Death Wish (1974)

[titoli]

I've just read the novel and was curious about what Garfield might have possibly found wrong about the movie.  Well, I can't say it. The movie follows the novel quite closely for more than a half, apart from some minor changes (like the clockwork orange attack which in the novel is barely hinted at). Then the subway scene ends up in the novel without Paul killing the hoodlums because it is too risky: but that it's my favourite scene of the movie. The police doesn't have so much room in the novel and they don't quite manage to get a line on Benjamin (the character's surname). But the finale in the novel is very different: Paul, after having killed three boys throwing rocks at a passing train for fun, while leaving the place is spotted by a cop who sees him with the gun still in his hand. The cop lets him pass. Is that a better finale? I don't know. And then: is Bronson the right lead? I mean, if a hoodlum looks at his face late at night it is probable it will be him getting scared. Anyway the novel gets a 9/10 and the movie a 8/10. I don't feel yet like watching the Willis. Or maybe I will(is).   

[cigar joe]

I've just read the novel and was curious about what Garfield might have possibly found wrong about the movie.  Well, I can't say it. The movie follows the novel quite closely for more than a half, apart from some minor changes (like the clockwork orange attack which in the novel is barely hinted at). Then the subway scene ends up in the novel without Paul killing the hoodlums because it is too risky: but that it's my favourite scene of the movie. The police doesn't have so much room in the novel and they don't quite manage to get a line on Benjamin (the character's surname). But the finale in the novel is very different: Paul, after having killed three boys throwing rocks at a passing train for fun, while leaving the place is spotted by a cop who sees him with the gun still in his hand. The cop lets him pass. Is that a better finale? I don't know. And then: is Bronson the right lead? I mean, if a hoodlum looks at his face late at night it is probable it will be him getting scared. Anyway the novel gets a 9/10 and the movie a 8/10. I don't feel yet like watching the Willis. Or maybe I will(is).

I haven't either

[titoli]

Garfield wrote a follow-up to his novel:



It's good though the author can't decide between a regular thriller and a reflection on vigilante law and its consequences. It seems a movie of sorts was made from it. 7/10

[dave jenkins]

Watched this again, this time with the wife (her first viewing). She enjoyed it, but she had the annoying tendency to shout at the screen to warn the muggers each time. (Honey, I fear you're not fully entering into the spirit of the proceedings.) It's true, as titoli says, that the muggers should take one look at Bronson and immediately run the other way, but this film doesn't have a lot of real life in it. I mean, can you believe how well lit Manhattan was at night in the 70s? Man, if there was really all that light out there how could any mugging get done? Or why bother to wait until dark, it's just as bright then as in the afternoon. Anyway, there are several things about this film that work for me. My favorite bit is that the 3 goons who do the initial damage are never heard from again. As much as I'd like to see Bronson ice Jeff Goldblum, I get a certain satisfaction in the fact that in real life you'd never be able to find those guys. Typical revenge film would be all about tracking those guys down, but this goes a different way. Also, I've always liked the ending, even though it's not remotely plausible (they've got the gun, opportunity, motive . . . sounds like a slam dunk prosecution to me). And the bit about Bronson being a C.O. in Korea and yet being a deadeye marksman was a nice touch. And Vincent Gardenia is good. Then there's the Hancock score. If it weren't for the lighting, I'd be giving this more than . . . a 7/10.

[cigar joe]

Watched this again, this time with the wife (her first viewing). She enjoyed it, but she had the annoying tendency to shout at the screen to warn the muggers each time. (Honey, I fear you're not fully entering into the spirit of the proceedings.) It's true, as titoli says, that the muggers should take one look at Bronson and immediately run the other way, but this film doesn't have a lot of real life in it. I mean, can you believe how well lit Manhattan was at night in the 70s? Man, if there was really all that light out there how could any mugging get done? Or why bother to wait until dark, it's just as bright then as in the afternoon. Anyway, there are several things about this film that work for me. My favorite bit is that the 3 goons who do the initial damage are never heard from again. As much as I'd like to see Bronson ice Jeff Goldblum, I get a certain satisfaction in the fact that in real life you'd never be able to find those guys. Typical revenge film would be all about tracking those guys down, but this goes a different way. Also, I've always liked the ending, even though it's not remotely plausible (they've got the gun, opportunity, motive . . . sounds like a slam dunk prosecution to me). And the bit about Bronson being a C.O. in Korea and yet being a deadeye marksman was a nice touch. And Vincent Gardenia is good. Then there's the Hancock score. If it weren't for the lighting, I'd be giving this more than . . . a 7/10.

I'd give it an 8/10, it does get darker and darker as the film nears the end. As for lighting, NYC had a myriad of various luminares over the years there was no universal street light.

When they removed the Ninth and later the Third Avenue els they used Westinghouse "Whiteways" for lighting they had a distinctive bar look see below.


Aroused (1966)


The Incident (1967)

I don't think any of them are around anymore.

I do remember noticing the switch from warm yellowish incandescent to cold mercury vapor.

[cigar joe]

I forgot to ask before any body know the significance of the four nuns?

You see them just before the attack at the apartment and then another four nuns at the sanitarium.

[titoli]

I forgot to ask before any body know the significance of the four nuns?

You see them just before the attack at the apartment and then another four nuns at the sanitarium.

I seem to remember no mention of them being made in the novel. So it was just some kind of joke for the movie.

[cigar joe]

I seem to remember no mention of them being made in the novel. So it was just some kind of joke for the movie.

That's what I was thinking, it must have had some significance to Winner.

[dave jenkins]

The first appearance may have been a kind of foreshadowing as they appear just prior to the attack. Later, of course, the daughter ends up in the sanitarium attended by nuns. Kinda weak, but maybe that's what Winner was going for.