Strong and Moving!

Load of rubbish!!

Fresh and Exciting

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Skin Game is predominantly directed by Paul Bogart and written by Richard Alan Simmons and Peter Stone. It stars James Garner, Louis Gossett Jr., Susan Clark, Brenda Sykes, Edward Asner and Andrew Duggan. Music is by David Shire and cinematography by Fred J. Koenekamp.Slavery era America and two interracial con-men travel from town to town duping white folk into purchasing black Jason O'Rourke (Gossett Jr,). After Quincy Drew (Garner) strikes a deal, with money in hand, the pair meet up later to scarper and split the profits. A nice con, that is until ladies and savvy outsiders enter the fray...A lovely Panavision/Technicolor production, Skin Game is a little remembered comedy Oater, not because it's poor, but more than likely because it has been shunted to one side due to what is now perceived as political incorrectness. Which is a shame, for although it doesn't fully exploit the premise it is working with, it's a very likable pic that's propped up by strong lead performances.As the not so intrepid duo move from town to town, places with great names like Dirty Shame and Bitter End, a number of funny scenes keep things perky, be it bath time, Jason crying or the verbal jousting rumbling on, the comedy is subtle and easy to digest. The introduction of Clark lifts the pic higher, for she's a bigger rogue than Quincy and Jason, adding more cream to an already amusing pudding.It's all very improbable as such, so we are not surprised when things inevitably go belly up, while the intention to probe the bile of the era in question doesn't make a telling mark. But the pros of the piece far outweigh the cons to give us a film worth tracking down. 7/10

Got my breath taken away when I was reading what was coming up on TCM and saw this. I had never heard of it. The premise sounded absolutely painful, even by 1970s standards, and I watched it only to see just how painful it was, in terms of stereotypes, glossing over the evils of slavery, etc. In short, I watched it to make fun of it. And - I was surprised. I'm going to do my best to not spoil the surprises in this review, as so many others have done - I'm writing this to entice you to watch it. Because it's worth watching.This movie is way smarter, way edgier in terms of humor and commentary than I expected, and the story did not at all unfold as I had thought it would - and it's rare that I'm surprised by a movie from the 70s. Yes, there are some what-were-they-thinking?!? moments in terms of how a circumstance is portrayed, and some painful stereotypes about indigenous, non-English languages - but, overall, this movie doesn't present slavery as anything but reprehensible, and it presents African Americans as intelligent and creative as anyone else - and it's fascinating to watch that realization come over one of the characters in particular. I found the portrayal of the two lead women in the film surprising and refreshing for the time the film was made as well (I won't spoil it by saying more). It's intriguing that the film shows only the after effects of the whipping of an enslaved man - not the actual, horrendous act, at least not on a slave - I wondered if that was just too painful for a 1971 audience to endure. It's also intriguing that it shows a white slave- owning woman as a sexual predator - something we all know happened, but it rarely gets talked about, let alone referred to in a movie. I won't say it's some sort of enlightened film, but watch it all the way through - you might be really surprised by the story and the portrayals. James Garner and Louis Gossett Jr. (credited as Lou Gossett) are terrific together - I believed the friendship and the mutual respect - and their naiveté about the world. I don't think any other actors could have pulled this off. I still can't believe I liked the movie.

This is a very funny movie, dealing with a very serious subject, but it's premise is not as far-fetched as you might think. After all we have heard about man exploiting his fellow man, can we doubt that there were con men who found a way to make money off slave owners, buyers and sellers? Look at what happened after Hurricane Katrina? Anyway, my point is that this should not detract from enjoying this movie because the premise is certainly as plausible as most other westerns. One thing that stood out to me in this film was the relationship between the characters played by James Garner and Lou Gossett. Even though the setting is the 1850's, their relationship is clearly one of equals. While Gossett complains about his role as the commodity being sold in their con game, it is clear that these two are equal partners in deciding how and where they will ply their trade. They share the rewards of their loot equally and when one is endangered, the other risks his life and freedom to rescue his friend. When one discovers new responsibilities that requires a complete change in his life, the other unhesitatingly - well, with only short hesitation - joins in. Gossett and Garner are such a good pairing that I wonder why they didn't do more films together. (Although Gossett did appear on "The Rockford Files" as a guest star.)

And Lou Gossett with hair - Wow! But this comedy has a heavy load to carry, dealing with slavery & it's human cost. It's not much of a comedy when Jason actually gets sold into slavery and Gossett conveys the desperation very well. It does have it's light moments and Susan Clark helps lighten the load. I rated it an 8.