JoeytheBrit I once read an interview in which Harold Robbins, the dirty old man of (so called) literature, revealed that his books were written to a strict formula of one sex scene every six pages and one business scene every twelve (or something like that). Well, this adaptation of one of his later (and lesser) novels seems to stick fairly rigidly to that formula, with hot-shot racing driver Tommy Lee Jones and crusty old car manufacturer Laurence Olivier taking turns to work their way through the female members of the cast – which is probably why Robert Duvall looks so out of sorts throughout the film as Larry's bitter grandson. Yes, this is that infamous film which has Sir Larry – clearly only in it for the money – with his trousers around his ankles as he tests out the suspension on a random hotel maid's chassis.To be fair to the old thesp, he's by far the best thing about this trashy, but curiously compelling and enjoyable, soap. He seems to have watched every Frank Morgan film he could lay his hands on before revealing his convincing American accent to the camera, and it's a strange experience to see such a respected actor slumming it this way. A young Tommy Lee Jones was still trying to establish himself in movies when he landed this part, so you can't really blame him for accepting the lead role. Other names in the cast (Katharine Ross, Lesley Anne-Down, etc) were always second-rankers who were probably grateful for the exposure, but Robert Duvall is the real casting oddity in a role that is bland and one-dimensional.The story pits him against Olivier and Jones as they attempt to design an economic production-line car that will transform the industry. Bob's more interested in selling dish washers and men's clothing to Filipinos, so he launches an undercover espionage plot that has a fairly predictable conclusion. There are few dramatic moments, and you could probably wander off for ten minutes to make a cup of tea and smoke a fag without losing the thread of the plot. Anyway, the story is secondary to the depiction of life amongst the ridiculously rich, and the ready availability of incredibly gorgeous women who disrobe for the flimsiest of reasons. It panders to that desire that lives within all of us to some degree to have the finest things in life, but also makes it clear (probably without meaning to) that such lives are essentially empty and meaningless, thus leaving us feeling just a little bit better about our modest lot in life.

jehaccess6 I vaguely remembered seeing this film somewhere years ago. I had really remembered Kathleen Beller's gratuitous nude scene, included when such scenes were quite rare in a major theatrical release. When I found the DVD in the remainder bin, I grabbed the last copy left in the pile.I can't say that I enjoyed the plot, given that the plot was very thin underfoot. Other comments have noted the parallels to some of the trashy night time TV soap operas of that period. Really, this film could have been a pilot episode for a big-budget TV soap opera. If only they hadn't prematurely rolled up a lot of the potential plot themes.No, this was a nostalgia trip back to the excesses of the '70s. I got to see all those non-stellar styling exercises Detroit was foisting off on the American public, in the face of their increasing buying resistance. Here indeed was an early stage in the downfall of Detroit.Then we had that ridiculously disguised Mercedes limousine wearing an outlandish grille to conceal its origin. I don't think a New Orleans pimp would feel comfortable driving such a monstrosity.The real high point was the ridiculously hammy performance of Lawrence Olivier. He really got to let loose in a role that set no limit on how outlandish and trashy his portrayal would get. What unknown director would have the nerve to tell Sir Larry he was chewing too much on the scenery? That scene showing Olivier on top of the maid was a real hoot, a high point in a stellar career! On further viewing of this film, it became apparent to me that a stand-in for Olivier actually was filming this scene.Then there was a brash young Texan Tommy Lee Jones trying to pass himself off as a third-generation Italian-American. Tommy, somehow I can't see you growing up Italian.Then there was a much thinner Edward Herrman. He is now best known for flogging Dodge trucks and cars and voice overs on public TV nature programs. Oh well, a guy has to make a living.I believe the film did tone down some of the original plot in the novel. As I recall Loren Hardeman not only had an incestuous relationship with his daughter-in-law, but fathered her child. So he was not the boy's grandfather, but actually his father.Well, I am glad I have the DVD in the collection. It is a great antidote for pretentious films that take themselves too seriously. It made me want to look up Kathleen Beller on the IMDb and maybe catch some of her other efforts.

susandelavan I bought this film because I LOVE Robert Duvall and Tommy Lee Jones, and it was packed with other great names. The movie misses its mark at every chance. It fails to bring you into caring about the characters, the passion, the evil, etc. I don't know how it could miss with the people involved, but it does. Just the description of the movie was gripping, but the viewing failed to deliver. The era was fascinating. The sets were beautiful. The music was blah. The drama was off center. You should see the chemistry of Jones and Duvall in "Lonesome Dove" to see what is missing in this film. I'm glad I have this chance to comment, as I was dying to tell someone who cares.

dangermouse0000 There's only one reason to watch this film. It's not the quality of the acting or the strength - or otherwise - of the plot. Rather, it's a study in excess, and my favourite excess in this film would have to come under L for lust. Kathleen Beller is extremely photogenic and I absolutely love the swimming pool scene !