Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Wizard-8 "To Kill a Clown" is a really strange movie, one that could have only come out of the 1970s. For starters, it doesn't seem to know what kind of movie it wants to be. It starts off being really goofy (even the opening credits are comic), but the movie ends with a climatic sequence that seems to have been inspired by the previous year's "Straw Dogs". Throughout there are bizarre touches like the many freeze frames the movie uses when moving from one scene to another. And there is the atypical casting of Alan Alda as someone who is mentally disturbed. All this may make the movie sound like it's a gold mine for people who are into bizarre cinema, but it isn't that much entertaining. It starts off slow and soon gets to be pretty boring; you have to wait until an hour has passed before some juice starts to flow. And even when that happens, what follows is not really worth the wait. Ultimately, there seems to be no point to the movie; what writer/director George Bloomfield was trying to say or accomplish, I'm not sure. It's no wonder why this movie hasn't been given a DVD release. By the way, while the movie was slapped with an "R" rating, what's displayed barely gets to "PG" status by the standards of today (or even back in 1972.)

udar55 Adapted from Algis Budrys excellent short story "The Master of the Hounds," TO KILL A CLOWN is an oddity of revenge cinema from the early 70s. While it serviceably handles the man vs. man with dogs scenario, it unfortunately never achieves full audience involvement due to unsympathetic leads.Despite being based on a short story, the material here is still painfully underdeveloped with major dramatic portions of the story left untouched. Director George Bloomfield has altered Budrys' source story by making Alda's character a Vietnam vet (in the short story he was a WWII POW) and the young couple hippies. This dynamic of the war monger vs. the peaceniks should have offered some interesting social commentary but Bloomfield does nothing with it. It also doesn't help that our hero Timothy (Lamberts) is a really annoying hippie prone to acting like a immature child and talking about his career path as a clown (another variation from the story and source for the odd title).Bloomfield was also obviously inspired by the previous year's STRAW DOGS and more interested in making a film like that. Not only is his lead Lamberts a dead ringer for Dustin Hoffman from that film, but Bloomfield changes the end of the story (where the crippled Major and his dogs invade the couple's house via underground tunnels) to outside assault that segues into a fistfight where the peaceful become the punishers. But Bloomfield is no Peckinpah and the end result is not as powerful as it could be.If CLOWN does have any merit, it is for the pre-M*A*S*H performance of Alan Alda as the deranged Vietnam vet. At first he is subtilely creepy with his awkward questions and affable laugh but as the film progresses he becomes more unhinged. The scenes where orders Timothy around like a soldier are very creepy and by the end he is just a notch below raving lunatic (his speech about how buttons are the foundation of America is a keeper). In fact, all of the acting in this is good with fine turns by Danner (who looks so much like her daughter that it is creepy) and Lamberts despite the bad characters they are saddled with. The two Doberman Pinschers are also quite good and deliver all of their lines perfectly.

louisgauthier This movie contains some of the worse dialogue and direction I've seen in years. No one seems to know what the hell is going on. What's the point? The dialogue and acting is uncertain and the little photographic tricks like freezing the frame at the end of every scene is ridiculous. Who is Alan Alda's character suppose to represent and why is he torturing these people? Although his character has presence and conviction, his inane dialogue betrays him every step of the way. What are his motives? Anyone?? The movie starts out like a 1960's hippie comedy(check out the opening credits and music) but then goes straight downhill. It looks like it might have been an interesting story(great location- a nearly deserted beach) but someone forgot to write a coherent story. Too bad. What a terrible waste of a young, cute Blythe Danner(in a bikini for the most part) and a young Alan Alda just before MASH. The movie feels like it's trying to make a point. Wish I knew what it was.

lthseldy1 This movie is strange. First of all, Alan Alda is TOTALLY different from his noticeable character from M*A*S*H. This story tells about a couple that rents a house on the beach from Alda who plays a veteran and is now handicapped from the knees down. As the couple starts settling down, Aldo starts snooping around the house offering friendly gestures such as wine and beer. He likes the wife who can do without the raspy, whiney voice and all she talks about her immature husband. Then he discovers that the husband is all she is into and Alda looses interest and just likes her as a friend. Alda ownes two vicious Dobbermans that attack and guard on command and scare them half to death. As the story continues, Alda decides to party with the couple and invites the husband to come out with him at sunset. Nothing is mentioned of what he is to do, but the next morning, Alda is angrily waiting the husband to come out and he finally does. Then Alda starts action crazy like he is a drill sargent and treating the husband like a recruit giving out commands and ordering them to be carried out. The husband acts as if this is silly, but finally obeys. After all of this, the couple is held hostage in their own house guarded by the ferocious dogs. They find a way to get out and Alda has made it so that they wouldn't. The couple and Alda fight it out and something happens, but it should have been the other way around. Alda was good as the crazy Mr. Richie but his character could have been pepped up a bit to make him more crazier. The people that played the couple were foolish. I give it a 5.