Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Ploydsge just watch it!

Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

judah-17 It seems that none of the reviewers to date have realized that the "twist" ending was the cleverest and best denouement possible. By occurring as it did, his wife got all he originally wanted her to get, and much more!! If it had not happened, although he would have been entitled to the reward money for discovering who the real murderer was, the latter paying for his crime, he would still have ended up in jail for serious public mischief by causing a false accusation to be laid and an expensive police investigation and jury trial to occur. It makes no difference that it was self-directed or directed against anyone else as far as the difficulties he caused may be concerned. In addition, the court might have fined him in an amount equal to or even more than the needless cost to the state. This would have eaten up most, if not all, of the reward money.However, because of the unexpected ending, his wife would be entitled to collect both on the double indemnity provision in his insurance policy and, as his heir, the full reward money as belonging to his estate. That's more than he had schemed for her.Beautiful!

martin lane Would Hitchcock have made something of this strained premise?..One hopes he would have avoided some of the silly staging (Kennedy escaping from his hospital room in a black suit but no shirt (( would the suit have been left in the room of a recovering prisoner under guard????))Via a freight elevator that is FULL of hospital staff...including a morgue attendant...who ignore this huge half dressed blond band-aided (after brain surgery)giant AS IF HE IS NOT THERE?!?! I was prepared by this scene for a later "twist" which had the central murder victim (in a flashback)willingly getting into "a car he knew"...with the film then contradicting this by having the person who the victim was supposedly expecting to be in the car scream that the car was not even hers at the time of the killing...I wont reveal who was in the car ...(just suffice to say that it was someone who the victim would not have been expecting a lift from...and that their presence makes the whole crime as illogical and unlikely as much of the rest of this film.

moonspinner55 As a Los Angeles insurance investigator with a brain tumor (but unwilling to undergo the necessary laser surgery), George Kennedy bustles through this far-fetched, hyperbolic criminal nonsense like an overage Boy Scout. He proceeds to implicate himself in a year-old unsolved murder, which would allow spouse Anne Jackson to collect on the reward money; of course, the surgery becomes imperative--thereby leaving Kennedy a healthy, innocent man convicted of first-degree murder! Despite variable camera-work, and a somewhat confusing past-and-present style, this is a well-made picture with a solid cast. Kennedy, actually, has some fine early scenes; but once the plot loops become entangled, he has nothing to rely on but his typical slow-burn. John T. Kelley's screenplay changes gears in the final third (becoming standard cops-and-robbers stuff), releasing all the pent-up hot air within this scenario. It not only leaves questions unanswered, it also makes the L.A. police force look bad and the criminal justice system appear inept (which may have been intentional). ** from ****

Erewhon The premise is familiar -- guy learns he's going to die, tries to find a way to leave his family provided for -- but it's presented in an interesting manner here, with Kennedy an appealing if unlikely lead. All goes well until the ending, which is so outrageously wrong for the movie that it completely sinks the film. A surprise ending is generally something many thrillers try for, but it has to be a surprise ending that satisfies the audience on some level, not one that throws the whole story back in their faces.