Tough Guys Don't Dance (1987) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
38 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Oh God! Oh Man! Oh Norman!
ascheland7 June 2013
Writers, be they Philip Roth or Jacqueline Susann, invariably complain about how Hollywood makes a mess of their work when bringing it to the screen. Norman Mailer was different. Rather than let Hollywood ruin the movie version of his novel "Tough Guys Don't Dance," he chose to ruin it himself. That his movie has the ingredients to be a camp classic yet still falls short is all you need to know about Mailer's skills as a director.

And yet Mailer comes so close to making this disaster enjoyable. Just the dialog alone — an awkward mix 1940s gangster patois, writerly pretensions and gutter vulgarity, usually combined in a single sentence — should make this a must-see. The dialog doesn't sound like it would ever be uttered by actual people yet it's highly quotable (though not here). The only movies I've seen that refer to male genitalia as much as this one were gay porn videos, which is kind of surprising given the gay panic coursing through "Tough Guys" (second only to the misogyny). Or maybe it's not so surprising.

The cast of "Tough Guys Don't Dance" does its part to turn Mailer's movie into campy fun. Ryan O'Neal pounds the last nail into the coffin of his career as Tim Madden, the alcoholic would-be writer who can't quite remember if he's responsible for all the blood in his Jeep or the head buried with his marijuana stash. Though I kept thinking Nicolas Cage would've been so much more fun, O'Neal is actually effective in the role. Too bad his performance can't overcome that awful "oh god oh man" moment on the beach. A miscast Isabella Rossellini delivers her lines as if embarrassed to say them, but in her defense she does have to say things like: "He must have the biggest c—k in all Christendom." If Elizabeth Berkley of "Showgirls" fame were to play Maggie in a dinner theater production of "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" it might look something like Debra Sundland's portrayal of Madden's money-hungry ex-wife Patty Lareine. And yet Sundland is never quite that awesome. John Bedford Lloyd plays the part of Patty Lareine's bisexual ex-husband Wardley like a Southern belle suffering from a case of the vapors, so maybe it's perfectly natural that he would use a word like "imbroglio". But it's Wings Hauser who steals the show as the lunatic Capt. Alvin Luther Regency, the police chief—and seemingly the town's sole law enforcement officer—breathing down Tim's neck. Hauser doesn't chew the scenery; he unhinges his jaw and swallows it whole. Only Lawrence Tierney, as Madden's father Dougy, emerges from this movie with his dignity intact.

With a director blinded by ego, over-written dialog and over-the-top acting, "Tough Guys" should be in the same league as "The Oscar," "The Concorde-Airport '79" and the remake of "The Wicker Man." But with the exception of Hauser's performance, it never quite takes off to such giddy lows. It's a movie that's more fun to talk about than actually watch. I remember reading an article about the making of this movie in the late '80s, the lurid plot description – sex! drugs! violence! – enough to make me seek it out when released on video. I was profoundly disappointed. I expected trash, but I didn't expect it to be boring. I re-watched it recently and while I found it more entertaining, I was still disappointed. But Mailer didn't make this movie to please me, or anyone else. As made clear by trailer to his movie, in which the smirking author/auteur reads the scathing comment cards from test screenings, Mailer doesn't care what you think. The only opinion that matters is his, and in his own opinion "Tough Guys Don't Dance" is a good movie. You're just too dumb to appreciate genius.
24 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Ryan O'Noir Chats w/ Subdued Dillinger Warning: Spoilers
Ryan O'Neal's infamous "Oh Man Oh God" moment, while awful and embarrassing, taken on its own accord.. linked all over the Internet and embedded below this review... within context of an equally bizarre vehicle, just sort of comes and goes, coinciding with a cheesy spinning camera-glide in this Neo Noir thriller with little thrills, tons of intentionally pulpy dialogue that Norman Mailer, who directed based on his novel turned screenplay, purposely borrows from the likes of Raymond Chandler and Mickey Spillaine… Although there weren't many cocaine addicts written about back in those dime novel days; at least not for an aimless anti-hero to be involved with without a second thought. Enter O'Neal's low-rent ex-con writer, Tim Madden, literally counting the days with shaving cream on a mirror of his missing wife's beachfront mansion...

We begin as Tim finds his dad sitting reposeful in the living room, and Lawrence Tierney, a man who reigned genuine terror in the true crime flicks of yesteryear (and would growl in RESERVOIR DOGS a few years later), actually has a reason to be bald-headed: His surprisingly subdued, world-weary Dougy Madden is suffering from the after-effects of chemotherapy. The conversations with his son, including banal dialogue seeming like ad libs from a macho actor's workshop (TIERNEY: "Your mother was delicate, she spoiled you a lot" O'NEAL: "Well I did my three years in the slammer standing up, no one made me a punk" TIERNEY "Good for you... I didn't want to ask") is how, instead of the usual narration, we're provided exposition through this steamy, uneven tale centering on O'Neal trying to figure out how the severed skull of a woman got buried in the woods, and why he knows the exact location. The sporadic O'Neal/Tierney wordplay is performed good yet awkwardly leads to each flashback sequence: a keyword is repeated at the end of the present time and the start of the backstory... just in case you missed it. A sort of Film Noir for Dummies. And Mailer throws in a score of naked bodies and taboo subjects that end up serving as wallpaper.

The second-billed and not very important "one that got away" ingénue Isabella Rossellini aside, if any particular dame steals the picture it's femme fatalle Patty Lareine. Actress Debra Sandlund (now Debra Stipe) chews scenery without chomping too loud, knowing just how to play kitsch unlike O'Neal in his "Oh God" moment or Wings Hauser, who goes his usual overboard after being subtle for most of the film.

The real problem with TOUGH GUYS is the direction by Norman Mailer, but that's not exactly true… For DANCE doesn't seem like there's any real direction at all. As if the actors are performing in a vacuum; their characters exist on a treadmill course throughout the gorgeous New England beach locale. And while O'Neal has lived to regret his performance, it's not that god-awful, and he's a comfortable enough shoe to trudge along the muddled plot line: For when our man vanishes for twenty long minutes, taken over by tormented simpleton John Bedford Lloyd as… someone's crazy lover… what was once aimed downhill reaches rock bottom, with vengeance.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Could have used a few more Wings.
bcuberny514 August 2023
I once had the opportunity to tell Mr. Mailer how much I enjoyed his book and he told me he owed his publisher one more novel so he wrote it to get out of his contract as quickly as possible. I get the feeling this movie was produced in much the same manner. While I loved Lawrence Tierney and Wings Hauser, the rest of the characters, as well as the plot, are as contrived as any Spike Lee movie I've ever seen. Friends of mine hail this as the "New England Blue Velvet" which would explain Isabella Rossellini but I'm not a big fan of David Lynch either. For better or worse, I am addicted to (Neo) Noir and Wings Hauser is the perfect foil for this genre. The best that can be said about the film is his scenes make the movie palatable.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A very funny and perverse diversion
triresia18 November 2004
This is one of my favorite movies. A strange mixture of seemingly unintentional humor , macabre plot twists, and the charm of off-season Provincetown. I wouldn't call it a drama. HILARIOUS. Patty L. is a real overdone nostril flaring trailer park siren. Ryan O'Neil seems to play the straight man to everyone else. I don't know how he maintained such a bland facade - I guess that's his style. He mostly stood around looking haggard, and so managed to provide something like a foil for all the circus freaks. At one point in the beginning of the film during a scene with his hard drinking crustacean of a father (L. T. is great), I thought I saw something like a suppressed smile cross the faces of both actors - a great moment that I'm sure was totally unintentional. Who wouldn't crack under the weight of all the corny dialoge? Contains the funniest dad and son out "fishing" in the rowboat at night scene ever filmed. I can still hear the foghorns. Despite all the corniness, its all somehow...so...mesmerizing....
33 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Good lord.
Mr-Fusion25 January 2016
"Tough Guys Don't Dance" . . . a title like that speaks to the moviegoer: neo-noir, pot-boiler, and if we're lucky, a Mickey Spillane whodunit. Yeah, there's mystery here, I guess. A terrible one. But that's not the draw here. Internet fame being what it is, you come to this for the hilarious line delivery, awful accents and over-the-top direction. Even so, it's sorely underwhelming. The movie's exceedingly dull, and it didn't take long for me to want to slap dainty Ryan O'Neal around for a few hours. The only tough guy in the whole thing is Lawrence Tierney, and he gets maybe a few minutes' screen time. The macho runs very thin here.

Bottom line, it's not worth it. Here's what you do: look this movie up on YouTube. You'll find the infamous O'Neal line ("Oh, god! Oh, man!") and just stop there. Don't think there's more gold to be mined here. There's not. This isn't "Silent Night Deadly Night 2".

Better yet, look up the trailer. It's Norman Mailer reading the comment cards from the preview audience. Obviously staged, but as an ad campaign, that is nothing short of marvelous.

3/10
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The movie that sunk Ryan O'Neil's career.
Mccadoo23 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I love all the reviewers here who are basically saying "this is a very good movie, you're just not sophisticated enough to understand it".

Please, the reality is that you're either being disingenuous or you're just not remotely as intelligent as you think you are.

The only three clear memories I have of this train wreck are the now infamous "Oh god, oh man" scene, the exact moment when O'Neil committed professional suicide, the scene were one blond shoots the other blond in the police car, honestly the only thing that differentiated the two blond characters was the level of their bad acting, and finally the really disturbing scene of two guys hanging a woman's naked and headless body by it's feet; one of the afore mentioned two blonds I think, though it really doesn't matter.

The plot of this movie....I was going to say makes no sense but actually there isn't a plot. The acting is horrendous, the direction is laughable, the thing jumps all over the place, flashbacks, time jumps, characters that come and go for no discernable reason (one is Linc from Mod Squad!), this movie has it all, and all of it is awful. It doesn't even succeed as a fun bad movie...it's that bad.

I'm surprised that anyone involved with this horror had any career left after it was released. But then again these days we have Adam Sandler so I suppose it shouldn't surprise me all that much.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Mailer Gives Bad Head
wes-connors21 March 2011
In scenic Massachusetts, haggard and hungover Ryan O'Neal (as Tim Madden) discovers a severed head in place of his drug stash. Bummer. Flashbacks dog Mr. O'Neal on his quest to solve the mystery. "Tough Guys Don't Dance" was nominated for several movie "Worst" awards by the organization calling them the "Golden Raspberries". It received dishonors as "Worst Picture" of the year, "Worst Actor" O'Neal, "Worst Actress" Debra Sandlund (as Patty Lareine), "Worst Supporting Actress" Isabella Rossellini (as Madeleine Regency), "Worst Director" Norman Mailer, "Worst Screenplay" (Mailer again), and "Worst New Actress" (Sandlund again). The film faced stiff competition from "Leonard part 6" and "Ishtar" but Mr. Mailer won, in a tie, the worst director honors; clearly his was the award most deserved. The aforementioned stars really are awful (some scenes are all-time worsts), but some of the other players are appealingly sleazy.

** Tough Guys Don't Dance (5/16/87) Norman Mailer ~ Ryan O'Neal, Debra Sandlund, Wings Hauser, Isabella Rossellini
5 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Norman Mailer's wildly uneven but often provocative rhapsody on noir themes
bmacv21 October 2002
When Lawrence Tierney utters the line that gives Tough Guys Don't Dance its title, he evokes the stoic, hard-boiled codes of post-war noir, felt in films he made like Born to Kill, The Bodyguard and The Devil Thumbs A Ride. And when Isabella Rossellini shows up, she suggests David Lynch's kooky and subversive Reagan-era suspense movies like Blue Velvet. These homages mark two of the many streams that flow into Norman Mailer's rhapsody on themes of sexual intrigue, multi-tiered duplicity and garish murders. (Mailer directed his movie from his 1984 novel.) It's a baroque contraption that comes close to self-parody - and may even cross the threshold - but neither is it just a fling at film making by a celebrity author intoxicated by his own publicity.

The forlorn setting is Cape Cod under the sign of Sagittarius: the dunes and the bars empty, and the Atlantic is choppy and gunmetal grey. Ex-con Ryan O'Neal (his boyish superstardom well behind him) has been drinking heavily since his wealthy if white-trash wife (Debra Sandlund) left him; one morning he wakes to find a tattoo on his arm and his jeep's upholstery soaked in blood. Circumstances lead him to a burrow where he stashes his marijuana harvest; in it he finds the severed heads of his wife and a woman he had picked up (along with her boyfriend) a few nights before.

The clues he starts piecing together lead him back down paths that wend through his own none-too-savory past. There's the out-of-town `couple' with whom he had spent a hard-drinking night (Frances Fisher and R. Patrick Sullivan); a woman he had once loved (Rossellini) now married to Provincetown's sadistic Chief of Police (Wings Hauser); another woman he had met when she was married to a wife-swapping Christian preacher (Penn Jillette) and who later wed a rich, spoiled Southern boy (John Bedford Lloyd) then, ultimately, O'Neal, whom she recently left. Helping him find his way is his gruff, cancer-ridden father (Tierney).

What plot line there is hangs on cocaine (maybe) and several millions, but that's but a pretext for Mailer to worry the preoccupations, even obsessions, which crop up again and again in his work, most notably the yin/yang of eroticism and violence. The women come across as predatory sirens but end up being almost beside the point - they're prizes for sexual competition between males, conflict that shades into edgy attraction, right up to taunting flirtation. (The movie is loaded with homosexual references, generally pejorative - the bisexual boyfriend is even given the name `Pangborn' - and the continuum of couplings, both on screen and in the back story, results in a very kinky daisy chain in which everybody save Tierney might just as well have slept with everybody else. Mailer comes close to suggesting that two men who have slept with the same woman share an implicit homosexual relationship themselves.)

Coming to Tough Guys Don't Dance expecting anything like a conventional suspense film (even something `post-' or `neo-') is to court disappointment. One comes for Mailer, who's like the little girl with the curl right in the middle of her forehead: When he's good, he's very, very good, but when he's bad, he's horrid. How the proportions weight out in this movie can be argued, but adventurous and provocative nuggets nestle among some very bad choices (the acting runs the gamut from rather good to execrable, often within the same performance). Caveat spectator: wildly uneven and sometimes grotesquely macho, Tough Guys Don't Dance is far from negligible.
22 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Utterly stupid
masterjk26 January 2011
When I saw who had directed it, I was surprised. When I saw Coppola had produced it, I was surprised. After I saw the movie I wasn't at all surprised that Golan Globus had distributed it. Nobody else would touch it. It stinks. The acting is so over the top I had to wonder if it were trying to be a parody of itself. Badalamenti who wrote so many great scores, scored a complete zero on this one, unless he felt the only hope was to go for the laugh factor. And the "acting." The only one who has a clue, and he is fine, is Tierney. O'neal is O'terrible...one of the worst acting jobs I've seen since I was in a high school play. The others, who try so hard to affect Southern accents, sound like cartoon characters. I just kept wondering how bad it could get and when Pomp and Circumstance began to intone as the bodies were dumped into the bay, I knew. Clearly Mailer was inebriated during the whole production, attempting to keep up with the cast.
5 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Warning: For Intelligent and Advanced Film Buffs Only!
AlanSquier10 March 2007
Okay, now that I have your attention, I don't guarantee that you will rate this the 7/10 I do, even if you qualify as an intelligent and advanced film buff. However, I do believe you will find something to chew on here.

It's written and directed by noted author Norman Maileer. And it's tough in every meaning of the word.

The rough plot sounds like a rather typical noir. An excessively drinking author given to memory blackouts doesn't know if he committed a murder or not.

Believe me, it's not that simple and Mailer takes us down a long winding and convoluted path before we know the whole story. At times, it seems ludicrous, and although I disagree with the Razzie noms it got, I understand. This is the type of movie which some will find inexorably bad.

However, it weaves a spell and the tough will stay with it because it's addictive. You will laugh at inappropriate times and groan sometimes, and yet the very serious film buff will continue watching it, and be glad he/she did. And I do believe that many will find this rewarding although certainly not unflawed. Maybe Mailer wanted it flawed.

As others mentioned, Wings Hauser is the perfect actor in this. However, Ryan O'Neal gave this his all, and veteran B film noir actor Lawrence Tierney also adds to this.

Some will love it; some will hate it. I did neither, but I did enjoy it. There was a point, the chain connecting the characters in their sex lives and in the chain of violence.

Love it or hate it, I suspect you will remember this one and not consider it a waste of time.
23 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Painful in the Extreme
SaintNo111 January 1999
Norman Mailer is one of America's great writers, however, he came spectacularly unstuck when scripting and directing this movie. The dialogue is appalling - it might have worked on the printed page but it's embarrassingly bad when spoken. The direction is flat as a pancake, much of the acting is over the top, and usually coupled with bad Southern accents, and the plot descends into ridiculous melodrama almost immediately. It would be totally forgettable except for the presence of the radiant Isabella Rossellini - just fast forward to her scenes or don't watch it in the first place. You'll be missing nothing.
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Dance With This Devil!
toadentanner25 April 2002
If you have an insatiable appetite for movies and want to get into something unusually tasty then serve yourself this movie tonight!

Important sidebar: if you've already read a critique posted on this site that nay-sayed this piece please do yourself a favor and etch-a-sketch that memory away. Though well-worded, Jack Sommersby's review of Tough Guys Don't Dance is just as equally misguided. For instance, the same gentleman who waxes that he was summarily summoned into Sleepyville three times before he was capable of viddying this work from beginning to end also asserts that it is a film that "you can't quite take your eyes off of." Believe me, you won't have a problem making more than "a bit of sense" from this mixture of the twisted, oddball and suspenseful. In fact even Doctor Dunderhead couldn't help but sleepwalk into a bit of truth when he characterized this Norman Mailer pastiche as "perversely fascinating." You don't need to know Jack to dig this flick the first time through, and you may find yourself revisiting it soon afterwards haunted by its savage and sublime reverbations.

This movie is a MUST SEE for film fans. Ryan O'Neal steps out from under typecasting--which has rendered him ineffective in much of his work--to engage in an often upsetting, yet somehow casual dance with the devil. He, Lawrence Tierney and Wings Hauser serve up sumptuous performances. All the while the supporting cast provides color, depth and character to a plot that is as unnerving as it is both captivating and entertaining.

Ignore Sir Superlative Sommersby's slight of hand and rent this movie! If I'm wrong then blast me back herein. On the other hand, if you like what you see then do me a favor and explain to me what the last phrase of Jaded Jack's review means--"rendering us helpless under power to disturb"!?! In the meanwhile, fellow movie devotee, keep on dancing.
14 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Norman Mailer goes neo-noir
Petey-104 August 2011
The story revolves around Tim Madden, a writer and ex-con.He has to deal with two heads of women he knew.The problem is he can't remember if he is the killer or not.Tough Guys Don't Dance (1987) is a Norman Mailer direction, and he also wrote the book.The movie was a flop, even getting some Rasberry awards.The actors do a decent job.It has Ryan O'Neal as Tim Madden.Lawrence Tierney is his father Dougy.Isabella Rossellini plays Madeleine Regency.Wings Hauser is her husband Capt. Alvin Luther Regency.Debra Sandlund plays Patty Lareine.Penn Jillette portrays Big Stoop.Frances Fisher plays the part of Jessica Pond.I read Mailer's original novel, written in 1984, before seeing the movie.I must say the novel is better, but the movie isn't a huge failure.It does fail to be a great movie, though, but it could be a lot worse.I guess the biggest weakness of the movie is the lack of likable characters.There are all these killers and junkies, and it's very hard to like those people.The main character may have some good qualities, though.But anyway, if you've got nothing better to do, you can watch this movie.Maybe you even like it a bit.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Pathetic Trash
Damas16 December 1998
Must've been a humbling experience for Mailer. The screenplay was god-awful and Ryan O'Neal was the best actor, so that'll tell you something about it. Whew, it really stunk. I was painfully embarrassed throughout the entire film. Should be burned.
3 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
supremely awful, like its author
vandino131 March 2006
Norman Mailer used to mean something, literary-wise. He was a Big Noise back in the fifties and sixties trying to be the heir apparent to his hero Hemingway, but since Mailer was really just a small-statured city boy with no interest in the outdoors he resorted to games of thumb-wrestling and head butting men (and assaulting women) instead of hunting and traveling. Like this movie, Mailer is a juvenile, woman-hating, gay-hating, faux-tough guy obviously obsessed with his fragile masculinity. Decades of hype and bad writing and activities (including the notorious Abbott disaster) have reduced his noisy reputation to virtual silence. He has become as pathetic as this movie, based on another one of his terrible novels. Granted this film is more coherent than his previous directorial attempts way-back-when (i.e. 'Wild 90,' 'Maidstone') there is still no reason to give it any more credibility considering its supreme awfulness. Of course, there IS the 'Showgirls'-like aroma of a risible good time to be had for those inclined to cheer on the execrable disasters of filmmakers who thought they were making something worthwhile and were so very wrong. For other viewers this is a stupefying experience mirrored by the consistently haggard look of Ryan O'Neal throughout. Like Spike Lee, Mailer MUST include his obsessions on screen. Ala Spike, consider this a 'Norman Mailer Joint.' That means you will hear men grousing to other men about "being men" and "not being fags" and how spiteful and cruel all women are, and it will be spoken in purplish film-noir-meets-gym-locker-room dialogue (my favorite: "Don't tickle my stick.") There will be countless scenes of women degrading themselves for no reason or men complaining/crying because those ruthless harpies have emasculated them. Since it's directed by a rank amateur, naturally the actors look either lost or unhinged. In short, this film, like its author, is an embarrassment.
8 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Perhaps not the worst film I've ever seen
v_danilovic27 November 2022
But it's in the running. The only thing I can think of that would justify Mailer's train wreck of a self-parody is that his ego forces him to take everything he writes, etc. Seriously.

I must give credit where it's due. Some of the location shots around P-town are gorgeous and evocative. Then of course Mailer, being Mailer, had to superimpose his awful mess on them. I'd be curious for a brief moment how much Mailer had to pay to produce this miserable vanity project. Golan and Globus were notorious for putting out garbage, but Coppola?

Also, praise for the one strong performance: Ryan O'Neal's beautiful dog. Too bad it ended so abruptly, and that the dog wasn't real!
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
This movie is small potatoes. It is the answer to cancer.
bjumholtz18 May 2022
This is one of the absolute worst piles of dung I have ever had the displeasure to view. It is a disjointed pile of "cool" scenes with complete disregard for plot, structure, or understandability. You will have no idea what is going on. He just gets in a Jeep and goes to the next thing. It's like watching a terrible point-and-click adventure video game being played. What a waste of decent actors. What an unbelievable mess. Oh god, oh man, oh god, oh man, oh god, oh man, Paul Scheer, why did you make me watch this??

The worst thing about this.. the absolute pinnacle of my disappointment.. it's that this isn't just a bad movie.. it's a bad Cannon movie. There are no explosions, there is no Kung Fu, there's nothing fun about it. All there is left is the bad acting, poor blocking, and decent cinematography. And I am absolutely convinced this film is part of The Truman Show Universe.. not one other person is to be found in this high class, sleepy seaside town. Nobody sees anything, and there are zero stakes or consequences to the actions of the protagonists. This film is ridiculous.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Pointless beach side dansant in the acrid Provincetown cold that could have been saved for a less rainy day!
stephen_thanabalan_fans8 February 2006
Was Pulitzer Prize winner (twice!!) Norman Mailer wise in not attempting another Director/Writer film role and sticking to non-fiction work like post WWII 'Armies of the Night' or anti-war themes after this flick? Well, considering he has yet to Direct and write filmography since, I'd guess he knew his own answer to that question. For me and Stephen Thanabalan in film class, it's unsurprising given that this film is almost an unintentionally black humored outing with a cloying cast and a satiating fustian plot in a pointless beach side dansant in the acrid Provincetown cold. The film basically confounded itself and failed to capitalize on what was essentially a decent macabre tale that fettered Arthur Penn/ of greed, debauchery and betrayal- ingredients of what might have been a decent film-noir if coherently edited and as such, cannot count itself so. The film's main problem: it lacks class. In all departments- acting; macho-romantic-80s soft focus camera-work; acting (even hiring Isabella Rossellini couldn't save this one); plot twists; acting.Oddly enough, there was something crabby and yet alluring about this awful Norman Mailer outing by the beach as the waves crashed onshore. It dealt pretty much with subject matter Quentin Tarantino might have on an average film day: coke; porn starlets; depressed lead character on a vigilante road; warped sheriff; tattooist bums; gold-diggers; crooked priest; characters taking a crack at the rich; playboys shooting each other in the head (literally too!) and you get the idea. It could have been crazed film-noir but in the end it was just cheesily pretentious melodramatics- only thing is somehow I did not switch it off to see how low a man of Mailer's reputation would let it sink.
2 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
one of the ultimate so-awful-it's---something films ever
Quinoa198423 October 2015
Oh, Norman Mailer - acclaimed author, won more prizes than you can count in one minute, and occasional maker of films (a number of them basically like shoots in a weekend with friends in his living room, or so I've been told, I haven't seen the Eclipse box-set yet of his other works). In 1987 he was given carte blanche, via Cannon films and producer Francis Ford Coppola, to take his windy, warped novel that poked fun at pot-boilers and crime fiction (film noir especially) and made it into a movie. And the results are completely befuddling.

I think a lot of it comes down to plot logic. In that, this doesn't have that much. Sure, we follow along Ryan O'Neal as he is trying to figure out a mystery involving a lost woman, an old affair, and, uh, other things. It even has one of those plot-framing devices that opens the movie, where O'Neal is telling his story to father(?) Lawrence Tierney and then this just... disappears for a LONG stretch of the film, to the point where I forgot it was even a thing. There's also Isabella Rossellini (in seemingly the one performance playing it straight, or trying to), and another actor - damn if I forget his name - who is a cop that often appears wigged out (probably on coke, who knows it was the 80's).

I wish I could explain what happens in this movie and why it's so f***ed up, but it just boggles my mind! So much of it comes down to Mailer not really being able to transition his dialog, which probably worked OK on the page (and even there one wonders if it was still questionable), to the format of the screen. People just... don't talk like this! The verbiage is off the charts in this one - but there are moments where, I THINK anyway, Mailer knew he had something really warped and just went for it. The scene that I know I'll never forget and many others haven't is when Ryan O'Neal's character discovers a letter from a woman from his past, it gives him some crucial, heartbreaking information, and then he just bursts with "OH MAN, OH GOD, OH MAN" for about 15 minutes as the camera pans around him in a dizzying effect. If this was meant for comedy then it's genius on par with the Zucker brothers or Mel Brooks. If it's supposed to be in any kind of Earth reality, it's a disaster-zone.

But oh, what a watchable movie made of WTF. Part of what helps is that it is competently shot and edited, and the performers, alongside those I mentioned Penn Jillette and Frances Fisher pop up, are trying to give it their all and be true to the material. But by being true to it means showing how completely nuts it is. Maybe the most golden part of the experience is the theatrical trailer for the film itself, where Normal Mailer on camera reads the mix of reviews - the good, the bad and the 'Uh say what' - and that makes me happy alone the movie was made. I have a feeling doing a double feature of this and another 1987 Cannon films art-house release, Godard's King Lear, could be just the thing to make you go run for the hills... or break your brain laughing. It may be awful, but it's awful in a spectacular way.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Things Are Tough All Over
sol-5 November 2017
Unable to remember if he is responsible for a murder, an alcoholic writer recalls bits and pieces of the previous few days while conversing with his cynical father in this unusual film written and directed by Norman Mailer, based on his novel of the same name. With lead actor Ryan O'Neal narrating the film retrospectively, the unsolved murder theme and tons of shady characters, 'Tough Guys Don't Dance' has often been cited as a neo-noir but it is actually closer to a noir spoof with some comedic moments so bizarre that it is hard to tell if the humour was intentional or not. Whatever the case, the film benefits from memorably eccentric supporting characters and the capable likes of Penn Jillette and Wings Hauser try to make the most of the material, though there remains room to question whether the film would have been better played straight without the comedy angle. The central dynamic is certainly quite interesting with O'Neal torn internally as he solves the mystery, unsure of whether he is responsible and if he is, whether he truly wants to find out. The final product though is pretty messy and it is easy to see why the film received several Razzie nominations in its day.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Only for Mailer imagery fans
akhilles847 November 2001
Warning: Spoilers
This is a hard film to stomach.It has a lot of intense,extreme scenes of sex,violence and obscurity.Ryan O'Neal could have done better.Wings Hauser outshines all in his role of sadistic,sex crazy chauvinist police officer.Who at the end turns insane.And thats what he isnt alone in.There are even more obscure characters here,like southern reverend Big Stoop and his "friendly" ex-wife Patty.They create a spiral of sex and intrigues which ends in suicide of the first and death of the other.

All in all,a movie every sado-masochist would love to own.For normal people-a torturingly mad 2 hour experience.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
simultaneously funny and haunting neo-noir
chrisdfilm3 September 2003
There are a lot of people who really hate this movie. Then strangely they go on and on detailing the things that bother them about it but that they also find fascinating and relentlessly hypnotic.

It's unfortunate that people are so rigid in their definition of what makes a 'good' movie.

Norman Mailer is by no means a terrible director. He actually does a very credible and commendable job of adapting his own novel to the screen. The dialogue is at times overblown and purplish, but it is never boring and frequently it's downright brilliant.

Every performer acquits themselves well, even Debra Sandlund as Patty Laureine, Wings Hauser as the sociopathic macho police chief and John Bedford Lloyd as the eccentric, messed-up millionaire, all of whom can be accused of overacting. But ultimately their performances are completely in tune with their insane characters and draw us into a nasty labyrinth of twisted emotions and nightmarish memories. Ryan O'Neal actually gives one of his finest performances as an alcoholic loser who has messed up his life and who is so prone to blackouts, he's not even sure if he's killed someone. Lawrence Tierney is excellent as his tough guy dad who helps him make sense of the chaos in their small-shut-up-for-the-winter-and-consequently-spooky-as-hell Provincetown coastal neighborhood. Isabella Rossellini is also great in what appears to be an, at first impression, thankless role, but who in fact turns out to be the character who gets the last word and the best revenge.

The great thing about this film is it manages to have its cake and eat it, too. It's not only an at times very creepy modern film noir, it's also a frequently hilarious black comedy. Also, contrary to some people's perceptions, the film has a complex narrative structure that pulls the viewer in, much like the best mysteries. If you go in not expecting a conventional mystery thriller but more of a cross between David Lynch, Roman Polanski, Jules Feiffer, Hal Ashby and maybe Arthur Penn(when he directed NIGHT MOVES), I guarantee you you will not be disappointed.
22 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Clunker dialogue and extreme overacting in Norman Mailer's vision of a 1980's noir
redcrossaint23 July 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Norman Mailer's "Tough Guys Don't Dance" is incredibly convoluted and complicated, and even I, after sitting through the whole movie, understand what happened. There's a weird connection I have to this film... I was laughing along and confused at moments, but found myself enjoying it. The film was written and directed by Norman Mailer, the famed novelist, and is even based off of his 1984 title. The film is meant to be a somewhat noir, and it is, and even has an overplotted string of events. I particularly liked the elements that director Mailer incorporated into the setting, creating a somewhat ghostly connection to this little Massachusetts town in which the film is set. Mailer's film also looks nice and polished. Problems arise with 1) the screenplay, and 2) the acting. The screenplay is one of those times where a lot of the dialogue would best be suited for a novel; for example, the line "I am all wrong for this kind of imbroglio" is more for a novel than a real film. I certainly have never heard anyone talk like that before in real life, let alone in a movie. And the acting is another thing altogether; much of it is laughably bad, including the now famous scene in which Ryan O'Neal as Tim Madden exclaims "oh man... oh god, oh man... oh god, oh man". It is these elements, combined with Mailer's interesting sense of direction that make this quite a fun time at the movies. It is most certainly not a good movie, and I know Mailer wasn't trying for one. I'm pretty aware that this was not intended to be a really good movie, and with that, it's a successful movie because of how sheerly ridiculous the whole idea even is.

I'm going to keep this basic, but the plot follows Tim Madden (Ryan O'Neal) an overtly dramatic writer and ex-con. He's known for alcoholic blackouts, and awakens one morning from an eventful two week bender only to discover a pool of blood in his car and a severed head in a trash bag hidden where he usually keeps his stash of drugs.

The best element of this movie, as many critics have pointed out, is Tim's father, Dougy (Lawrence Tierney of "Reservoir Dogs" fame) who has a great characterization and performance from Tierney. The rest of the film is really hard to take seriously, but then again, Mailer didn't want us to take it seriously. It's campy too. Every element of this picture is ridiculous. It's a pretty funny picture, and if you do see it, I'm sure you will 1) not be disappointed and 2) laugh a great deal. It's a lot of fun, if you can even decode the plot.

Tough Guys Don't Dance (1987)

3 STARS (OUT OF 4)

Written and directed by Norman Mailer

Starring Ryan O'Neal, Isabella Rossellini, Debra Stipe and Wings Hauser

Rated R

110 minutes.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One dreadful film
foxion11 July 2002
What were they thinking? Didn't anybody read the script or did they read it and then lack the guts to tell Mailer it didn't work? Whatever the reason this is one pathetic film. Bad script and hilariously bad acting. It is the bad acting that keeps you watching. You want to find out how bad can it get. In most films, even bad ones, you can find something to recommend it. I can't think of anything to recommend about this one.
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Flawed but the book is one of my all time favorites .....
PimpinAinttEasy18 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I reread Mailer's book recently. So I decided to check out the film too. Tough Guys Don't Dance begins with some great establishing shots of the beautiful seaside American small town called Provincetown. It is very much a film of place.

Mailer has played with the novel's structure while making the movie. Ryan O Neal is not very convincing as Tim Madden. In the book, Madden was a lot more funnier. Debra Stipe as Patty Lareine was also miscast. Wings Hauser looked the part of Alvin Luther Regency but fails during the climax scene. Anyway, it was wonderfully over the top with Mailer retaining some of the hilarious and dirty dialogs from the book.

There were issues with lighting with too many scenes using way too much light. Mailer gives a lot of attention to the film's supernatural elements. I wish somebody would remake the film. Coppola was the executive producer maybe he should have a go at it. Or maybe David Lynch ought to do it. It would be as interesting as Twin Peaks.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed