Butterfly (1982)

Good concept, poorly executed.

Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

The acting in this movie is really good.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Another film based upon a book by James M Cain and, naturally, another controversy. Cain's work always tended to focus upon emotions running high and passion, particularly, sexual passion, being exploited for another's gain. Postman Always Rings Twice and Double Indemnity also exploit these human frailties (qualities?) but they never encounter quite the derision heaped upon this fine film. Strangely, enough, a most faithful interpretation of the book, just lacking the sticky claustrophobia of the original's interiors. Obviously this is disliked because of the way the 'incest' scenes are played but it is, as they say, only a film and this is not meant as a an advertisement but as an exploration. Worse things than this happen as we well know and to fall over ourselves to throw the first stone at a movie seems crazy. Especially if it has one of Stacy Keach's best performances, a great and most convincing one from Pia Zadora (who deserved her Golden Globe newcomer award) and at least an interesting late appearance from Orson Welles. Super cinematography, competent direction, fine score from Morricone and great steamy story. What's not to like?

1st watched 3/6/2010 -- 3 out of 10 (Dir-Matt Cimber): Laboring tease-fest with Pia Zadora winning the Golden Globe for newcomer of the year as a daughter of a miner who enters into his life and causes all kinds of havoc. The best part of the movie is a comical performance by Orson Welles as a judge gathering up all the facts at the end of the movie and giving a hoot of a performance(that definitely fits the film!!). The basic storyline is that Pia's character visits her father, played by Stacey Keach -- teases him sexually, and then finds out about a possible motherload of silver in a mine that he guards. They then try to harvest it(illegally, of course)for profit until Pia's fiancée comes into the picture trying to get her back. From here on there is sex, violence, murder and other mayhem followed by a courtroom scene to sort out all the pieces. Zadora's performance is pretty bad even though Keach does an OK job as the put-upon father. How Zadora got a Golden Globe I'll never know?? Anyway, this is really a pretty trashy piece of film-making that should be avoided, in my opinion, unless you want to get a peak at Pia(which is pretty much all you get).

My comment is not so much about the movie as about those who call the "bathtub scene" sexy. This was supposedly an incestuous scene and it is somehow sexy?As it turns out there was no incest, but the characters thought there was.And the man was tried for it.The movie may have stunk -- though Cannes loved it, Rex Reed loved it and Pia Zadora was never so good (yes, well) -- but at least a predator was portrayed having to answer for his crimes. Sort of.One wnoders what Orson Wells and Stacy Keach were thinking. They both had careers. But then Mickey Rooney was in some hortrible movies, as well.

Once again, as I write this, I gotta tell ya, I saw this on the "Z" Channel in Los Angeles in the early 80's. I had three emotions while seeing this..one was, "This is messed up" then laughter, and one more was: "Pia Zadora isn't THAT bad of an actress."You see, it WAS the 80's. Pia had an on screen "something" that with the right vehicle could have given her a decent film career. Leading Lady? No way. The second or third important female role? You betcha. Such as "the wicked sister" or "the backstabbing girl friend" roles, with the type of stuff that was coming out then. She could have been a "cheap rent" Jane Seymour type in films playing those rolls. But she got this one...and it wasn't that great. The story was all over the place, the sexual tension was laughable and...very confusing at times. This film is bad, but top 200 bad, not top 50 bad.The gosh-awful script didn't help ANYONE in this film. It was bad. There is a bit of "camp" film quality running through this film at points, not enough to make it a "good-camp" film to redeem it. A lot of misguided areas here, a hodgepodge of a story and a lot of wasted talent.Thank goodness for all involved, there was a paycheck waiting for them at the end.