That’s some name.

Lorimar! That brings back memories! Or… er… not actual memories of anything, but…

Oh, Peter Sellers?

Anyway, this is another Hal Ashby movie. These Ashby movies are films I read about back when I was a teenager — mostly in old copies of Mad Magazine — but I never saw any of them. I quite liked Harold & Maude, but I didn’t much take to Shampoo.

Perhaps this is gonna be more Maudish?

I feel seen!

Oh deer — this is my absolutely least favourite movie genre: “The naif faces the world”. These things are always Oscar bait…

Hah! I amaze myself!

But I guess Shirley MacLaine is gonna take care of him and learn a valuable lesson?

There she is. That was a lot faster than I expected.

Not only is this the dreaded “naif in society” genre — but it’s also a BITING SATIRE!!! There’s nothing I hate more than a BITING SATIRE.

(Satire is code for “not actually funny”.)

So is Chance going to end up being elected president or something? I betcha that’s biting.

It’s nice set design.

But, OK, for a biting satire it’s kinda funny.

The bit is that Sellers says random things about gardening, and then these people interpret that as profound things about life in general.

Yes, it’s also a biting satire about TV.

Scathing commentary!

A brutal look! That gently lifts! And smashes! To the jugular!

A gentle smashing to the jugular.

Watching this, I’m similarly confused — I’m basically bored in general, but I’m amused by a lot of the scenes. There’s a lot of really solid performances, but the general thing is *rolls eyes*.

Indeed.

I mean, the movie looks good and stuff — it’s well made — but it’s just not my thing. Like… if you were to design a movie to appeal to me less, you could probably do it — but this would be a good attempt. So it’s just me! This movie is probably brilliant and stuff.

Being There. Hal Ashby. 1979. ⚂

Well, this is odd. A few years later, Mitchum had success with the Chandler adaptation Farewell, My Lovely, so it makes sense to do another one. But this one is set in England? In the countryside? I don’t think that’s the original setting?

See? Very English.

Hey, it’s her.

It’s probably just me, but I’ve never seen an explanation about what happened to British movies in the 70s. They had a really good thing going on until the 60s — lots of classics. And then in the 60s there were a bunch of interesting experimental stuff.

But this is basically filmed like a Carry On movie.

So… what happened to the British film industry in the 70s? Why did it die off? This is just so badly done — I mean, on a technical level. Echoey sound, boring set designs, actors that just stand there spouting off lines at each other.

Heh, there were several years where every British TV crime-related TV series and movie had this exact shot. It went out of style? Or did they get a new sign?

It’s such a frustrating movie. Above you have a car chase, and you’d think they’d use the opportunity to show some interesting sights, but it’s just this — driving around in nondescript environs. So it doesn’t even work on the “well, I’d like to see the UK in the 70s” level.

So, it’s totally what I’d expect of an 70s British movie — a bit inept.

I’m waiting for the movie to stabilise at some level… but it just gets worse and worse!

Shots like this… is this meant to be a joke? Is this entire movie a send-up of noir movies? Did they try to make a “camp” movie? Or is it just really stupid?

I have no idea! But Captain Ockham says “it’s really stupid”.

Well, you can’t say that this movie doesn’t have big names.

Rude!

That is some hairdo.

Should have gotten an Oscar for Best Light Reflector Usage, though.

It’s a really, really bad movie, but I’m upping the die because it’s a well lit movie. And because of this interview with Sarah Miles in the extras:

She really didn’t like the movie at all, and I love the way she goes (at the end) “And Michael Winner went on to do lots of movies! Good for him”. It’s the snarkiest actor interview I’ve ever seen on a disc.

The Big Sleep. Michael Winner. 1978. ⚁

This is another one of those 70s neo noir movies? I think I’ve actually seen this before, on VHS in the early 80s, but I remember nothing…

This movie is kinda weird — I mean, in a technical sense. While they’re dancing, they obviously had problems with a pickup mic in her bra, so you can hear the chafing. But they kept it instead of flying in a new audio?

The director had a short career…

Man, the performances here are strictly amateur hour.

Even Mitchum is delivering his lines like he’s reading it off a card.

OK, it’s picking up now.

But it’s so weird for a neo noir movie! I mean… look at the lighting here? Could be from a 70s documentary.

And now there’s so much room echo — like they only had one mic several metres away…

Isn’t that… yes, it is.

Comics: It’s what all the prostitutes are reading.

I see signs.

OK, there’s technical problems here, and some iffy performances, but it does really nail the noir thing plot in many ways. It’s satisfyingly confusing. The only problem is the resolution, which should come as a shocking twist — but is so obvious that anybody who’s read a mystery before will call it ahead of time. I mean, there were no other candidates for who Velma was, were there?

But still — very entertaining.

Farewell My Lovely. Dick Richards. 1975. ⚄