Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Yash Wade Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

JasparLamarCrabb Campy shenanigans starring Ann-Margret as a juvenile delinquent who insinuates herself into the home of political hopeful John Forsythe. She won't leave and won't let Forsythe leave either. Douglas Heyes directed this insanity and it's not awful. Ann-Margret really gives it her all in this early role and Forsythe, though he seems to be taking things waaay too serious, is fine. When Ann-Margret invites three would-be beatniks over, things get really goofy. Peter Brown, Skip Ward and Diane Sayer play the three hoodlums and they all give ridiculous performances. There's an unbelievable amount of faux-hipster dialog spouted. The whole thing ends up with a car chase through Tijuana (though nobody appears to leave the Universal back-lot). With Richard Anderson as Forsythe's befuddled friend and, briefly, Audrey Dalton as Forsythe's wife. Joseph Gershenson "supervised" the music, which appears to have come from a lot of other movies.

rowsdower45 Look, I know what the guidelines say, but when someone comes in trashing MST3K, I just gotta react. After all, even the most hardcore MST3K fans will tell you that this was kind of a sub-par episode, recommended for regular viewers only, and if someone's going to use this episode as a yardstick for the whole series, well, we can't have that, won't we?OK, maybe it had kind of an intriguing plot, but the movie could have been over with in about half an hour if not for the leaden pacing and relentless subplots. And if we're going to talk 'witless and worthless,' then look no farther than the acting in this film. The wooden performance of John Forsythe; the shrill, pointy overacting of Ann-Margret; the irritating, repetitive pseudo-funny philosophical observations of Ron (which became like Chinese water torture after awhile); the unappealing, unacting Midge; the lunkheaded, fiercely underacted Peter Graves look-alike Buck; I'm sorry, what's "witless and worthless?"And it doesn't end there. Someone explain to me how a woman notices from across the room a light lit up on a phone and then comes to the conclusion that there's someone else in the house! (Mike: "David, there's some DNA samples and carpet fibres under your fingernails!") Also, why does a man who's faced a couple days of moral and psychological hell stay back at a motel to comfort his captor (let alone accept a kiss from her)? And where did Ron and Buck get the other car? And what was the significance of the final shot of the wedding ring? And what was the one thing? And what about Scarecrow's brain? Bottom line: Douglas Heyes was good on the Twilight Zone because it was a half-hour long; a 90-minute film needs more action and more plot development than a show one-third the length can possible encompass."I hate to mention this, but... I'm dyin' in a rush!" 4/10.

Some_Random_Guy ***SPOILERS***This movie is, for me at least, completely unwatchable. The acting and technical aspects are just fine, but the story is awful. This film is 82 minutes of John Forsythe's character getting threatened, blackmailed, and screwed over by a bunch of kids all because he tried to help a stranger. Fairly early in the movie it becomes clear that the senator-to-be's best bet would be to just call the damn cops already. Halfway through you'll wish he'd hit "Jody" over the head and bury her in the crawlspace. Just when Ann-Margret's character can't get any less likable, her friends arrive. Yay, more annoying characters with no redeeming qualities.The closest this movie comes to having any real payoff for the audience is when the two young thugs finally catch up with her in the hotel room looking for some payback. Unfortunately, Forsythe, despite EVERYTHING this girl has done to him, decides to play the hero - and is promptly taken down. The knowledge that all three of the youngsters die in a horrible car accident just isn't satisfying enough.Not even MST3K made this watchable. The entire movie is some poor b**tard having his life wrecked just because he tried to be a decent guy. Apparently some people actually like that sort of thing, as there are a number of positive reviews for this movie. I personally couldn't stand it.

Eric-1226 I can't fully explain it, but this movie really works for me on several levels. I recorded it off of late night American Movie Classics about a week ago, and after viewing it once, I absolutely could not resist the urge to watch it again, and have kept the tape for future viewing.There's just something about this movie. It has a surreal story premise that borders on the realm of ludicraciousness (that's not a real word, I just made it up. And I'm not really a film critic; I just play one on the Internet.) Anyway, where was I...Oh yes, the basic plot: it's about a quad of juvenile delinquents, the foremost of whom is Jody Dvorak (Ann-Margaret), who hold oh-so-square aspiring San Diego politician David Stratton (John Forsythe) hostage in his own house. His wife and daughter are conveniently out of town for a few days, allowing for the implausible story to take place primarily in the politician's own house. The JD's act with varying degrees of incomprehensibly strange behavior: they are edgy, neurotic, violent, confused, and... poetic. Poetic? Yes, really! They glibly drop lines of dialogue that could easily have been written by Beat poets of the late 50's/early 60's. The movie is filmed in glorious black and white, and should instantly appeal to all who are fans of the black and white medium. Plus, the very stylish B&W cinematography, with its vaguely gothic light and shadow effects, more than compensates for an otherwise cheapie studio set. Even if you are not a fan of black and white, or are at least "neutral" on the subject, I urge you to check out this film just to catch a glimpse of filming the way it used to be. The movie buzzes along at a fairly fast clip, and eventually they all end up in Tijuana, Mexico, further adding to the surreal quality of the story. It helps to listen attentively to the dialogue – much of it serves to tie together the scatter-shot plot elements. But it also has a surreal feel to it. Nobody talks or says things the way they do in this movie any more (or did they ever??). Yes, the dialogue and the B&W cinematography are two compelling reasons to watch the film. But perhaps the main reason to see it is: yeah, you guessed it...Ann-Margaret. I've never really followed A-M, only being aware of her from a few of her films such as Carnal Knowledge and 52 Pick-up. Well, she is utterly dazzling in this film (funny, but there are a few spots in the film where I saw an uncanny resemblance to a younger Christina Applegate (Kelly Bundy, from "Married, with Children") – of course I guess if you think about it, Kelly Bundy always was one step away from joining the ranks of JD's). If for nothing else, watch this movie to see some nice work done by A-M early in her career.Anyway, I heartily recommend this movie to all die-hard classic film buffs, to those who want to see something in film bearing the mark of an earlier time - before movies got some damnably slick and high-tech. You, as I, may smile (or groan) a few times during this movie, but it will be a forgiving smile, a warm smile born of nostalgia for a simpler time.