MovieChat Forums > The Onion Field (1980) Discussion > WOW BAD FILM!

WOW BAD FILM!

posted 12 years ago by boywonderpowpunch
13 replies | jump to latest

Just watched it on TCM and have no clue why this is considered good in any way, Woods is very creepy yes, but even though the story is true, it doesn't go any wheres and not worth a film. I was expecting some interesting court battle where the killers almost go free or something after the intense shooting scene but no nothing happens but a bunch of depressing scenes where the one cop who survived the shooting shop lifts while working as a plain clothes cop in a mall. This is badly filmed by the way I had no clue he was stealing for all I know he bought the watch, it just shows his hand take it off a rack. And the black guy Jimmy accused along with Woods goes from jumping up and down in his cell after hitting Woods like once or twice in a small little fight saying he whooped Woods and saying that without his gun he is a pussy, which also was an unrealistic scene because the guard breaks it up by shooting a round off inside a cell block, oh that's realistic, the fact the bullet could ricochet off the wall and kill him doesn't matter does it, the next scene is the old scientist guy from Back To The Future, except he is young in this film, obviously, telling the black guy how he can use Woods to his advantage and perhaps get outta jail but the black guy literally just sucks woods wood in the shower. No joke. Oh and this movie has probably the corniest ending I have ever seen, it will make you laugh. Horrible movie, this type of film could in no way exist today it is so dreadful.

Funny how it was based on a book written by an ex-cop who wanted Hollywood cop movies to be more realistic, too bad the only thing he got down was the cop realism every other aspect of the film is dull and laughable.

[–] amyghost 12 years ago

Did you even *watch* this film? Or just skim through a rental copy of it and pick up a few random scenes to kvetch about?

If you'd paid any attention whatsoever to any of the scenes you've mentioned, they'd have made sense...and clearly you don't seem to think that 'realism' and 'compelling story' can exist in the same film. Maybe if Scwarzenegger or Vin Diesel had staged a mass breakout by punching out the entire guard force and then blasting their way out of the prison, this film might've held your attention a bit better. And been considered by you to be more 'realistic'.

//the guard breaks it up by shooting a round off inside a cell block, oh that's realistic, the fact the bullet could ricochet off the wall and kill him doesn't matter does it//

That one sentence alone tells me immediately that you weren't paying attention, since another inmate tells Smith in the following scene that the 'gunshot' was a blank, routinely used by the guards to break up disturbances and scare the inmates into straightening up their act.

And there is more than one scene of Savage's character shoplifting, so it's hard to understand how you couldn't get what he was doing--unless you were busy channel surfing during those scenes and so utterly lost the thread of what was going on.

If you're going to write an all-caps header about how WOW,BAD a film was, try doing everyone a favor and actually watch the film before going off about it next time, okay?

[–] boywonderpowpunch 12 years ago

OK I admit I was bored, maybe changed channel once or twice but doesn't change the fact this movie sucked, I'll take Diesel in Fast Five any day, it did better on imdb and Rotten Tomatoes than this crap did.

[–] amyghost 12 years ago

A couple of points for the fact that you admit that you didn't pay attention.

Stick to Vin and Company. A film as subtle and dare I say intelligent as this one is wasted on viewers like you.

[–] boywonderpowpunch 12 years ago

That's for sure, movies that suck are usually wasted on people like me. Unless they suck so much they are unreal...like Troll 2.

And yeah I dare you not...to say this film is intelligent, I admit at first it seemed like a story with real people, but did you see the ending!

CORNEEEEEEEEEEEEY!!!!!!

[–] amyghost 12 years ago

That's largely because the film was made in 1979, before the real-life events had fully played out. Smith was paroled, but continued to land back in jail for violations, dying there in 2007. Powell, at 83 years old is still alive, still comes up for parole, but has always been denied. Campbell's family invariably turn up at the hearings to remind everyone of just *why* this lunatic should not be released even now. (UPDATE: I just read that Powell died of cancer yesterday, August 13th.)

Hettinger's life, sadly, did not have a 'corny' happy ending. His marriage finally ended in divorce, and he died of an unspecified liver ailment, according to Wikipedia, in 1994 at the age of 59.

It seems entirely possible that the demons that haunted his life because of this incident never went away, and that the liver ailment may well have been alcoholic cirrhosis; however I can find no confirmation of this.

The filmakers wanted an ending that was respectful to the memory of Ian Campbell. Sorry, but I don't see anything particularly corny in that. Or did you watch the full ending? Or just up to the point where Hettinger and his wife are on the camping trip, and assumed that *that* was the ending?

[–] ShanerMD 11 years ago

You're a goddamn simpleton. Stop giving opinions about movies. Yours aren't worth anything.

[–] joed1667 11 years ago

I guess you couldn't get into this film because it did something that no other movie I have ever scene has been able to do, with the exception of Tora...Tora...Tora!, and that's stick to the facts of what happened. No nudity, no car chases, no massive explosions and no beefing up and distorting the scenes for dramatic purposes.

[–] amyghost 11 years ago

Good point. Probably a major reason why the film seems to garner so much derision from younger viewers today. They've been raised on the kind of cinematic filler you note above, and any film that lacks copious quantities of same can't, in their opinion, be any good.

[–] joed1667 10 years ago

Nice to see someone who has a higher IQ than the poster of this topic.

[–] joed1667 10 years ago

Sorry you felt that way about the film. Guess films like Howard the Duck are more on your level!

[–] freejazz38 10 years ago

When we see you, we go, "Wow, stupid moron!"

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Don-the-Lamplighter 7 years ago

This is badly filmed by the way I had no clue he was stealing for all I know he bought the watch, it just shows his hand take it off a rack. And the black guy Jimmy accused along with Woods goes from jumping up and down in his cell after hitting Woods like once or twice in a small little fight saying he whooped Woods and saying that without his gun he is a pussy, which also was an unrealistic scene because the guard breaks it up by shooting a round off inside a cell block, oh that's realistic, the fact the bullet could ricochet off the wall and kill him doesn't matter does it, the next scene is the old scientist guy from Back To The Future, except he is young in this film, obviously, telling the black guy how he can use Woods to his advantage and perhaps get outta jail but the black guy literally just....

There's this really cool thing they invented called a period. You should think of using one every now and then.