Redwarmin This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

Wordiezett So much average

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

Michael O'Keefe This drama is Robert Aldrich's attempt to adapt a Clifford Odet's play to the big screen. Charles Castle(Jack Palance)is a rugged Hollywood star still oozing charm and sex appeal; but he has decided to leave show business in hopes of spending his efforts on reconciling with his estranged wife Marion(Ida Lupino). Head honcho of the studio Stanley Shriner Hoff(Rod Steiger)is more than willing to beg and coerce Castle into signing another contract with the studio that will tie him up for the next 14 years. If need be, Hoff will blackmail his star trying to cover-up a dark incident protecting his lucrative career.Also featured in this cynical look at the old Hollywood Studio system are: Wendell Corey, Shelley Winters, Everett Sloan, Ilka Chase and Paul Langton.

Movie Critic Dull and boring. A movie about the movie making world and what they will do to cover up scandals among their best actors.I found the drama about the actor's marriage far too scattered and uninteresting. This film is supposed to show that some studio owners were evil greedy men making their stars produce garbage meaningless movies for money--using corrupted directors (gee what a surprise!). Also that this unfufilling career (producing kitch) leads to infidelity and marriage problems and robs the souls of the poor actors.Personally I would rather watch 99 River Street any day than this boring thing--all the studios would have gone bankrupt if they only produced these pseudo-intellectual masterpieces of boredom. An ugly now very dated looking French painting is supposed to symbolize the studio owners and of course the high culture and intelligence of the actor or rather his wife who bought it. PSEUDO-INTELLECTUALITY DEFINED.It drags it goes no where. It is talky with endless unemotive dialogue--in fact the scream when his wife finds his body--is the first non droning dialogue you hear--it made me jump. Shelley Winters is the most memorable actor for her short part where she is hopelessly dense and annoying.Watch things like 77 River Street...that is entertainment when things try to become too meaningful or artsy they flop..Several reviews say they let the actors control this entire movie allowing too much hamming and over-rehearsed stops (scenes).One last thing the tinny jazz soundtrack for this thing it was so bad it became irritating.DO NOT RECOMMEND

Steffi_P With the mood of cynicism that permeated the motion picture industry in the years after the war, Hollywood itself sometimes became its own target. With the decline of the studio system and the rise of the independent producer, this was inevitable. Pictures like Sunset Boulevard and The Bad and the Beautiful veiled their attacks, were somewhat playful in their satire, and in any case chose relatively soft victims. The Big Knife however is flagrant and visceral, and put its producer-director Robert Aldrich in the studio bad books for several years to come.Even before The Big Knife went into production, it was hard to get either backers or cast willing to be associated with it. Aldrich eventually took on a supporting actor to play a lead role. But Jack Palance is no second-fiddle player. For his looks and demeanour he was usually cast in tough baddie roles, but here he gets to show his considerable dramatic range. He continually mixes his emotions with exceptional skill – an example being when he snaps angrily at Everett Sloane, showing a hint of vulnerability beneath the surface that is both believable and faintly poignant. This is one of his most impressive performances and he is more than able to carry the picture.The rest of the cast, while similarly not the most glamorous of choices, are a real box of gems nonetheless. Opposite Palance we have Ida Lupino, not an outstanding actress, but always one who radiated great intelligence and dignity. This is by far the best I have I have ever seen from her, and her character's relationship with Palance's is truly touching. Also at his very best is Wendell Corey, a man who tended to play blandly obnoxious types, as he does here, but capable of demonstrating real humanity and depth when it was required. Rod Steiger's performance is, at first glance, a little too surreal and theatrical for a straight drama, but as the picture wears on it seems somehow appropriate for the one absolutely despicable villain to be some kind of bizarre caricature. In any case, he is good fun to watch.The question is begged, if The Big Knife was such a bugbear to the Hollywood establishment, and has such an iconic cast, why has it not been championed by latter-day hipster film geeks? The answer is simple: The Big Knife simply isn't that good. Robert Aldrich was a skilled director of dynamic action flicks, and it's clear he now truly wanted to raise his game and make serious dramatic pictures. But good as his intentions are he's out of his depth. He simply doesn't understand the kind of manipulation needed to make a stage play work on the screen, without it seeming like an endless string of talking, and for all his movement of the camera the narrative still remains dull and static.The production is also scuppered by two seemingly minor factors. First, the set decoration is far too cluttered, and while Aldrich makes some good use of bringing props into view at opportune moments, there is simply too much business there and it upstages the actors. Secondly there is that score by Frank DeVol, which clearly thinks it is modern and innovative, but is frankly annoying, especially since the poor mixing makes it sound as if DeVol's drumming is actually supposed to be taking place on the set, and you expect a guy with a snare to suddenly walk into the frame. When you see how badly it is done here, you can appreciate why the Academy gives awards for such "boring" categories as Art Direction and Sound. The ironic thing is, had a major studio dared to pick up The Big Knife and got a better production team to work on it, they could probably have done a fairly decent job.

vocalistbob I've tried to watch this film 3 or 4 times, but I just can't get past the fact that everything about it is just awful. I'm sure it was a courageous move by somebody to cast Jack Palance as the protagonist, but there is not one single fiber of my being that believes that he could act at all, much less act against type.Yes, I understand that Clifford Odets was a brilliant author, but it's not evident here. This odd and forced mish-mash of 50's hipster dialog seems to obfuscate any genuine meaning, which explains why none of the actors, even the good ones (Steiger, Ida Lupino, Shelly Winters, Everett Sloane) seems to know how to deliver their lines - it's as though they don't understand the meaning of what they are saying. And in the meantime, Wendell Corey and Palance stage a terrific contest to see who can be more stone-faced.The direction is amateurish and completely overwrought. The physical interaction between the characters is as stilted as the dialog.And can we discuss that hideous set? It's so busy, ugly and contrived that it adds to the robotic, disconnected quality of the characters, the dialog and the portrayals.This film seems to suck the energy right out of me. It looks like everybody took an overdose of Valium each morning when they arrived on the set. It takes a pretty lousy movie to make Rod Steiger and Shelly Winters look bad, but this one succeeds.I can see that it might have been effective as a play on or off Broadway, where intellectuals and beats could have congratulated themselves for appreciating the power of the plot and the artsy flourishes of the pseudo-hip dialog.