casablancavic This movie could have been done in 1/3 the time.What was good ws the potential story, what was bad was the over acting from everybody -Jeffrey Tambor and the person who played the trans girl especially.The music was atrocious....ohh so brutal.Who would think that this music should be in there should have their ears pulled off their heads.Endless dialogue which has nothing to do and is uninteresting at all points.Scenes which come out of nowhere and go nowhere.Characters who don't appear again and who aren't need to begin with.Dialogue which doesn't sound real and camera work which seems like a first year film student is doing a sample shot of work.It's not in tune with the 70\s or even the 80\s, 90's or 60's for that matter - and it definitely ain't in tune for anything 40 years later.I watched it for free and I only did so because I want to see how bad it really was.The only spoiler here is the bad performances which should have been nixed from the editor before making it's way into the film...and there were plenty.There was no need for a bedroom scene at all, it offered nothing at any point and took away from everything.Lousy writing overall - even for a 1970's era film.

JTLott While I'm sure the intent of the filmmakers was for this to be a comedy and it does generate some well-earned humor, the stakes involved embodied through two criminally (no pun intended) underrated supporting performances (by Robert Christian and Thomas G. Waites) are much too high for this film to be labeled a comedy, despite the filmmakers intentions. This is compelling drama presented in a matter-of-fact style that makes it all the more chilling. In fact, the film only goes wrong when it tries too hard for its comedic tone. I remember seeing this film as a kid late one night on cable. I came in on the scene where Ralph, the doomed transvestite, is forced to go to prison due to lack of proper paperwork and was shaken by the revelation in the next scene where Pacino revels that Ralph hanged himself. Watching this film as an adult, I thought I'd be desensitized to such material especially since I am a "Law & Order" addict and all. However, that scene and this film scares me now more than ever because I understand just how very easy it is to get trapped in the maze of the criminal justice system. And since the Supreme Court just days ago ruled in favor of retroactive searches based on traffic warrants being admissible which makes anyone a target of unlawful search and seizures, this film is all the more prescient and horrifying.

Jakester One reviewer here says, in effect, "This is a comedy!! People who say otherwise are fools!" Balderdash. It's half comedy, half tragedy - i.e., tragicomedy. This difficult genre, this strange hybrid, reached maturity in the late 1960s and into the 1970s with films like Dog Day Afternoon, Nashville, McCabe and Mrs. Miller, this picture. So, half comedy, half pointed commentary on the corruption of America. The film is good and seems to improve with repeated watchings. The script is strong - well researched, lively, elegantly stitching together a tremendous amount of disparate material. That said, some of the scenes drag on too long. The photography seems uninspired. The music is that rather irritating oboe-heavy stuff that permeated a lot of movies of this era (see also "Tootsie" for example). The acting is excellent. Jack Warden is hilarious. Christine Lahti is entirely convincing. John Forsythe is outstanding. Al Pacino is, as always, worth watching - it's a huge role for him and he carries the weight gracefully and occasionally hits major places of insight.The sequences with the character named Jeff are worth the price of admission. I'm amazed that this actor (Thomas G. Waites) didn't become one of the top character actors of the 1980s and '90s (he apparently was more interested in the stage, acting and writing). His climactic moment in this picture is my nominee for the best jailhouse sequence in movie history. You'll be haunted by his declaration: "YES I CAN!"

hdavis-29 I loved this in 1979. It was a good evening's entertainment. Lots of fun. Pacino was in his element. We all cheered him. The good guys won. The bad guys and the corruption they represented took it on the nose. I would have given it a '10' back then.The thing is, it ain't 'back then' anymore. And boy does this movie show its age. I know it's heresy to say but entertainment gets dated. This one hasn't aged well. It's none too subtle. As one of the IMDb reviews I just read said, less would be more. Charlie Chaplin was hilarious in 1925. He ain't that funny today. This was a bravura performance back in '79. In fact, several of them were. The writing seemed crisp. It felt almost embarrassing today. The "5" is for how much I enjoyed this 30+ years ago. It wasn't there for me anymore. I can only imagine how this film would look to a young audience today.