Too much of everything

Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

The acting in this movie is really good.

Outright: Yes, long-legged child woman, elfin- faced Pia Zadora is worthy as Golden Globes' Best Newcomer 1982. Take careful note that the award says "newcomer" and doesn't focus on acting ability. Certainly Pia was THE most dramatic newcomer arriving in the flurry of excitement accompanying this movie's release. And listen to the interviews on the DVD... the accusations of "buying the award" are, IMO, false. Makes a great story which the press jumped upon, but it seems to be only public opinion. It hurt little Pia very much, and it was all fueled by envy, because the public were jealous of the pretty girl and the rich old guy who had his young wife cast in the movie he financed. These two people deemed not to defend themselves at the time, figuring "it would blow over" but then, as stated in the interview*, it didn't.*Personally, I find DVD extras like commentaries and interviews generally to be one big bore, but I recommend BUTTERFLY's extras for getting to another exciting aspect, the back- story (especially regarding the Golden Globe fiasco) I'm just saying, the movie deserves a chance. Even with its contentious subject matter. Which, when viewed without frothing at the mouth, comes down to: acts of passion between consenting adults. Why get the law involved in what goes on between two lovers? The law should hunt down violent criminals and stay out of private business.Okay, about the movie itself now:I had only seen a trailer I had downloaded, some of it was in slow motion or something like that, focusing on the initial Orson Welles court scene, and it looked heavy-handed and dumb. Fortunately great shots of Pia's angelic face did appear and I decided to go for it, but I had little hope for a decent movie, given this one's bad reputation and the downloaded evidence at hand.I was surprised. I had hoped, and thought, maybe... but didn't go in expecting too much.There is a heck of a lot more going for this movie than what you would suspect. Is it worth watching for Pia Zadora alone? Yes. She is a performer. Oddly enough, she is way older than I had thought, and some camera angles are even unflattering to her face, but as for the nude scenes, let's just say that there should be no complaints.The movie works better before all the "ensemble cast" enters the scene. The first half is erotic and frothy fun, think of it as bubbly champagne, the second half is just a large swig of vinegar. Must admit that I commented to myself "haven't had this much suspense in ages" - I really felt for the Jess character.Okay, the prudes and the embittered haters would love to tear the movie apart, and that is exactly what they did. Don't let them spoil it for you, watch it for yourself, and then decide.Powerful performance by Stacy Keach which gains sympathy every second of the way. What the average viewer here is most likely not gonna get, is that Kade goes for Jess because he is gentle with her, touching her the way she wants to be touched. Not rough-and-tumble. Not knock the stuffings out of her. I think that counts for something.

A decent film with some awkward dialog telling a powerful tale of the price of honor. Stacy Keach is Jess Tyler, an isolated ranch hand type who is visited by his beautiful teen-age daughter, having not seen her in 10 years. Pia Zadora plays the sexy and seductive girl a bit amateurishly, but then some of her lines are simply laughable so it may not be her fault. If she'd had more confidence and experience she might well have told the director (Matt Cimber) "I'll say these lines but they'll make me vomit in my mouth." She's convincing as an incestuous lolita and slowly played against Keach's lonesome cowboy, the story does raise some heat.The setting is appropriate, the sun-baked and barren lands of the desolate South-West. The characters fit this rustic setting never exceeding a rural kind of sophistication. Yet aside from the questions of production, this film raises a important issue. Jess Tyler is recognized by virtually anyone he's had dealings with that he's the most honest and honorable man they know. This meme is repeated often enough to make it a central issue. Yet, when he discovers that he might be able to finally consummate his hands on and mutually adoring relationship with this lovely nymphette, his honor seems to disappear in the hot lava of his lust.Indeed, it's easy to lay claim to honor when it's never tested against an ultimate desire.

This is a movie with a history that is bound to bring out her fans or call out the hounds.Pia Zadora is very beautiful and sensual in the role of Katy, a young woman in need of a man that loves and cares for her. Having grown up without a father and having been hustled by men who used her for their pleasure, she is seeking a strong male figure. After returning home to her real father, she becomes confused about the different boundaries that society has established for the love between a girl and her father, and the love between a woman and her lover, and thus intertwines the two. Pia Zadora turns in a convincing performance. She's at ease before the camera, is always expressive, and acts and delivers lines as well as most. Stacy Keach is equally convincing in his roll. And Orson Wells? Well, after all, he is Orson Wells.The plot was good and moved along steadily. It has a really interesting ironic twist near the end that is sure to take you by surprise, and leads directly to the odd and convoluted climax of this film.After the claimed shenanigans involving Pia Zadora's winning an award for her part in this film, it seems to me that many reviewers were outraged at the thought of such a dirty deed as buying the award, (if that's even what happened). It looks like to me that buying an award proves to them you're no good as an actress? One couldn't possibly buy an award and deserve it too, could they? Perhaps because they took those accusations as truth, their own sentiments kept some critics from ever giving Pia an honest look. And frankly, it seems to me that the same negativity from critics has followed her all the way to the present as reviewers still love to pile on Ms. Zadora who is a talented and beautiful lady. That's exactly what I suspect after I watch this film and then read what others have to say. I think they are really wrong about this film, and about Pia. It is a film that is surely worth watching and would be much more widely acclaimed were it not for reviewers who either can't or won't be objective. If you're even a little interested in "Butterfly", I say you owe it to yourself to watch this film and make your on decision about the merits of the story, the acting and the whole package. It is well worth your time.Now for the answer to the title question, What's really wrong with "Butterfly"? Of course, nothing is wrong with "Butterfly".

Is this film ever going to get a DVD release? Even a cheap, quick release? A film this bad deserves to see the light of day, so aspiring film students can watch this and learn what not to do. Like, say, the creepy "Oh, I'll wash my daughter's back while she's taking a bath" scene. I haven't been able to find this movie at any used VHS store; it's time to put this legendarily bad film to DVD. If for no other reason then to see Welles in the sunset of his career and Ed McMahon actually acting, instead of being Johnny's sidekick or giving people massive checks for Publisher's Clearinghouse. And Pia Zadora, Thespian. Come on Criterion Collection, your public duty to unearth this wretched gem for a whole new generation to explore awaits you!