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).
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 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.