Organnall Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Claire Dunne One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Red-Barracuda This was a movie that French director Claude Chabrol made just before the period considered his golden era in which he knocked out a number of excellent dramatic thrillers. It would only be fair to say that with this one he hadn't quite nailed the formula, as while it has a complex plot, it ultimately doesn't add up to all that much by the end. The story features a young couple who try to convince, Paul Wagner, the mentally unstable owner of a respected champagne business to sell his company to another corporation. Matters are complicated when on a trip to Germany, a girl Wagner meets is murdered while he experiences a blackout, while back in France the same thing happens once again. These events are used as leverage to blackmail him into giving up his company.It's got to be said that this one takes a while to get going. It begins with a scene involving a gang attack, which kind of sits a bit awkwardly in the story, and it is only alluded to later on but left essentially adrift from everything else. After this, we watch some rich types involve themselves in a series of vaguely interesting activities but it is really only once the first murder finally occurs that the story becomes interesting. It sort of gets by after that but you would be hard pushed to say by the end that it was anything too out of the ordinary or inspired. Still, any film that features the incredibly alluring Stéphane Audran gets plus points from me basically from the get-go, and while she does have an admittedly smaller role than she would have in Chabrol's later films, it is an important one. Frankly, Audran was a huge reason that many of the films from Chabrol's golden era were so good and in this instance, even with limited screen-time she is still head and shoulders above everybody else. There was a neat disguise reveal later on which had me fooled and the movie does end on a commendably strange final shot. Ultimately, this is certainly worth a watch if you like Chabrol or Audran, although it is for sure one of their lesser collaborations.

enoughtoil Spoiler alert: this review is all spoilers. But this movie is so bad that I don't think it's possible to spoil it any further. A reviewer who has praised the movie asserts that the Anthony Perkins character, Christopher, is in cahoots with the character, or rather characters, played by Stéphane Audran: Audran is Jacqueline when disguised as Christopher's mousy maid and she is the flashy Lydia when not in disguise. Lydia commits a bunch of murders and tries to pin them on Christopher's friend, the character named Paul who is played by Maurice Ronet. Lydia's plan is to benefit financially from the deaths of her murder victims and then live happily ever after with Christopher (why the beautiful and intelligent, albeit ruthless, Lydia would kill in order to be with a loser like Christopher is beyond my comprehension). But if Christopher is in on Lydia's plan, then the scene where he makes a play for Jacqueline and she rejects him makes no sense. Perhaps he could be in cahoots only with Lydia, not realizing that she is also Jacqueline, but that would mean that all it takes for a woman to deceive Christopher is not much more than her wearing of a wig. Christopher's being in cahoots with Lydia would also mean that he would be delighted when he learns that his wife, Christine, played by Yvonne Furneaux, has been murdered, when in fact he is distraught. The entire movie makes very little sense. With the partial exception of Christine, all the main characters are unprincipled and obnoxious people, so it is difficult to have much sympathy for any of them.

gridoon2018 This early Claude Chabrol thriller is rarely seen, but it's just as good as most of his later, more widely acclaimed films. The beginning is a little too languid (as one character puts it, their job is "to do nothing with distinction"), but once the first murder occurs, the film transforms into a gripping, Hitchcockian mystery. Chabrol is collaborating with his regular cinematographer and composer, so the photography and the music are up to his usual high standards. There are some stunningly beautiful women (Stephane Audran in red lingerie is worth the price of admission by herself....and why is Suzanne Lloyd so little-known?), and an equally stunning plot twist. But you must also be prepared for one of the strangest, most open-ended final shots you will ever see! *** out of 4.

MARIO GAUCI Despite the mixed reception it enjoys among both critics and fans of the director, this film can now be seen to have been the one to virtually inaugurate Chabrol's major period; it was actually made in conjunction with Universal, a studio with which his idol Alfred Hitchcock was still tied at the time and, to further stress that connection, he utilized one of the stars from the latter's recent work (Anthony Perkins in the first of two pictures he did for the French director). This co-production arrangement – which even saw eminent American film critic Derek Prouse and character actor Henry Jones figuring among the writers and supporting cast respectively! – resulted in two separate versions: the English-language one running 98 minutes and the French being slightly longer at either 107 or 111, depending on the sources. Unfortunately, the former seems to be the more readily available cut which, incidentally, also fails to give credit to Chabrol's regular scribe Paul Gegauff for his contribution to the clever screenplay! Though Chabrol had previously dabbled in the thriller genre (including one in color, WEB OF PASSION [1959] that would make for a perfect thematic companion piece), this stylish film – which also brought on a sudden blossoming of his then-wife Stephane Audran's talents, in what initially appears to be a dual role – set him out as European cinema's foremost purveyor of folies bourgeoises (to cite a later, albeit much maligned, title I have been unable to track down for this comprehensive tribute). Even so, this first 'mature' attempt proves a bit uneasy as a whole – owing, in part, to the language barrier but, also, the strained decadent milieu at its core (to get an inkling of the film's overall effect, if Hitchcock had made LA DOLCE VITA [1960], it would have looked something like this!). In fact, the psychological aspect of the narrative (the hero suffers a head injury and undergoes repeated shock treatment, which makes him seemingly prone to blackouts) is rather downplayed in favor of some dreary business dealings which, eventually, descend into blackmail and murder.With the protagonist made to be an alcoholic playboy – I particularly enjoyed the Bunuel in-joke where the inebriated hero smashes a TV set just as a screening of LA MORT EN CE JARDIN (1956) is about to start! – it was inevitable that Maurice Ronet, who had virtually cornered that particular market ever since playing the suicidal lead in Louis Malle's LE FEU FOLLET (1963), would assume that role here and he went on to win a Spanish acting award for his sterling efforts. In retrospect, given his pedigree, one would have expected Perkins to be the victim of any potential conspiracy but he emerges a schemer here instead…which he does very well, mind you, except that in the last sequence we realize he had an accomplice all along who is even more ruthless than he is!Actually, the revelation with respect to the latter comes across just as 'shocking' as the one at the climax of Agatha Christie's "Witness For The Prosecution" (superbly filmed by Billy Wilder in 1957); that said, death and disguise also come into play at the finale of Chabrol's subsequent release, LES BICHES (1968; also with Audran). Then again, such an audacious open-ended closing shot as one finds here could hardly have been anticipated! Apart from Audran – not to mention a glossy look (courtesy of the ubiquitous Jean Rabier) which was soon to become a trademark of the Chabrol style – the film boasts a number of other attractive females (including Yvonne Furneaux as Perkins' wife, whose lust for power proves her undoing, Catherine Sola as Ronet's tennis partner and, both as unwitting pawns in the game of murder, voluptuous artist Suzanne Lloyd and Christa Lang, who had previously worked with Chabrol three years earlier in his espionage pastiche THE TIGER LIKES FRESH MEAT and would go on to marry iconoclastic American film-maker Samuel Fuller).