Worth watching but nothing special .....it is most notable as Clint's directorial debut movie.

Play Misty For Me review

By roncoach from suffolk

Play Misty For Me

Starring Clint Eastwood, Donna Mills, Jessica Walter, John Larch

Director Clint Eastwood

Genres Thriller

Run time 98 mins Certificate 15

1st December 2011

A good film with which to start Clint off on his role as a gifted director. It seems SO long ago now, and yet the great star is still directing......and MUCH better films than this one.

It is tense in parts, it's dull in parts. It has good scenes in parts, it has poor 'padding' in other parts. But overall I rate it a 'Good Film' as my 3.5 stars indicate-----seems about the average with most viewers, and I cannot find any reason to argue with the majority on this occasion.

The colour is poor, and to some extent that spoils the scenic views of California which are shown in the film.

The use of the Roberta Flack classic song seems to have been added , completely out of context during a beach scene, and Eastwood's love of the song surely spoilt his objectivity and his early learning process as a director. Music is such a big part of Clint's life and soul.......and it shines through in many of his films; but, in this one, a great song seems to be just a contrived addition without context.

But, there are a lot of good and not-so-good things that could be listed in depth when reviewing this film. I merely conclude that it is a good thriller , some really gripping moments and overall well worth watching. But if this movie were to be given 5 stars , how could any of us start to rate some of Clint's truly great films which have contributed so much to cinema for so many decades ??? No, it's definitely worth 3 or 3.5 stars, but don't get carried away just because Clint Eastwood is the star and director. As for our leading lady, who never went on to stardom, is concerned : she is surprisingly good..........but we cannot even begin to compare her with the actress who won all the Awards that year for a great film

( Jane Fonda in 'Klute'). I highly recommend Klute as an outstanding film, with far more tension, suspense, menace and 'scariness' than 'Play Misty For Me' could ever achieve.

But, 'Misty' is a good enough film and well worth watching if you've never seen it.

Report this review Write a review

About the reviewer: roncoach

Mad about films-----nearly any genre invented. I firmly believe that , for examples, during the Golden Age of Hollywood ( say 1937-47) or during the Ealing Years in Britain in the 50s ,more good or great films were made, in terms of sheer numbers than before or since. But I also firmly believe that good and great films have been made in every decade over the past 90 years or more right up to the present day. It is just my opinion that far fewer are made in the present era than in earlier eras. But so long as great films , like The King's Speech ( 2010) or Shawshank Redemption (1994) { or even great TV series like "Lost") are made ........the silver screen will always enrich people's lives and add to our cultural heritage. And most of all to our sheer enjoyment ! Not everyone needs to be a film "buff" or include viewing as their favourite hobby......but is there really anyone who does not enjoy a good film at least from time to time ? In another life, I want to be Leslie Halliwell who, during his life, watched just about every movie ever made and passed on his enthusiasm and passion to so many of his readers. After his death, his successors never "got it right" as Mr Halliwell would have wished. Pity. I have made a collection of my 100 "must-see" films -------it is available under one of my profile sections. Of course, some of the list would change every day LOL ! But the one published on this site gives a good idea of the range of my movie "likes". I wonder if my feeling is correct that today's younger generations are far less tolerant of the whole spectrum of movies in terms of when they were produced. I feel that older generations will readily recognise and acknowledge a good or great movie whether it it was made in 1940 or in 2011. But it seems that younger generations do not do that------they are less inclined to even watch a film dated 1940 ( thus missing some all-time greats) , and if by chance they DO see an "oldie" that is genuinely a great film, they are likely to review it as "dated rubbish". I hope that sweeping generalisation is wrong and that younger generations make a point of looking for 5* films from bygone eras and not just trying to search through much dross to find a good or great film from among the current "blockbusters". Yeah, I'll get off the soapbox and go and watch a film......a good one : from 1940 or from 2011. Happy Viewing :)

Titles rented: 175

Favourite actor: Bogey to Bacon; Coop to De Niro; etc

Favourite director: Michael Curtiz