Sorry, this movie sucks

Overrated and overhyped

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Suspense and private eye flicks are okay and this 1969 flick "Marlowe" is clearly no "Chinatown" it's still a film of wonder and mystery. Starring James Garner("The Rockford Files")as private eye Philip Marlowe who's tough and the money doesn't come easy still this private eye is smooth investigating cases and in this film he's on one of a missing person. And soon no one is who they seem the case takes twists and turns that involve blackmail and murders with ice picks. And all of this is taking place in a growing 1960's L.A. it's a hard boiled case with changing characters(it was nice to see a Bruce Lee appearance!) and that makes it tougher for Marlowe to crack the case. Overall this little suspense piece is entertaining it's funny watching the plot unfold and seeing new twist in a mystery game.

Philip Marlowe (James Garner) is hired by Orfamay Quest (Sharon Farrell) to find her brother Orrin who had come to L.A. years ago. On the way, he finds a man murdered with an ice pick. Then he finds another body with an ice pick after getting knock down by a mysterious woman. Police detective Christy French (Carroll OConor) investigates. Marlowe discovers the mysterious woman is popular actress Mavis Wald (Gayle Hunnicut) and one of the dead man was developing compromising photos of her and Steelgrave. The ice pick stabbings are the trade mark of gangster Sonny Steelgrave (H.W. Wynant) and his men beats up Marlowe. Winslow Wong (Bruce Lee) comes in to rearrange Marlowe's office and keeps trying to buy him off for Steelgrave.James Garner is a great actor. He does have the charm which he used to great effect in 'The Rockford Files' years later. That's what this movie feels like. It has the quality and the feel of a TV show. That's what director Paul Bogart is more known for. The one thing missing is a hard-boiled cinematic style. It may have been a mistake to place this in the modern swinging 60's. At least, this never takes advantage of the natural discrepancies. There are way too many little problems. There isn't the usual scene when Marlowe gets hired and introduced to the audience. Even Bruce Lee is wasted. He gets two scenes of jumping around but nothing is ever allowed to land on Marlowe. Sure he has a bit of fun trashing the office but he takes a ridiculous flying leap off of a building. It's a close call and this is a miss by a hair.

Mostly Forgotten, and Maybe not Deservedly so, if Remembered at all this is Sighted as the Film Debut of Bruce Lee. His Brief Scenes are Memorable, but hardly Justifies the Only Reason to check out this Modern Incarnation of Raymond Chandler's 1940's Detective, Philip Marlowe.But Wait, this is 1969, not only when the Movie was made but the Setting. Does it Work? Somewhat, but Truth Be Told, not only Chandler and Marlowe Aficionados will most likely Agree that the Quintessential Gumshoe, does belong where and when He was Created. That being the Los Angeles of the 1940's.But that is not what this is and We have to go with it or not. See how much better it worked in Period with Farewell My Lovely (1972) with Robert Mitchum. James Garner is well Cast as the incorruptible Private Investigator, and there is an Assortment of Engaging Support with Rita Moreno as a Stripper getting most of the Ink (not counting the aforementioned Mr.Lee).So in the End it is a good Tribute that has just Enough of the Sensibilities that made the Iconic $ a Day, Plus Expenses P.I. such an Enduring Part of the Popular Culture. Although Admittedly He looked Cooler in a Trenchcoat and Hat.

This is a mish-mash where the original cynical Marlowe of the late 40s meets the laid-back and careworn private detective of the 60s. We move from all those shadows that dominated the noir films to the bright lights of the swinging 60s. And it doesn't really work; nor should it. To me, it comes over more as a satire on the originals with plenty of good one-liners and a surreal couple of scenes with Bruce Lee. The storyline is too complex to set out here and I suspect there will be many differing versions of just what the story actually is. Not that that matters too much as I think it may be better simply to see it as a satire or, perhaps, a parody.Gayle Hunnicutt was out of place although Rita Moreno maybe makes up for that. Garner is, well, Garner. See it as a curiosity rather than as something that is important or significant in the history of film.