The Silent Partner (1979)

Surprisingly incoherent and boring

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Another sleeper that became one of my favorite films. Eliott Gould plays a bank teller who anticipates a robbery. He tricks the actual bank robber and takes the money for himself. Two things happen. Someone else is blamed and the bad guy (Christopher Plummer) is not going to rest until he gets his money. He also is sadistic enough to want Gould's head. What transpires is parry and thrust between Gould and Plummer with the latter being a really big threat. The way this plays out shows how incredible plotting can make a good movie great. This is the way movies should be made. Gould was a kind of icon of this era. The conclusion is so very satisfying, not clichéd or contrived like so many are.

I saw this movie when it was in the theater originally. I remembered liking it a great deal and had looked for it for a long time. Although I remembered it as being excellent, I was 17 when I saw it originally, and probably drunk. I wasn't sure I would like it nearly as well when I was 47 and sober.I was very pleasantly surprised. Eliot Gould doesn't work for me all that often. Seems like he is unbelievable/miscast in most roles. This role is perfect for him and he does a great job. The only thing wrong with Christopher Plumber (Plummer?? I can't spell) is that he hasn't really gotten that many good roles. He has a great role in "The Silent Partner" and he swings hard and connects fully. He is completely believable and his eerie character is highly memorable.I can't think of many movies that I consider true "sleepers"-- movies that are vastly better than you would think given the lack of public attention or critical acclaim. "The Silent Partner" is on that short list. In a way it kind of reminds me of two other movies on my very short "sleeper" list-- "Blood Simple" and "Miller's Crossing." Tough to call any Coen Bros. movie a sleeper, but those got way, way less acclaim than they deserved. The Silent Partner has a similar kind of eerie intrigue to those movies. It is more similar to Blood Simple than Miller's Crossing. The plot and characters in Miller's Crossing were pushed to the point of hyperbole--and that line was kept the whole movie, but never crossed to the point of eroding the suspense. But, The Silent Partner displays many of the same virtues Blood Simple and Miller's Crossing have. It cracks into my top 50 movies. If you watch it on DVD, treat it like you are at the theater-- dark room, no interruptions, etc. It would be a waste not to.

There are some interesting ideas and unusual plot elements strewn about but overall this movie is a leaden-paced mess.Gould sleepwalks, York seems lost and both their character's actions make no sense, Celine Lomez is adequate but her character as well does inexplicable things.The only solid performance was Christopher Plummer, what his character does makes some sense and is consistent.During the first 45 minutes (up to the point Gould calls his own apartment and steals the truck) almost nothing of sustained interest takes place and the intriguing parts are belabored long after the viewer is well aware of what is going to happen. The film seems to be trying to flesh out the characters but Gould and York are just odd, not interesting and on top of that the performances are bad. The Celine Lomez character is also introduced in a horribly obvious manner.The film also fails to maintain a consistent tone (Farce? Caper? Thriller? Escapism? Romance? Character?... etc), there are gigantic plot holes and towards the end a slasher-film style murder obliterates the small pleasures. How is the viewer supposed to be entertained with character details and plot twists after a sympathetic persons head is sawed off on jagged glass and then dumped in a cement pit? WTF?? I am supposed to care who gets some money after that?? I sought this film out due to Roger Ebert's glowing review and all I can think is that he was drunk (evidence being how many obvious details he gets embarrassingly wrong).All that having been said though the film IS unusual and I would understand someone treasuring it for that alone after so many years of cookie-cutter thrillers.

Anticipating a robbery, a clever bank teller manages to secretly pocket most of the loot, enraging the robber. This intricately plotted and suspenseful cat-and-mouse thriller from Canada, ably directed by Duke based on a screenplay by Hansen, is a lot of fun to watch. Gould gives a finely tuned performance, nicely balancing his character's vulnerability and bravado. York is lovely as Gould's co-worker. Plummer makes a scary villain - very creepy and sadistic. Lomez is effective as a mysterious woman who pops into Gould's life. The only complaint is a couple of gratuitously violent scenes where Plummer unleashes his anger on poor victims.