christopher-underwood Another film based upon a book by James M Cain and, naturally, another controversy. Cain's work always tended to focus upon emotions running high and passion, particularly, sexual passion, being exploited for another's gain. Postman Always Rings Twice and Double Indemnity also exploit these human frailties (qualities?) but they never encounter quite the derision heaped upon this fine film. Strangely, enough, a most faithful interpretation of the book, just lacking the sticky claustrophobia of the original's interiors. Obviously this is disliked because of the way the 'incest' scenes are played but it is, as they say, only a film and this is not meant as a an advertisement but as an exploration. Worse things than this happen as we well know and to fall over ourselves to throw the first stone at a movie seems crazy. Especially if it has one of Stacy Keach's best performances, a great and most convincing one from Pia Zadora (who deserved her Golden Globe newcomer award) and at least an interesting late appearance from Orson Welles. Super cinematography, competent direction, fine score from Morricone and great steamy story. What's not to like?

nickroosa Is this film ever going to get a DVD release? Even a cheap, quick release? A film this bad deserves to see the light of day, so aspiring film students can watch this and learn what not to do. Like, say, the creepy "Oh, I'll wash my daughter's back while she's taking a bath" scene. I haven't been able to find this movie at any used VHS store; it's time to put this legendarily bad film to DVD. If for no other reason then to see Welles in the sunset of his career and Ed McMahon actually acting, instead of being Johnny's sidekick or giving people massive checks for Publisher's Clearinghouse. And Pia Zadora, Thespian. Come on Criterion Collection, your public duty to unearth this wretched gem for a whole new generation to explore awaits you!

schneb99 This is a movie that would have been good as the "B" film at the drive-in. You could tell from the beginning that it was a movie made for television. I worked extra on the set, and Orson Welles had a bottle of wine behind his podium as he did his judge shtick. He drank so much he would forget his lines, and he abused the cue card holders something fierce. After awhile, we ungrateful extras were yelling, "He will drink all wine before its time!" Cruel, but we were frustrated. Stacy Keach was a consummate professional, however. He acted as though the movie was "Citizen Kane." I have had great respect for him ever since.

lambiepie-2 Once again, as I write this, I gotta tell ya, I saw this on the "Z" Channel in Los Angeles in the early 80's. I had three emotions while seeing this..one was, "This is messed up" then laughter, and one more was: "Pia Zadora isn't THAT bad of an actress."You see, it WAS the 80's. Pia had an on screen "something" that with the right vehicle could have given her a decent film career. Leading Lady? No way. The second or third important female role? You betcha. Such as "the wicked sister" or "the backstabbing girl friend" roles, with the type of stuff that was coming out then. She could have been a "cheap rent" Jane Seymour type in films playing those rolls. But she got this one...and it wasn't that great. The story was all over the place, the sexual tension was laughable and...very confusing at times. This film is bad, but top 200 bad, not top 50 bad.The gosh-awful script didn't help ANYONE in this film. It was bad. There is a bit of "camp" film quality running through this film at points, not enough to make it a "good-camp" film to redeem it. A lot of misguided areas here, a hodgepodge of a story and a lot of wasted talent.Thank goodness for all involved, there was a paycheck waiting for them at the end.