Home Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

Re: "Requiem For A Heavyweight": The TV Theatrical Release

199.80.70.126

I frequently reference the ten volume set, "The Motion Picture Guide",
whom, IMO, have excellent reviews of films between 1927 and 1983, edited
by Jay Nash and Stanley Ross. The review there gives the 1962 movie a
3&1/2 * rating out of a possible 5 *; pretty good. They consider Palance's
performance as very good, but Quinn's to be better, in fact, the best
performance of his career. Gleason and Rooney are lauded also for their
supporting performances. To make the film longer than the original, producers
added scenes that were originally axed by director Nelson, which consequently, turned out to be the precise weak points of the movie.
"The Motion Picture Guide" reviewers also said that the movie was technically weaker than the original TV version, mainly because of the
slow, repetitious scenes that were originally cut being restored; and inferior
scene transitions.
On the IMDb site, the TV version received a whopping 8.7 rating (out of
a possible 10) from 43 votes cast; and the movie version received a very
good rating of 7.9 (out of 79 votes). - AH



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Signature Sound   [ Signature Sound Lounge ]


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
  • Re: "Requiem For A Heavyweight": The TV Theatrical Release - AudioHead 10:04:28 12/07/99 (0)


You can not post to an archived thread.