mark.waltz This foursome do not come off at all like Fagin's gang in the Charles Dickens classic, "Oliver Twist". Like Fagin, under the training of Walter Pidgeon and James Coburn, newbies Michael Sarrazin and Trish Van Severe learn that " You've got to pick a pocket or two", but unlike the British waifs under Fagin's thumb, they learn to do it with panache. But a thief is a thief is a thief, and as charming as these four are, that makes them difficult to root for.Still, watching them at work in this comedy thriller is fascinating, and when the victims are lecherous men ogling Van Severe, watching the pervert loose his shirt is amusing. Veteran actor Pidgeon is as far from Mrs. Miniver's husband as he can be, a delightful old codger who keeps his spark flaring even if his days are fizzling out. Coburn is no-nonsense and bossy, Sarrazin sexy yet bumbling. Attractive but minus the spark that makes movie stars, Van Devere seems like a desperate replacement for either Dyan Cannon or Raquel Welch. Still, there's great location photography of several Pacific coast cities (notably Seattle) and a nostalgic feeling in the costumes, dialog and trends. They pickpocket as if it was just another day in market trading. As caper films go, it's dated fun yet the type of money making scheme they are out to perpetrate leaves an awkward feeling lingering.

bkoganbing The only other film that I saw where a pickpocket is a hero is Pickup On South Street and the stylish James Coburn of Harry In Your Pocket would look down on Richard Widmark. Widmark worked alone and lived hand to mouth until he happened to dip on a Communist spy and got some atomic secrets in that film.We're dealing with something totally different here. James Coburn in the title role will dip into your's and everyone else's pocket. After watching this film I'm glad I carry my wallet in my front pocket where a strange movement there will set off definite alarms. You watch Harry In Your Pocket and NO ONE will ever carry a wallet in a back pocket again.Coburn and an old associate Walter Pidgeon take in a pair of young trainees, Michael Sarrazin and Trish Van Devere, and things work out for a bit. But soon Van Devere becomes an object of rivalry for the team. Coburn also is known far and wide by law enforcement, but they can never catch him with the goods.Some nice scenic cinematography in Seattle, Salt Lake City, and Victoria, British Columbia is in this film as three of the places where the team plys it's trade. Coburn is a man getting on himself and jealous of young Sarrazin. His only real attachment is to the elderly Pidgeon who now just serves as a lookout for marks and a steerer. Pidgeon is rather touching as the old crook for whom there really is no retirement due to the life he's chosen to lead.For a look at an elegant yet also seamy side of a crooked business you can't go wrong with Harry In Your Pocket.

Bladerunner101 Bruce Geller made a huge impact with Mission Impossible but this film lacks that show's drive and innovation. Painstakingly plotted and performed it nevertheless drags in places and it's no surprise it was his only feature film.Pigeon looks out of his depth throughout and fails to spark any rapport; Coburn brings his usual cool reserve and magnetism, Sarazzin improves as the film goes on. The revelation is Trish Van Devere who plays the love interest and conscience of the film with real style. As well as looking like a cross between Debbie Reynolds and one of Charlie's Angels (both these things being magic) Devere brings an engaging lightness of touch that overshadows Coburn's own, and keeps the viewer just about caring how things turn out.

viciouslollipop I caught this movie last night on TCM while channel-surfing around...I have always been a big fan of James Coburn and had never seen this(I was born the year, 1973,before it came out). It was a really neat little flick about pickpockets from different generations working together...it is almost like a time capsule watching the places, fashions, and particulars from that era. The story was engaging and it was well-shot;the acting was also good from all four principals(Coburn, Pidgeon, Sarrazin, and Van de Vere). I tend to agree with several of the posters in that this movie probably could not be made today, or it would be a direct to video affair. Character studies and dialogue driven movies are almost niche films by some of todays standards. All in all, if you are a film fan it is definitely worth checking out(if just for the contrasts in styles from the mid 60's/late 70's to today:)