Reviews (4)

Outstanding Movie And Excellent Book
For starters this movie depicts everything that is detailed/explained in the original title "Native Son". I do not know precisely which movie one of the previous reviewers from Decatur, Georgia was watching, but I can most definitely assure that it was not Native Son.

The cast performed almost as good as the cast members in the original story. I think the book and the video are an excellent combinational method for those reading the novel and attempting to visual what the entire concept of this novel is all about. In short I think the video is well deserving of a 4 star rating.

NATIVE FLOP
The cinematic presentation of Richard Wright's classic is once again another flop. Although it is far better than the original adaptation of the book into a movie (filmed in 1949), it fails to capture the essence of Bigger Thomas. How can such a film with a star studded cast fail so miserably? After all, now you have actors who can really act!

Native Son lacks passion.Bigger comes across as poor Black boy gone wrong with his cowardly behavior. His white liberal benefactors personalities are benign. Jan (Matt Dillon) just doesn't impress me as an ardent communist. Mary Dalton ( Elizabeth McGovern) comes across as a bubble head. Even Oprah Winfrey's begging plea to let her son live, is a sham. Where is the political and heated fervor of the era? John Karlen's role as Max, the lawyer for Bigger, was a waste of time. He wasn't convincing as a passionate lawyer out to save this oppressed black boy.

Most film adaptations of books fall short in staying true to the author's story. This second adaptation falls through period. I found it a great disappointment in the acting as well as the script. Someday, somehow, some one will do this great novel justice and present us with a blockbuster film filled with not only passion but with a sense of what formed this Native Son. I recommend this movie to put in your video archive along with its original version.

Big Letdown From the Book
After reading the book, the movie leaves a lot to be desired. There were just way too many things left out of the movie.

The film did have an exceptional cast, and the acting was terrific. I was somewhat suprised at how well Matt Dillon play Jan Erlone. The setting was pretty good too. The scenery was put together nicely, as it did look like the 1940's.

Unfortunately, the editing from the novel made the film seem quite choppy. Having read the book, you got into the minds of the characters, especially that of Bigger's. The movie skipped over too many things, not allowing you to do this, which was a fairly big letdown.

Not reading the book might leave you with a different impression of the film, because, once again, the acting is wonderful. But, having read the book, I couldn't enjoy the movie. Way too many important scenes were taken out of it. It is really not a good adaptation.

Book better than movie
Well, after reading Native Son, I thought it would be a good idea to rent the movie to get visual of what happened in the book. Well, that was all I got out of this movie...

There wasn't anything wrong with the acting or set, it was the script. They simply cut way too much out of the book. Here are some examples:

-After Bigger killed Mary and they found the bones in the furnace, Bigger ran from the house (as he did in the book), and then all of a sudden he's on roof tops getting chased and then caught. In the book he was on the run with Bessie for a few days and then he killed her. -In the book, they had two inquests and in the movie they only had one...no mention of Bigger fainting in the first inquest. -They completely cut out the trial in the movie, only playing soundbytes. They only showed the sentencing. In the book, Bigger's lawyer gave a 16 page statement on Biggers behalf. -Bigger's mother (Oprah Winfrey) assumed the role of both his mother and the priest in the movie.

Well, those are a few examples. If I hadn't read the book I wouldn't have known what was going on in Bigger's head, which was what made the book so good. I don't think Richard Wright would be too impressed with this movie. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

On The Borderline Of Sheer Boredom
Charles Bronson the man of action films was not his usual self in this film where he plays a chief border patrol officer who investigates illegal smuggling of imigrants led in by a sadistic killer played by Ed Harris(In his Film Debut)Hotchkiss. Who is backed up by an corrupt american bussinesman who uses these immigrants as slave labouers. Good story but had the people involved with this project showed a little more dramatic sequences to livin up the already bored viewer this could of been more of worthwhile effort. Bronson tries hard to show more acting but it seems like he rather blow some punk away with a service revolver like he did in `DEATH WISH` As for Harris who had a little more hair on his head at the time was a great villan but for the wrong film. It`s a shame his talent didn`t get noticed until he did THE ABYSS in 1989. The film wasted time trying to hammer into the audience`s minds the problem of illegal aleins being used for unstable working conditons and lost any good dramatic impact from it. There`s nothing wrong with bringing a message to the viewer but not at the expense of the entertainment value.

Real Border Patrol Action
I first saw the movie in 1980 while a student at the Border Patrol Academy. I was trying to get an idea of what I was getting myself into. While the Border Patrol Agent's everyday on-duty life is not exactly as portrayed in the movie, this is the closest video to reality that is on the market. Charles Bronson is perfect for this role. In the movie, he is even wearing an old hat that a Border Patrol Agent gave him for the part. The USBP allowed the use of official emblems and badges and parts of the movie was filmed at an actual BP station. Of the three or four Border Patrol movies available, I think this one is the best. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

this is a great movie and might help kids today to see it
I saw this movie when it was made and really enjoyed it but besides that it showed me what drinking can do as i had a friend at the time who drank. i think it is a great movie and would hope that if any kid today could see it they might be helped by it. Today about 18 years later i still abstain from drinking and my friend is a heavy drinker.

Good movie for the time.
I may be little biased about this movie as it was filmed at my high school in Madison, WI during the Spring of 1979. I was a freshman and and classes basically were all skipped during filming. They had the trailers out front, and would wet down the streets with huge water trucks. Some of my friends were used as extras and one friends house was used for Lance Kerwin's house.

The movie is good overall, really telling the story of the times when everybody was drinking and smoking too much, even our star athletes. It's worth a look. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Superb Movie!!
This is a superb movie filmed in the Dallas area that's about an elderly convict (Robert Mitchum) making a daring prison break and being chased down by his law enforcement friend(Wilford Brimley)just before his retirement.A movie very well worth watching!! ... Read more

Reviews (1)

JUST AS THEY SAY, YOU CANNOT PUT IT DOWN.
WE KNOW GEISICK, AND WOULD LIKE TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK. WE JUST CAN'T FIND ENOUGH COPIES. END ... Read more

Reviews (1)

dumb
Let me say one word - dumb. The characters in this movie do not show too much intelligence. It's a movie about twisted ideas of love, twisted sex and twisted individuals. Why this may sound like it appeals to you in the beginning you will quickly find out that it won't Sam Elliott should take this movie off his resume.

Flashing back and forth from a police interrogation room to events of the past it is not hard to follow but at times it doesn't flow smoothly. It's a murder mystery. A who dunnit. A man is being questioned about the murder of a woman's husband, a woman he wants badly. Did she kill the husband or did he? Or someone else? What happened to the woman now, is she dead? Lots of questions to ask, if you can get through the dumbness and the kinky nympho scenes.

What would you do for another man's wife? What are the limits of your deeds? These are questions that pop into my mind while watching the movie, along with the thought, "dumb".

Although the ending did provide a nice twist the movie was kind of weird over all and a real downer. But peoples lives can be like this I suppose, how pathetic. I just personally feel there are more entertaining ways for me to spend two hours than watch a movie like this, which was dumb. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

A good lesson to parents on parenting! Tear Jerker!
This movie with a sad but satisfying ending teaches parents not to try to force their children into a mold but to be supportive of them if their likes or dislikes are different from their parents. Children do not always turn out exactly the way parents want them to, but in spite of this, if we show them unconditional love, they will likely be prone to acts of love and not violence. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Tautly directed thriller
Alistair MacLean's thriller that falters only in the end, is nevertheless a good nostalgic trip for those faithful MacLean's fans. Viewers will sit up and recognize Charlotte Rampling (also in Angelheart), Michel Lonsdale (in Ronin who fixes DeNiro). Good thing about the movie: locational photography (shot in Arles, France among other places). Worth a glance!

Fine paced thriller
Cast of this movie: Charlotte Rampling (from Angelheart), David Birney, and Michel Lonsdale (Ronin, The Day of the Jackal, Moonraker). This thriller has few advantages over other movies which base themselves on international intrigue: good locational photography. Faithfully follows the book but stumbles only when Bowman is forced into the ring with the Bull and loses its pace thereafter. Actually, the book had more suspense and thrills (who can ever doubt Alistair MacLean?). ... Read more