The Osterman Weekend (1983)

Sam Peckinpah always seemed to remain at the level of a TV director who's simply working on a bigger screen. The inclusion of more violence, drugs and sex doesn't lift anything above TV of its era. Here he tends to prove it with a pathetic show of perverse overindulgence in an attempt to distance himself from his origins. Add to this an over-reliance on 70s type technology that even at its peak looked cheap - but by the mid eights looked even worse. With a mixed up story, average acting (except maybe John Hurt) poor music score, it all contributes to a lowly experience. This tends to be of little worth other than for the curiosity of diehard fans of an overblown filmmaker who specialized in nasty content.

Would someone tell me what the hell is going on ? Peckinpah's films tend to improve with age. They also get better the more often you watch them. For these reasons I'm reluctant to award this film fewer than 8 stars, but I don't think I can manage more than six. Those initial jump-cuts have me guessing.Critics such as Ebert, Kehr and Canby wrote that it "made no sense whatever"; "the structure is a mess"; "incomprehensible" and "hallucinatory". First time through, without prior preparation, I could hardly understand any of it. However, Wikipedia came to the rescue with a painstaking explanation of what was going on, and I now see that there may have been some deeply submerged pattern to the story's narrative. The surface explanation is that this is Fassett's extremely complicated way of getting his own back on his boss, for killing his wife, a seemingly pointless exercise in the first place, the motivation for which was not clear to me at all. The boss, Burt Lancaster, didn't seem to be aware of having committed the murder, and even if he was, he didn't appear to link Fassett, John Hurt, with her in any case. Not according to his subsequent dealings with Hurt, anyhow.I'm already confused. The confusion is not simplified by the multiple closed circuit television set-ups spying all over the place, some of which didn't seem to be off any public radar, and were being publicly broadcast nationwide. Anyway, after murdering some of his friends and their girlfriends, and crowing "then there were two", the perpetrator, Fassett/Hurt, finally gets shot by Rutger Hauer, who rescues his kidnapped wife, his son and his dog, whose death had previously been faked. It is difficult to understand why Fassett aimed to murder Hauer/Tanner's friends, including Tanner himself, and his family. What happened to Lancaster/Danforth, after he was exposed on television ? We should have been told. I'll just have to watch this film again, a number of times. I believe the book is good: there just doesn't seem to be a close or adequate marriage between the visuals and the script. Having now watched it twice, it becomes distinctly better. In fact, it is positively good. Terminally professional. Two more stars.One thing: like many of Peckinpah's films, it is prophetic, in view of recent political events in the USA. It points out how we are increasingly manipulated by the programmes on television, which is truer today than 40 years ago. Switch off, if you can. You can do it, if you try. 40 years ago ! Remarkable.

CIA director Maxwell Danforth (Burt Lancaster) does a deal with the Soviets and let them kill agent Laurence Fassett (John Hurt)'s wife. Fassett is unaware of the deal and is tracking down Soviet agent Omega. He tells TV personality John Tanner (Rutger Hauer) that his friends are all working for Omega. Tanner and his friends are gathering for the weekend. Fassett sets his home up with surveillance. Tanner tries to send his wife Ali (Meg Foster) and son away but they are almost kidnapped. Tanner's friends include his TV producer Bernard Osterman (Craig T. Nelson), plastic surgeon Richard Tremayne (Dennis Hopper) and his coke-snorting wife Virginia (Helen Shaver), and stock trader Joseph Cardone (Chris Sarandon) and wife Betty (Cassie Yates).This story is a mess and the execution doesn't solve anything. Director Sam Peckinpah's last feature film is full questionable things. It's too many to list. Even his action sequences are badly done. He overuses his trademark slow motion shots which seems very dated. Other action directors have pass him by. Then there is the plot. It's not simply plot holes but more about motivations. I don't understand why Fassett is doing what he's doing. It's all quite a mess.

Peckinpah's swansong 'The Osterman Weekend' at first appears as a political thriller but gradually as the story gets more complex, the layers unfold as the surprise is gradually revealed. It may have a dated look mostly because of the technical props that are obsolete today. But, the main theme of the story is ahead of its time.The movie is shot in a voyeuristic fashion. The viewer is given intimate glimpses into the lives of the characters, even during their private moments such as when they're having sex. At the same time, the editing could have been tighter had it not focused a little too much on the sex and drugs themes. Peckinpah does an excellent job in building tension and catching the viewer by surprise. The film gets a tad confusing but once the major twist is revealed, it's easy to get back on track.All the actors, John Hurt, Rutger Hauer, Dennis Hopper, Helen Shaver, Cassie Yates and Chris Sarandon do a good job. Craig T. Nelson is adequate. His performance in the latter half suffers due to the poor lines he's given to deliver. Lalo Schifrin's score works. The action sequences may not look as sophisticated as they do in today's spy-thrillers but they're quite fun to watch.Even though 'The Osterman Weekend' is confusing at times, it does work as a suspense thriller. It has its flaws but in my opinion, it is not half as bad as many have made it out to be.