Return of the Secaucus Seven (1980)

Sorry, this movie sucks

Simply A Masterpiece

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Independent filmmaker John Sayles' debut film, The Return Of The Secaucus 7, released in late 1979, is a film that is typical of the low budget feel of such films from that era- even such horror films like Last House On The Left or The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Like those other films it is filled with inexperienced and mediocre acting, and unrealistic dialogue. Before this film was made, Sayles had been a screenwriter and script doctor for Roger Corman's cheapo horror films. This film, however, was the first that bore his own imprint and vision. Unfortunately, the excellence of his later films only points up the flaws of this first film, written and directed by Sayles on a low budget. Like many low budget indy films, this film is long on talk and short on action and visual razzle-dazzle, and was filmed at a New Hampshire lodge.The film has often been compared to the 1983 Lawrence Kasdan film The Big Chill, but, like that film, there is a dearth of characterization that weighs this film down. The characters in The Return Of The Secaucus 7 are little more than stereotypes, or, at best, archetypes- some are teachers, two are speechwriters for a U.S. Senator- Irene Rosenblue (Jean Passanante) and Chip Hollister (Gordon Clapp), and another is a bad country singer-songwriter. The plot follows a group of pretentious thirtyish former college radicals who gather for a weekend reunion in a small New Hampshire town. Other than that, there is no plot, merely thinly connected scenes of gossip, flirtation, barbecues, Charades and Clue, volleyball, and basketball, nude male rock diving, and alcohol and drug consumption…. one wonders why more was not made of the great late summer landscape of New England? Surely panning over the White Mountains would not have been such a large cost? Is the film wholly devoid of good moments? No. The basketball scenes are well coordinated, and give a good sense of how men bond vs. the women's bonding over Clue, but such moments are too few in number. The Charades scenes are typical of the bad and unrealistic conversations the characters have. Instead of having real conversations that reveal depths, Sayles cuts far too quickly between scenes, in order to push the film forward, but at the expense of depth. With later classics such as Matewan and Lone Star, Sayles would reveal himself as a filmmaker capable of greatness, but this film gives few glances into that later flowering. That it was recently put on the list of important American films worth preservation is more a testament to its place as Sayles' initial film than any qualities the film, alone, has. Still, The Return Of The Secaucus 7 is an interesting film that, despite its flaws, is well worth seeing, if only for film historians who love discerning small traits that hold clues to later and greater art by the artist. For the rest of us, flip a coin, and you have the same shot at enjoying this film. That's still better than most Hollywood films these days. Sigh.

Shocked that there's only three pages of comments for the film widely considered to be one of the fathers of the modern indie film movement. John Saylees used his b-movie money from Roger Corman (the best scripts written for him) and financed this weekend home movie that became a hit and launched Sayle's film career. Some of the bad reviews are really unfounded. This has some of the best dialog in American film, and though the performances are not all polished, it adds to the reality. There's a sense of genuine community not like the Hollywoodized "Big Chill."If you stick with the film you'll be rewarded by many nifty scenes and conversations. Gordon Clapp is fun and there are beautifully observed moments of wit and drama. Mark Arnett is particularly good and the moment he recites his litany of protest arrests is great. The film-making is raw, but that's not the point.However, the DVD version is actually missing a scene on the VHS of the hamburgers being grilled to some sort of rhythmic montage. Why?Anyway, if you're a fan of great dialog, political commitment, and what can be done for 40 grand and terrific writing, check this classic out.

I am absolutely stunned by the majority of contributors here who didn't love, or even like this film. One of the best films I've ever seen in terms of dialogue. It's true that if you're in the mood to watch "Raiders of the Lost Ark" with a couple of friends, this is NOT the film for you. Since not much happens in this movie, if you can't appreciate the dialogue, than you won't like this movie at all.I find it interesting that most of the "stars" of this picture were amateurs, and didn't make another film after this one. The only "major" stars who came out of this were Gordon Clapp (NYPD Blue) and David Strathairn, who wasn't even one of the stars, and was in a supporting role.

In John Sayles debut, we mostly get talking, talking, and more talking. A great script can do amazing things for a low budget film. There really was not a point where I was disinterested in what the characters were saying.*Small spoiler* The tension between best friends JT and Jeff over Maura is great and culminated in a beautifully sequenced basketball game. You can feel the difficulty between them. I haven't seen the Big Chill. And after seeing this film I don't feel that it could top it. This movie should be an inspiration to all aspiring independent filmmakers.