuck it all and head for the woods with his beloved cat, a load of pot, and a world-weary "Its OK with me". Moreover, he's tossed about by most every event that comes his way, too burned-out to complete a thought and too bummed-out to press an investigation. He can't even find his cat. The slouching gait and hang-dog expression have all the assurance and verve of a man headed for a hanging. Bogart's classic impersonation, it ain't.

But Altman has laid a trap, one that only comes into focus at film's end. It's a startling yet oddly believable turn of events. Head doctors term this type of reconfiguration Gestalt Shift, and here the shift is a rewarding one, causing us to go back and re-examine the Gould character and his passage through what has gone before. It's also a brilliant stroke which at last links the counter-cultural Marlowe to the classic version. There are many fine touches in the film, including a highly effective use of sudden violence, particularly runty Henry Gibson's slam-bang humbling of lordly Sterling Hayden (he knows about drunks). And, for once, Altman's penchant for non-actors like Jim Bouton does little damage, although I wish the ending had skipped the ill-advised "Hooray for Hollywood". Nonetheless, this is one of the half dozen or so films that define counter-cultural film-making from the 60's. However, Its key Southern California ambience is best viewed, as other reviewers point out, in wide-screen. So catch up with that mode if you can.

Didn't enjoy this film; I recommend: rent before you buy.
Been a long time fan of McCabe & Mrs. Miller, consider it one of the great films of the '70s, and bought the disc with pleasure. So last week I rented 3 Women based on the reviews of that film here and absolutely loved it; an incredibly surreal and strange film. So I ordered it, and then decided to explore a few other '70s Altman films. Based on those reviews I decided to add The Long Goodbye with my order of 3 Women, expecting that I would enjoy both. But I couldn't wait, so I rented The Long Goodbye too and watched it last night. Suffice it to say, I didn't like it, but fortunately the order hadn't shipped so I was able to cancel The Long Goodbye in time and will just receive 3 Women from that order.

What didn't I like? Well, the scene setups are very cliche. In one scene Marlow and Ellen Wade are talking by a window. Altman separates each on both sides of the frame with the ocean behind the window in the center frame out of focus. Then there's movement in the window. The camera zooms past both Marlow and Wade to the scene past the window with both continuing their conversation and you see Wade's husband throw himself into the ocean in suicide. Great camera work, but the acting is played so deadpan by both that given the circumstances it just didn't seem believable. Gould's Marlow faces numerous situations where he plays it so deadpan it just didn't work for me, that's just one example.

And the ending, far from being a shocker, simply played out an obvious violent outcome that today wouldn't be the slightest bit outrageous. And yes, I recognize that the shocker is moral and not just a shock from violence. Maybe society today has simple degenerated over the last 30 years WRT accepting violent imagery. But it just didn't work for me either as a shocker or as a satisfactory conclusion to the story line. Honestly, Chinatown is a much better early '70s take on Noir and IMO eclipses this film by far.

Now I admit, I haven't read the Chandler book, nor have I seen The Big Sleep in a long, long time. So I don't have the context to properly review this film from a historical perspective. My review is strictly based on a single viewing last night where I walked away from the film disappointed after having expected to much more based on the reviews here. By all means, if you're exploring Altman films do rent this picture. Watch it. Then based on that decide if it's appropriate for your collection. If so, buy it with pleasure. But I can't honestly recommend buying this film based on the reviews here alone.

Oh Great! I'm Gonna Have That Song In My Head All Day!
Robert Altman is notorious for having plenty of movement in all his films. This one is no exception. The transplantation to the 70's seems weird, but it's the story that really sets it apart. Raymond Chandler's Philip Marlowe is played with such awkwardness by Gould. I loved his chain smoking, anywhere he can get the chance. Sterling Hayden should have been nominated for an Oscar for this performance. I also got a kick out of "The Terminator" in a non-speaking role. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

Cluttered and Weighty
Initially released as "Cutter and Bone", this movie was pulled from theatres and retitled after several critics panned it. Inexplicably, it became a film festival favorite and developed a minor cult following upon its re-release. My verdict? Those early critical drubbings were well-deserved. For despite a potentially dynamic plot setup and one successful performance, the movie is ultimately done in by a lackluster screenplay, some uneven acting, and substandard direction.

It all begins promisingly enough, with a fascinating title sequence followed by the introduction of Jeff Bridges as a two-bit gigolo who becomes a suspect in a murder investigation. So far, so good. Then John Heard enters as an obnoxious, bigoted, profane Vietnam vet-cum-amateur detective who uses his physical disabilities to excuse his ethical and moral shortcomings, and S-s-s-s! The plot quickly deflates into a slow, muddled study of his unpleasant character, losing its promising elements of suspense and mystery, and leaving the actors with the impossible burden of maintaining audience interest. Tellingly, Bridges, who can convey character nuances with a subtle flicker of his eyes or shift of his lips, is great in his role; but Heard, who relies mainly on a gruff laugh and a gravelly voice that wavers unsteadily between slurring and over-enunciation, is merely grating in his. As Heard's wife, the usually fascinating Lisa Eichhorn is thwarted in her underwritten and choppily edited role, and Ann Dusenberry -- whose odd character simply disappears without explanation near the end -- recites some of her lines as if they embarrass her (as well they should). None of the actors is assisted by Ivan Passer's lackadaisical direction, which lacks both energy and cohesion, and only the final abrupt cut that ends this mess shows any prowess on the part of the editor. Recommended for devotees of the consistently marvelous but underrated Jeff Bridges; other viewers beware!

Truly excellent Cinema
One of my all-time favourite films this is an example of first class cinema. Jeff Bridges and John Heard are unlikely friends, more friends of convienience though at the heart there is something solid. A lot of reviews of this film state that its too simple - a murder mystery in essence and a partial study of relationships. Though its more than that for me, its a study of the best and worse of people AND the weary way one can live ones life if we let life get on top of us. Bone (Jeff Bridges) is totally tired of life - seeking thrills if he can be bothered - only deciding on a life changing course of action in the final frame of this film. Cutter (John Heard) is a drunk Veteran - immoral to everyone but those truly close to him.

Im trying to not give too much away but I consider this to be a truly classic film. And what a score!

My apologies for a rambling review - watch this.

an engrossing murder mystery
When Cutter's Way was first released in theatres in 1981, it tanked at the box office thanks to bad press from The New York Times and a nervous studio still smarting from the bath it took on Heaven's Gate. A good film almost disappeared from sight. Fortunately, the advent of video, and now its debut on DVD, has given this unusual film a second chance that it so richly deserves.

Jeff Bridges proves once again that he is one of the best American actors working in film today. He portrays Bone as a man afraid of commitment, content to do little, but fall back on his pretty boy looks to bed any woman who crosses his path. As one character tells him, "Sooner or later you're going to have to make a decision about something." This could be the underlying thesis of the whole film: making decisions, taking a stand about something.

John Heard's Alex Cutter is on the opposite end of the spectrum. He desperately wants to get involved in something, anything to stop living life in a bottle of alcohol. And so, he latches on to the murder mystery with the ferocious tenacity of a pitbull. Heard plays Cutter like a character straight out of a Tom Waits song. His performance, complete with raspy voice and cynical outlook on life, recalls many of Waits' down-on-their-luck losers that populate his songs.

The actors vividly breathe life into their respective characters creating the impression that they exist beyond what we see on the screen, that in some way we already know them and that they'll continue to exist after the film ends.

Director Ivan Passer also deserves credit for creating this world. From the haunting opening shot of a parade, caught in dreamy slow motion (thanks to Jordan Cronenweth's superb cinematography), filmed at first in black and white and then as the credits fade in and out it gradually becomes colour, Passer draws the audience into his absorbing drama. Cutter's Way contains strong visuals to contrast the ambiguous story. Nothing is spelled out for the audience, even right up to its conclusion. Do we support Cutter's obsessive conspiracy theories or Bone's refusal to get involved?

Following in the grand tradition of short changing this movie, MGM has decided to include only the theatrical trailer on the DVD. What about a retrospective featurette? All the principals are still alive and I'm sure would love to talk about this movie. Or an audio commentary? Jeff Bridges contributed an excellent one on the Against All Odds DVD so he's hip to the format. A lot of missed opportunities here.

Sometimes funny, rather poignant psychological thriller
I was interested in this film because may years ago I had read the book, "Cutter and Bone" on which it was based. I remembered it took place in the post-Vietnam era and one of the characters was a hard-drinking, foul-mouthed, crippled Vietnam vet. I had forgotten that the book had depressed me then. But viewing this video brought it all back to me. And I was depressed all over again.

The film is set in Santa Barbara and stars Jeff Bridges, as a drifter with an eye for women. John Heard plays his best friend, the Vietnam vet, and Lisa Eichhorn plays the vet's alcoholic wife. John Heard's makeup is great as it really looks like he has only one leg, one arm and one eye. He's a sorrowful sight but he's quite unlikable as he's an angry, scheming character with a sense of high drama. Some of his dialog is brilliant and opens a lot of cans of worms about what happened in Vietnam.

When Jeff Bridges stumbles upon a murder by an "upright citizen", John Heard convinces his friend to blackmail the murderer with the help of the victim's sister, played by Ann Dusenberry. What follows is a sometimes funny and rather poignant psychological thriller, with an underlying sense of tragedy. It's fast paced, well acted and deals with an interesting theme. I should have loved it. Right?

Wrong! I just didn't like it. It wasn't because the film wasn't good. I just didn't like the sense of anger and hopelessness throughout. And I didn't like any of the characters. The film ran a mere 105 minutes but I couldn't wait for it to end. I won't give it a poor recommendation though, because the film it did have its good points. I just couldn't get it to it.

The System Wins out Every Time
This film is a throwback to the dark noir of the 40's and 50's.One character seems to be living in a paranoid fantasy that eventually turns out to be the truth.Not many films examine the dark side of big business or the fear that it spreads from person to person.John Heard plays Cutter,a man who no longer adheres to a social code.Society gave him a war to die in so a select bueracratic group could grow fat and he no longer feels a need to justify their power over his soul.What this film shows is that when a civilization's foundation is corrupt at the very core,you will either spend your entire life living a lie or you will fall victim to other people's entrapment.Catch-22 either way,the lucky ones regain their dignity by dying young. ... Read more