Secret agent Harry Hannan suffers a mental breakdown when a botched mission in Mexico results in the death of his wife. He is sent to a mental asylum, after which he eventually returns to work. But, once again, he begins to doubt his sanity when he receives a bizarre death threat written in Hebrew. Not knowing which of his colleagues wants to kill him, Hannan teams up with pretty young college student Ellie Fabian to attempt to unravel the mystery.
Similar titles
Reviews
Why watch "Last Embrace" if everything in it is so obviously copied from Hitchcock? Why not watch a good Hitchcock classic instead? Well, for those who just long to see a more modern movie, "Last Embrace" might be a good compromis. Some folks just cant stand to watch the old movies anymore, because they look old and dont connect to the modern world anymore. The story and the acting in itself is rather good and full of great suspense. The movie is about a man who fears for his life. Somebody is out trying to kill him, but he doesnt know wny. He tries to decipher a mysterious letter that is sent to him, written in an unknown language, in the hope to find out who is trying to kill him.Sometimes the acting by the supporting actors is somewhat overdramatic, deliberatedly done to again copy the original Hitchcock style in which characters often performed with large gestures. Nowadays that is unheard of and it would look a bit silly, but it was one of those Hitchcock characteristics that was (badly) copied into "Last Embrace" as well.As a soundtrack fan I must admit that I disliked the use of a fake old soundtrack score (in MONO). The score in itself was beautiful, but it didnt blend well with this modern version of a hitchcock story. I dont mind remakes of good movies, but at least make them in a modern way. Now the deliberatedly old sounding, music score constantly clashes with the modern settings. But most people probably wont mind this at all, this is just a personal irritant of mine, because I like music so much in movies... To conclude: if you never have seen a Hitchcock movie and even if you dont know Roy Scheider either, "Last Embrace" is still a good suspense thriller. It has stood the test of time nicely. It could have been better, but I have watched it several times over the years and I still get thrilled by it.
Jonathan Demme is such a character-oriented director that, to see him pulling a Brian De Palma (which is to say, aping Hitchcock), it's predictably distressing when he fails to work up much suspense within this mystery. Working from David Shaber's mediocre adaptation of Murray Teigh Bloom's novel "The 13th Man", Demme attempts to strike a chord somewhere between Alan J. Pakula's paranoia dramas and Hitchcock's dangling-participle thrillers. Roy Scheider stars as a retired secret agent mourning the murder of his wife, now busy dodging the bad guys who are out to kill him. Takes off right away, but the script is full of flimsy threads and any early excitement quickly dies out. There's a visually impressive climax at Niagra Falls, but Demme gets next-to-nothing out of his cast, and even less out of this tepid story. ** from ****
I wish it were "Last Dumb Thriller". But thrillers are like that. They are like children: numerous, illogical, and often annoying. They want so desperately to be taken seriously but what is there to take seriously about a child's behaviour or a thriller's plot? Having seen this particular child - I mean... thriller - I understand why reviewers refer to it as "a hitchcockian thriller"; they might as well have called it "idiotic" for that's what "hitchcockian" means in the movie dictionary (look it up, if you don't believe me). Even the soundtrack is old-school Hollywood which is a mistake: it doesn't fit a late 70s film and makes it look phony. Besides, how dare they steal De Palma's idea of stealing from Hitchcock?! The story is absurd. Scheider's wife is killed, and her killers are never an issue. Instead, first his former employers follow him around, and later decide to kill him. Why do they decide to kill him? No explanation. Perhaps because the FBI is a dark, dark organization ("X-Files") which is very trigger-happy about knocking off its former employees for pension-funds reasons. Or perhaps because it's fashionable to want to kill Scheider in this movie; everyone seems to be after him. And while the poor unsuspecting viewer is trying to figure out the mystery by logically assuming that there is a major conspiracy, in reality the killer is... Janet Margolin! Yes, the woman occupying Scheider's living quarters; the one that briefly hinted she was "depraved". Why does she go after Scheider at precisely a time when his wife was murdered and he is feeling paranoid - and followed by his own ex-employers - and not a few years earlier or few years after the wife's murder? A pure hitchcockian (look it up again in the dictionary, in case you forgot what it means) coincidence. And how about that brilliant motive of hers...! Her grandmother was forced into prostitution when she was a fresh-off-the-boat 15 year-old virgin in NY, and then syphilisized by a bunch of horny Jewish men, one of whom - tah-dah! - is Scheider's grandfather. As a result, Margolin has been playing a hooker in her spare time (among other things) in order to kill off all the descendants of the men who so cruelly syphilisized her once-virginal grandmother. How hitchcockian (look it up) is that? The finale then shamelessly rips off the Mount Rushmore scene from "North By Northwest", except that the love-interest is a killer and she doesn't get saved.The movie also offers some dubious/off-kilter dialog and some not-so great acting. Check out the silly and obvious way in which Napier follows Scheider at the cemetery. Let's also not forget the moronic plot-device of Napier reaching for his jacket and holding his hand very suspiciously - but it wasn't a gun! How brilliant! Napier in the tower: now, there's another string of illogical behavioural patterns. J. Demme was, is, and always will be a director without style, without flair, and the man who directed "Philadelphia". Let's give him another Oscar!
A very decent effort from director Jonathan Demme before he went on to better things,LAST EMBRACE is inevitably compared to the works of Alfred Hitchcock,with many scenes derivative from many of the master's most famous works(VERTIGO,THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH,STRANGERS ON A TRAIN,etc.),but this is actually an effective suspenser in it's own right,with an intriguing plot,good performances and an exciting finale.Roy Scheider plays a Secret Agent just released from care after suffering a breakdown after his wife was killed in a shootout in a restaurant.After finding a woman(Janet Margolin)who has moved into his flat,he begins to suspect someone is trying to kill him after sinister messages in Amharic keep turning up.The film would've been more superior with more humour and better pacing,but nevertheless this isn't at all a bad Hitch imitation,with the bird imagery(a motif Hitchcock used frequently in his films)and a fine musical score by Miklos Rozsa(who had himself worked with Hitchcock on SPELLBOUND)adding to the atmosphere.The performances are fine,especially Ms Margolin,an undervalued and lovely actress who never quite made it to the top,making her character quite pitiable despite her actions.Her early death at the age of 50 in 1993 was indeed a sad loss for a film performer who deserved better.LAST EMBRACE was made shortly before Hitchcock's death in 1980;one wonders did he ever see this film? If so,I think he would have quite enjoyed the homage on view,not great,but fairly respectful and entertaining.
