The Old Man Who Cried Wolf

The fundamental theme in this film is so flawed that it is not a particularly good movie...and it's a shame as I love Edward G. Robinson and really wanted to love "The Old Man Who Cried Wolf".

When the story begins, Emile (Robinson) goes to visit an old friend he hasn't seen in many years, Abe (Sam Jaffe). However, a man comes into Abe's shop and beats him with a rubber hose and steals the $1000 he'd been saving to send to family back in Poland. Now here's the part that just didn't ring true. Emile is beaten as well and when he awakens the police immediately assume that Abe died of natural causes and there was no attacker. At the same time, a really annoying neighbor woman vehemently denies anyone else had been there and says that Abe never had $1000 in cash. How would she know this since she wasn't there?! Yet, inexplicably the entire case is chalked up to an old man losing his faculties...even though he never had a history of mental impairment. Plus, the intensity at which the nasty neighbor insisted nothing happened is very suspicious in and of itself. Yet, oddly, folks assume Emile is confabulating this story. It just defies common sense and essentially ruined the film. Why should he have to prove he ISN'T demented and why does everyone ignore him?!

So is there anything about this film worth seeing? Well, Robinson's performance is quite good as he was the consummate professional. But it's also so very sad that he wasn't given a better written story. Provide REAL reasons for folks to not believe Emile or at least build up to this better. Instead, it seems as if part of the story is missing...like they forgot to explain why people didn't believe Emile. Fortunately, this was not his final film as it would have been sad if this was his final film considering his terrific battery of work.

Edward G. (Emile) is an old codger going about friendly business as he drops by to say "Hi" to fellow old codger Sam Jaffe (Abe). Well, someone doesn't like Jaffe too much, turns up and puts an end to Jaffe and his life journey. Eddie G. is a witness so takes a blow as well but he survives. When he awakes, his pal is dead and there is a network of witnesses who remember things differently. We, as the audience, know that he is telling the truth surrounding the demise of his friend. Can he get his message across?

This is the 70's so, thankfully, the restrictive film legislative codes have been lifted and evil can now triumph. The soundtrack is cool in a nostalgic way and the film ends memorably. I have to admit to being disappointed but it is definitely not the note expected. That's what makes it memorable and that's the dilemma..

The film leads us through the movements of an old guy being chased which gets annoying because guess what…… he falls over….Eeeurgh!.... Corny…..!! But this might just save the old guy. There isn't much more to understand or follow up in terms of character study. There are good guys and there are bad guys. We just go with the Eddie G flow.

The only thing worse than to be a child and be disbelieved that you have witnessed a crime which has put your life in danger is to be an old man in the same situation. A tour de force performance by Robinson might just be the highlight of his later career. Balsam is excellent as the son. Asner does a good turn as a bureaucrat, and Percy Rodrigues is totally chilling in his portrayal. A great paranoia flick.

Edward G. Robinson stars an elderly man who pays a visit to his lifelong Polish friend at his neighborhood candy store--but, just as they are discussing the $1000 his friend has saved up, a black man with a rubber hose walks in and beats the shopkeeper to the ground. Robinson attempts to intervene, but he gets whacked on the noggin, too; when he finally comes around, surrounded by strangers and a police officer, his friend has died (of an apparent heart attack) and the $1000 is missing. Run-of-the-mill ABC-TV movie-of-the-week from executive producer Aaron Spelling is cheaply-rendered and has no payoff. The veteran star, ever the consummate professional, manages a solid performance; however, with this teleplay (by Luther Davis), the job couldn't have been an easy one to swallow. Robinson's condescending family refuses to believe his story about the robber with the hose (they want him under a doctor's care), while the police mock him and an alleged witness (Naomi Stevens, who can't read a line without overacting) hysterically throws Eddie G. Out of her apartment (I was surprised she didn't scream "rape!" just for kicks). We're spared no horrors: Robinson is even attacked by a laughing group of schoolchildren, who do everything but point their fingers at him. With Walter Grauman's direction hammered home, the movie is all on one ridiculous, melodramatic note.

Man, TV movies in the '70s were so much better than they are today. Hell, many of them are even better than theatrical films today. This is an engrossing movie starring the great Edward G. Robinson as an elderly man who sees his friend murdered but can't get anyone to believe him. It's a well-written and fairly gritty picture with a fine cast of familiar faces backing up Robinson, who's just dynamite. The ending is a bit of a downer but that was the '70s for you.

Other reviewers seem to be picking on "why didn't anyone believe him" as a major flaw with the film. I just can't disagree more. I mean, were we watching the same movie? First, there's the underlying theme of how the elderly are treated at the heart of all this. The well-meaning but full-of-it shrink even compares them to adolescents. Second, there's the fact that there wasn't one shred of evidence to back him up. They spent the majority of the film showing him trying to convince people only to have it repeated over and over that there simply was no proof. So it was his word versus the evidence, which is all that would matter in reality to anyone but those who loved him. The son was the most sympathetic to his plight and even that wasn't much. The daughter-in-law, the real villain of the piece in my view, seemed like she couldn't muster an ounce of sympathy for the sweet old man. I half-expected her to be in on the cover-up! There simply was nothing to back up what he was saying. And the shrink going out investigating, which at least one reviewer took issue with, was more about the shrink trying to prove to the old man that he was wrong than it was about trying to seriously investigate the case.