Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueWitnessing an assassination, a boy claims the assassins are hunting him. With his older sister, the pair escape numerous attacks and are aided by their grandfather and a resourceful young by... Tout lireWitnessing an assassination, a boy claims the assassins are hunting him. With his older sister, the pair escape numerous attacks and are aided by their grandfather and a resourceful young bystander even under the spectre of martial law.Witnessing an assassination, a boy claims the assassins are hunting him. With his older sister, the pair escape numerous attacks and are aided by their grandfather and a resourceful young bystander even under the spectre of martial law.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Joseph Fürst
- Local Police Sgt
- (as Joseph Furst)
Jonathan Burn
- Waiter
- (as Johnathan Burn/Jonathan Burn)
Tommy Eytle
- Visiting President
- (as Tom Eytle)
Avis en vedette
"Pins you to the edge of your seat" is the tagline for this film, and while that could be aptly applied to many thrillers; it certainly doesn't suit this one! John Hough's Eyewitness has the basis for a decent story (even if it's not all that original) but it's never capitalised on properly and, for the first two thirds at least, the film is slow, largely uninteresting and lacks tension and suspense; thus not providing what you want or expect from a film that calls itself thriller (much less, one that proudly proclaims that you will be on the edge of your seat). The plot takes obvious influence from the common thriller idea of having somebody witness a crime and then having the perpetrators go after that person; here, we also have a bit of 'the boy who cried wolf' thrown in too for good measure. The eyewitness of the title is a boy named Ziggy who goes to watch a parade and ends up witnessing an assassination. It's not long before the assassins are on his tail, but naturally considering the boy's track record for lying, his family don't believe him...
The film is rather well produced; it looks nice, is well directed and mostly features good acting from the ensemble cast. Lionel Jeffries is my pick of the performers and he does well as the eccentric grandfather and head of the family. He gets good support from Tony Bonner as a young stranger who ends up with the family due to a care few and the beautiful Susan George as his granddaughter. The film also features a performance from Mark Lester and this is where the film falls down. The child actor will always be famous for his role as Oliver Twist in the 1968 film (I'm not a fan), but here he is completely irritating and doesn't do much than run around looking scared for the ninety minute duration. The first two thirds of the film are very slow and dull and that's a shame because the film really opens in the final half hour and is actually quite good; but by then I was too bored to care as much as I could have done were it not for the disappointing opening. The climax to the film is quite good and on the whole, while I wouldn't say this is a bad film; it's not a particularly good one either.
The film is rather well produced; it looks nice, is well directed and mostly features good acting from the ensemble cast. Lionel Jeffries is my pick of the performers and he does well as the eccentric grandfather and head of the family. He gets good support from Tony Bonner as a young stranger who ends up with the family due to a care few and the beautiful Susan George as his granddaughter. The film also features a performance from Mark Lester and this is where the film falls down. The child actor will always be famous for his role as Oliver Twist in the 1968 film (I'm not a fan), but here he is completely irritating and doesn't do much than run around looking scared for the ninety minute duration. The first two thirds of the film are very slow and dull and that's a shame because the film really opens in the final half hour and is actually quite good; but by then I was too bored to care as much as I could have done were it not for the disappointing opening. The climax to the film is quite good and on the whole, while I wouldn't say this is a bad film; it's not a particularly good one either.
i bought this movie because i became a fan of mark lester after watching oliver. however i was somewhat dissapointed in this movie while it is exciting theres i snoyt much too it other than the boy being chased around by the bad guys. in is very voilent for a flim rated pg but of course pg 13 did not exsit back then.i guess basically it is a good movie to watch when you have nothing better to do.
I very rarely write reviews that are not positive, but once in a while when I see a movie that is particularly painful and I personally find way overrated, well, I feel I should at least leave a brief comment about it, even though it may be against the tide or opinion.
Maybe, it's just that the film itself is a product of its time (1970) but for me, having to wade through the first almost 30 minutes and all the 'Cutesy' little scenes and the scenes that set up the parade that too FOREVER, and then when I got to when Mark Lester is trying to tell them about the shooting, and then having to endure the ever so painful Susan George's HUGE overacting, well... seriously, we are already a 1/3 the way through the movie and, at least for me, has been quite a trial.
I SUPPOSE that if you can put up with all the what I feel are very Cheeeeeeezy directorial flourishes and almost every scene screaming 'Look at me how showy I'm being!', and can just get through the story, maybe you possibly might be able to get something out of it.
It's not that I am a snob by any means and I do love a variety of films, some can be rather silly or over the top, some more clever, some deeply scary and atmospheric, that's fine. But, when the combination of what I feel is very amateurish direction (where I would personally lay the most fault) and grossly overacting and paper thin characters at best, I'm sorry, for me I honestly just find it truly painful to watch.
I hope that this may help those who may feel similar to the way I do, as opposed to the many rather positive reviews that are here. I gave it a fairly rare '4'...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MY PARTICULAR WAY OF RATING:
5 - Flawed, but with some entertainment value.
6. A decently passable story maybe worth a watch.
7. A solid film, well made, effective, and entertaining.
And, obviously, you can probably figure out what above and below these would mean... : )
Maybe, it's just that the film itself is a product of its time (1970) but for me, having to wade through the first almost 30 minutes and all the 'Cutesy' little scenes and the scenes that set up the parade that too FOREVER, and then when I got to when Mark Lester is trying to tell them about the shooting, and then having to endure the ever so painful Susan George's HUGE overacting, well... seriously, we are already a 1/3 the way through the movie and, at least for me, has been quite a trial.
I SUPPOSE that if you can put up with all the what I feel are very Cheeeeeeezy directorial flourishes and almost every scene screaming 'Look at me how showy I'm being!', and can just get through the story, maybe you possibly might be able to get something out of it.
It's not that I am a snob by any means and I do love a variety of films, some can be rather silly or over the top, some more clever, some deeply scary and atmospheric, that's fine. But, when the combination of what I feel is very amateurish direction (where I would personally lay the most fault) and grossly overacting and paper thin characters at best, I'm sorry, for me I honestly just find it truly painful to watch.
I hope that this may help those who may feel similar to the way I do, as opposed to the many rather positive reviews that are here. I gave it a fairly rare '4'...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MY PARTICULAR WAY OF RATING:
5 - Flawed, but with some entertainment value.
6. A decently passable story maybe worth a watch.
7. A solid film, well made, effective, and entertaining.
And, obviously, you can probably figure out what above and below these would mean... : )
This has a certain amount of promise with its Maltese setting, a host of reliable British actors, a young Mark Lester and a fairly young Susan George. Although the cinematography is fairly sparkling, with shots into motorcycle mirrors, faces caught through gates and a superbly photographed car chase and aftermath, the director seems bored and as much time is spent letting Lionel Jeffries go on just a little too long than opening up a decent story line. There is, as might be expected, too much time with Lester too. Appealing enough as the young lad is, numerous sequences of him chasing or being chased make this seem more like a children's film than anything else, however attractive the streets of Valetta. Regarding the stop and start soundtrack, as an old fan of Van der Graaf Generator, I kept an ear out for their supposed contribution. No luck and nobody seems clear just what their input was but I'm assuming it was their music helping to make that road chase at the end so memorable.
10whpratt1
If you like a good thriller this is the film for you, there are scenes which will keep you glued to your seats. Ziggy, (Mark Lester) plays the role as a little boy who has an older sister named Pippa, (Susan George) and they live with their grandfather who lives in a lighthouse on the Island of Malta. Ziggy has a great imagination and many times tell stories that are not true and no one really believes anything he tells them. One day Ziggy sees an assassination and also knows what he looks like and can identify this person who is in high authority on Malta. Ziggy is hunted down by this person and no one will believe him when he tries to tell his sister Pippa, they all get mad at him except his grandfather. Susan George looked radiant and very charming playing a great role along with a great child star, Mark Lester. Don't miss this film, it is great entertainment.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesBased on the novel Eyewitness (London, 1966) by Mark Hebden (aka John Harris).
- GaffesMuch of the car chase has the action obviously speeded up which is also a pity because it really didn't need to be as the chase is dramatic anyway.
- ConnexionsEdited into Dusk to Dawn Drive-In Trash-o-Rama Show Vol. 9 (2002)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Sudden Terror?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Sudden Terror
- Lieux de tournage
- Malta(made entirely on location in)
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure 31 minutes
- Rapport de forme
- 1.66 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Eyewitness (1970) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre