Did you people see the same film I saw?

A lot of fun.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Big Sleep, The (1978) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Philip Marlowe (Robert Mitchum) is asked by General Sternwood (James Stewart) to track down a blackmailer who is using his daughters (Sarah Miles, Candy Clark) but after the blackmailer is found murdered the private detective finds a whole string of people who seem to be keeping one secret after another. THE BIG SLEEP certainly doesn't come close to the Humphrey Bogart/Lauren Bacall film but at the same time it's somewhat unfair to judge the two especially when you consider that this version was a lot closer to the original novel and features stuff that couldn't even be hinted at in the 1947 version. The basic plot how a lot of perversion as we're dealing with one sister (Clark) who is certainly a sexual pervert and someone who is taken nude photos, which sets off the entire blackmailing. Teenage pornography is one of the many subplots as a wide range of characters come in and out of the story. For the most part I enjoyed this version but I think what really kept it from being a good movie is the rather lackluster direction by Winner who just doesn't seem to know what to do with the material. There are far too many scenes that contain no suspense, no tension and even worse is that some of the action scenes come across as some sort of bored after thought. There are a couple different scenes where Marlowe finds himself in some sort of struggle yet they're all filmed rather poorly and end up going no where. I'm not expecting some sort of masterpiece but the director should have at least worked the mystery a tad bit more but sadly there's very little energy or emotion to be found. I will admit that the story here is much better than the original movie as Marlowe and Mitchum seem perfectly well suited for the material. There are several scenes where the sisters come onto Mitchum and that laid back approach of his is perfectly done and there never was a better acting at playing this type of detective. Mitchum is clearly having fun with the role and he certainly helps keep the film moving. Stewart only has a couple small scenes but it's always nice to see him and the stuff with Mitchum was a lot of fun because the two legends are clearly having fun working together. Both Miles and Clark are good in their roles and we get nice supporting work from Richard Boone, Richard Todd, Joan Collins and Oliver Reed. This film certainly earns its R-rating as Clark is nude in pretty much each of her scenes here and the dirty nature of the pornography certainly sets the film apart from the original. The film had its setting changed to London, which is somewhat of a letdown as L.A. would have been much better but overall THE BIG SLEEP is a fairly rewarding picture but one only wishes the director had done a better job.

Michael Winner doesn't have the best reputations as a director. It does seem like a crass act to switch Marlowe to London. I think Robert Mitchum has enough presence, humour and dignity to carry the film and it is a deliciously complicated plot. However my interest is in the many minor treats on the journey to the conclusion. Who wouldn't want to see Oliver Reed in his prime, a traditional British actor who was in his prime the day he died. Then there's Joan Collins working on her nails. There are many agreeable old cars, quaint Chelsea aspects and snaps of the Thames. I was reminded of the subversive humour of the Avengers especially with all that background jazz percussion. Some of the camera angles will indicate when the director was interested. I suppose this film is a lot more fun now than it was when it was released.

Who can make tasteless, dull, silly movies? Who can bother you by the stupidest cuts in one scene? Who can light dumbly everything and everyone like the worst TV work yet in cinematic movies? Who can move the whole cast as robots without so much meaning ? Who can bring the wooden performance out of all the actors, even the big names ? Who can direct the highest spiritless scenes ever ? Who can manage to write the most mechanical scripts, with the unfunniest lines? Who got the passion for harsh sex and violence on the screen ? Who got no sense of humor or maybe no sense? Who can annoy you with a style has no style at all ? Who can make movies to be learned at Film schools as the prototype of "don't do that again" ? And finally, who got the talent of deforming an American classic movie? So can bore you to death with what's supposed to be a thriller ? Ladies and Gentleman, I give to you the Winner himself : Mr. Michael Winner, who with him you'll always lose ! P.S : I think that's more merciful than other comment I wanted to write, about such a movie, which I intended to entitle "How To Explode a Movie By Dynamite ?!"

I had mild hopes for this film from the start. Robert Mitchum, a great actor in his day, was a little long in the tooth to be playing the detective. And it was set, oddly, in London and not in LA. Soon into the picture, not only did it barely live up to my low expectations, but it made me groan on several occasions.The ham-fisted acting, especially on the part of Candy Clark (was she directed to act that retarded or was it her idea?) and sterile scenery were especially hard to take. Some of the actors seemed like set dressings rather than characters. Richard Boone, looking as drunk as ever, plods through this movie for no apparent reason. The only thing memorable about Sarah Miles was her enormous triangle-cut hair, which did nothing more than annoy me.And what was Marlowe doing in expensive clothes and wearing a Rolex watch? Apparently being honest pays far more than he lets on.There are so many better Marlowes out there, so unless you're a real Chandler fan, avoid this one (same goes for Altman's The Long Goodbye and Robert Montgomery's Lady in the Lake).