dbborroughs Edward Albert tracks down a friend of his father's, Lee Van Cleef, and tells him that he's in trouble and needs his help as a safe cracker to get out of it. Van Cleef agrees and soon is in the middle of crosses and double crosses. Okay New York City set crime drama is a bit too slack for my tastes. Other than during the occasional moment the film is never truly griping as sequences seem to work in pieces but not as a whole. The robbery for example seems run of the mill until there are a couple of twists towards the end. Part of the problem is that the film trades off many of its characters in such away that we're not sure who the film is about. Is it Van Cleef? Is it Albert? What of Karen Black, highly billed but not showing up until about half way into the film.The film seems to be making it up as it goes along. Yes there are twists which work for a while, but at the same time I'm going to guess that you'll have worked out the ending some time in the final fifteen or twenty minutes. Worth a look if you run a cross it, but not worth going out of your way to see.(The New York street scenes are great if you like seeing how the city used to be)

KillYourTV CONTAINS A SPOILER!! This film was totally pointless. There are no characters to like or with whom one can identify(This was a rare instance where I almost found myself rooting for the cops). It's one redeeming feature, is that it does offer some realistic 70's nostalgia (cars, New York street scenes, and a funky synthesizer sound track that varies between comical and almost interesting at points). It is watchable though- while the writing wasn't by any means great, it does hold ones interest fairly well, and you don't quite know what to expect.Gretchko: "I had to kill the kid"Sam: (non-chalantly): "It happens".

bensonmum2 A retired safecracker (Lee Van Cleef) is lured out of retirement by the son of one of his buddies who is in trouble. The job - steal a load of diamonds from a warehouse safe. Things go terribly wrong. Van Cleef is wounded and everyone else is dead. Now, Van Cleef must elude the man who set-up the job, the man who owns the warehouse, and the police. It seems that Van Cleef's only ally is a crazy woman (Karen Black) who is the only other resident in an abandoned apartment building.Over the years I've noticed that when the material he's faced with isn't first rate, Lee Van Cleef can overact with the best of them. And that's what he does here. There are many scenes where Van Cleef makes some of the most ridiculous faces for no purposes other than overemphasizing his point. It get very distracting. But in The Squeeze, he's outdone by Karen Black. She chews scenery like her life depended upon it. I just had to laugh a couple of times (inappropriate times) because it was all too funny. I suppose that most of the blame for the acting weaknesses could be traced directly to the script. The characters are given some really lame lines.The story itself is quite nice. There's one double-cross after the next. The ending really caught me off guard. Just when I thought I had things figured out, I was hit with another loop. The plot is the primary reason I've rated this movie as I have. If you're a fan of heist films, much of The Squeeze will appeal to you.I would be remiss if, even in this short review, I didn't mention the soundtrack. The music is pure (bad) 70s disco. The main theme song is especially annoying and presents everything that was wrong with music from this period. Even worse, it's stuck in my head - Oh the Pain!

Sorsimus Lee Van Cleef at his most facially challenged plays a retired safeman, who comes back from Mexico to New York to do one job for a friend's kid.Includes most of the cliches one would expect from a "last gig"- film, but redeems itself with nice NY locations, comedy (some intentional) and Lee Van Cleef. Recommended as a time- passer.Released on video in Finland in the eighties.