Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Dalbert Pringle Let me tell ya - If 1966's "Harper" was supposed to be a prime example of Hollywood "neo-noir" - IMO - It sure fell flat on its smug, little face.Old "blue eyes" himself, Paul Newman plays irksome, apathetic, L.A. gumshoe, Lewis Harper, who has about as much charm and charisma as does a slimy slug.Regardless of this film's "big star" cast - Its "Find-A-Missing-Millionaire" story got so complicated and convoluted that it had me repeatedly rolling my eyes to the ceiling and groaning out in total exasperation, over, and over again.... (Sheesh! Give me a break, already!)(I won't even get into the tiresome bickering that Harper and his estranged wife regularly got into.... Ho-hum!)Anyway - If you're like me - You're gonna absolutely hate the note that this film's story ends on, big-time. You really are.

SimonJack When this movie came out in 1966, it was 10 years since Paul Newman's hit role in "Somebody Up There Likes Me." He was now a major Hollywood star. Newman was a versatile actor who could play well in any number of genres. In this action-crime thriller, he plays Lew Harper, a private eye. "Harper" is a complex mystery drama with a huge cast of prominent screen and stage names. Lauren Bacall plays Mrs. Sampson, Julie Harris is Betty Fraley, Janet Leigh is Susan Harper, Pamela Tiffin is Miranda Sampson and Shelley Winters if Fay Estabrook. On the male side, along with Newman, are Arthur Hill as Albert Graves, Robert Wagner as Allan Taggert, Robert Webber as Dwight Troy, Harold Gould as the sheriff and Strother Martin as Claude. All do very well in their roles.The movie is based on a 1949 novel by Kenneth Millar under his pen name, Ross Macdonald. The book title, "The Moving Target," is a good description of the film and the character of Harper. Macdonald's Harper is similar to the hard-boiled Sam Spade of Dashiell Hammett's "Maltese Falcon." But, Macdonald introduces a psychological twist in this story. And the script is peppered with short witticisms and sardonic comments by Harper.Here are some samples, beginning with my favorite exchange in the film. Miranda, "What do you do this kind of crummy work for anyway?" Harper, "What, are you trying to be funny? I do it because I believe in the United Nations, and Southeast Asia, and think it's funny if your life depends on what goes through the Panama Canal. What about the English pound? Tell you something, baby, so long as there's a Siberia, you'll find Lew Harper on the job." Miranda, "Are you putting me on?" Harper, "Geez, I didn't think so." (He looks away to hide his smile and keep from laughing.)Harper, "I used to be a sheriff until I passed my literacy test." Sheriff, "If I wanted to be ugly …" Harper, You are ugly." This is a first-rate detective mystery with plenty of action and intrigue. It's all the better because it isn't loaded down with gratuitous sex scenes that detract from the engaging story.

LeonLouisRicci Falling smack in the Middle of the Old Hollywood and the New Hollywood, 1966 was not the Ideal Year for a Neo-Noir featuring a Private Detective in the Hunt among the Upper and Lower Crust of Society.This reeks of a Place in No Man's Land with Sprinklings of the Cultural Revolution raining down on the Plastic Environment of Mid Sixties L.A.Paul Newman is Inconsistent in His Characterization of the Cynical "Gum" Shoe. He Spits it out with Defiance or Sticks it Under the Table, but this "New" form of "Smoking" is just a Prop. In Fact a lot of the Movie looks like Props.From the Spiritual Temple to the various Apartments it seems Staged. As do some of the Characters. Robert Wagner, Shelley Winters, Janet Leigh and Arthur Hill manage to have some Fun with Their Characters, but Julie Harris, Strother Martin, and Lauren Bacall are Miscast and can't rise Above the Misstep.The Awful Generic Music is that what was quickly Found in Elevators Relegating some kind of Hipness to those who didn't have a Clue. The Plot goes here and there Never Settling on a Style. Lighthearted Goofiness is mixed with Torture and Beatings and it doesn't Blend well. There is an Offbeat Ending but even that Surprise, for 1966, can't Forgive all of the Stiffness that has come Before.Added Together it is Average at Best and a Disappointing Failure at Worst. It is a Film Lost in the Time that it was made and resurfaces Today as a bit of an Embarrassment, especially for Newman whose Acting Range is Small, and it is Stretched here Beyond its Boundaries, but so is the Production and Direction.

jamescallumburton Paul Newman gives us the greatest private eye ever in this highly underrated Neo-noir that includes acting greats Shelly Winters , Lauren Becall and Julie Harris. The film has got a great story and Newman's performance is one of his best if not the best performance of his career , Harper is a well developed character who is cheeky , cynical , funny , down and out but tough as nails and it is so much fun to watch the character interact with all the suspects and villains in LA , really good film and The Drowning Pool ( Harper's sequel ) is well worth a watch as well since it has all the great qualities that this film has, check it out !