The Pusher

United Artists dumped this lousy movie, understandably since it lacks any entertainment value. As the title suggests, there was exploitation movie material to be mined here, but one-shot movie director Gene Milford (whose day job was film editing) delivered a deadly dull stinker with a no-name cast.

Writing credits are strictly A-list: screenplay by Harold Robbins early in his career, from an Ed McBain novel by Evan Hunter. But they have no feel for the genre. It plays like a reject episode of TV's "Naked City" series, with on-location photography plus chintzy studio interiors.

Cops are played by Robert Lansing and John Astin, also having career off-days. Heroine (who is hooked on perhaps heroin?) Kathy Carlyle is good looking but an instant flop -her only other movie was a routine Charles Bronson war picture.

The title character played by Felice Orlandi is a bore -instantly one-note evil. Addiction then and now is a surefire formula for drama, but Robbins, unlike his future amazing success with so many hit novels like "The Carpetbaggers", comes up with nothing but dullness.

B-movies are sometimes envisaged as an inferior kind of films. No, it means that the production costs are not as elevated as A-movies. If a star actor gets, say, 1 million dollars for a movie, well, some films (without stars) were made with an overall expenditure of less than 1 million. Now, I don't really care about production's costs, and some B-movies are better than the more high-class ones (not this one, I must say).

The strong positive values of "The Pusher", in my opinion, are the well-defined plot, without any confusing sub-plots or blurred images and shots that let you quite uncertain about what has really happened, and the consequent linear execution of it. This is also a detrimental point, because when you reach minute 16th (of the overall 82), you will know exactly how will the narrative develop.

No thrills, consequently, but if you are a lover of the genre you will enjoy this film. I rated it 6; let's say, more precisely, 6 and a half.

Gene Milford did not build a household name, even in the realm of B productions like THE PUSHER . I have not seen anything else done by him, but THE PUSHER deserves above average rating.

One curiosity is that 1958 is the year that appears in the opening credits, but IMDB makes it 1960. Was in production for two years? It looks so shoestring that I doubt it, to be honest.

Albeit offering a generally realistic view of New York between those years, the film opens by introducing you to Lt Byrne, his wife, his daughter Laura, and the latter's boyfriend, Steve, also a copper. All, law abiding, all likable... but you discover very rapidly that Laura begins to stray, taking drugs on the quiet. She knows what she is doing, the dangers involved, the impact on her father and boyfriend, and she is convinced she can kick the habit but she just keeps diving deeper into it, getting her stuff from "Ganzo", another name for the pusher, who is very credibly played by prim and proper looking Felice Orlandi.

Of course, moral and family issues rise to the surface, and Lt Byrhe becomes extremely interested in the case when he gets what is happening with Laura and helps her with cold turkey treatment.

It makes you think that by 1958/1960 drug trafficking still seemed a minor and relatively containable problem, and yet since then even the finest police force in the world, US Police, has not managed to reduce it significantly, let alone stop it. And with new drugs being engineered full time, like crack, ecstasy, fentanyl, and all the rest of it, the common citizen has become more and more a target for the panoply of pushers, sellers, and others keeping that infamous trade ticking.

Sadly, by the time this well-meaning, honest film wrapped up, I could only think that mankind heeds no warning, however clear, and in the long run it is condemning itself to extinction for the sake of enriching drug lords.

Strong B noir photography by Arthur Ornitz, credible screenplay by Evan Hunter. 7/10.

For some reason, "The Pusher" sat on the shelf for two years until it was finally released to theaters. I have no idea why, as usually this means the film is terrible...but there's nothing terrible about this movie. It's excellent...and holds up well all these years later.

The story is about a particularly vicious drug dealer. Not only does he sell heroin, but he doesn't like to leave any loose ends...which means he's more than happy to kill anyone...even his own clients or a cop! The problem is that the detective investigating doesn't realize that his own fiancee is one of the killer's clients. To make it worse, her father is a police lieutenant! Can the cops manage to notice that their lead to the killer's identity is right there in front of them?!

While the film is very realistic in depicting drug abuse, it's not a film noir movie. It focuses more on realism as opposed to sensationalism. Well worth seeing and never dull.

By the way, this film is John Astin's movie debut. He is only briefly seen near the beginning of the picture and barely says anything. I guess they had no idea he'd one day be a star.

This film begins with a young man being found dead in a clubhouse by what appears to be suicide. At the same time, however, the police also find a hypodermic syringe near his body which puts things in doubt pending an autopsy. Sure enough, the subsequent autopsy reveals that the victim had injected a high concentration of heroin and since his death is now ruled as an overdose the detective in charge of the case "Lt. Peter Byrne" and his partner "Steve Carella" begin to direct their efforts to finding the pusher who supplied him. Meanwhile, the detective's daughter "Laura Byrne" has been behaving slightly different the last few weeks which Lt. Byrne initially concludes is due to her upcoming marriage to her fiancé-Steve Carella. What neither the detective nor Steve know, however, is that Laura has recently become addicted to heroin and she gets her drugs from the same person the police are looking for. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this film turned out to be slightly better than I had expected due in large part to the overall gloomy atmosphere and the subject matter at hand during this particular time-period. Yet at the same time, there were a couple of scenes which I thought were overly simplistic and lacked the necessary realism. But by and large I thought that this was a decent film for the most part and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Average.