Review of Inserts

Inserts (1975)
3/10
Just plain bad, cheap and boring!
14 October 2004
A washed up silent film director - Richard Dreyfuss - has fallen in to making quickie porn, but even this has its problems.

I think Richard Dreyfuss is a good actor, but also a lucky one. For a shortish guy who often carries a bit of a paunch - and whose hair is in full retreat - he seems to very popular with casting directors. While often cast in Average Joe roles he can never rise above the quality of the material.

Here he is given trash to work with and is left all at sea with it. A previous reviewer says he (Dreyfuss) wants to forget all about it - and I do too!

This looks like a stage play written by a dope smoking school dropout and filmed by his best mate. The subject (porno) seems chosen to try and bring a bit of box office to a "Winter of my Despair" style production.

There are two types of bad movie. Boring bad movies and inept bad movies. This is the closest I have ever seen to the two forms being present in one film. The whole production takes part in one room among people that have either given up on living or never had much interest in it in the first place.

(Did Dreyfuss see something of his own demons in the script?)

Unfunny lines about the mechanics of sex abound but it doesn't seems to want to be a black comedy - not even a failed one - it seems to be wanting to be taken seriously!

The only worthwhile thing is seeing the youngish Bob Hoskins (playing a gangster) taking his first few steps in Tinseltown.

Interesting only if you want to see the daddy of all bum-archers and maybe the worst "A film" of the 1970's. The writer/director - who we won't name and shame - later wrote Harry and Walter Go to New York to prove that he really was that bad, it wasn't just bad luck.
8 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed