Jarrett (TV Movie 1973) Poster

(1973 TV Movie)

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
middle-aged star dooms picture?
alvink17 September 2005
Warning: Spoilers
it was suggested in the trivia section that this pilot movie was doomed to failure because of the casting of a middle-aged Glen Ford, rather than a younger and sexier stud-muffin. well, i don't think sooooo.

possible spoiler: there is only one plot device used- that of the ole' switch-the-real-art-work-with-a-clever-forgery routine. normally, i wouldn't consider the last statement a possible spoiler, but since there was only one device used, maybe it qualified.

the final big mass fight scene was as ridiculous as the fights in the old batman series- pushing, shoving, pulling back before the punch lands, but the worst (or the best i suppose) is when the claw-handed guy (yes, there is even one of these) takes a swing at mr. ford, who blocks it with, yes johnny, it's an electric toaster!! as claw-man spazzes on the ground, ford starts to run off, but wheels back and says, 'i hope you like your claw crispy'.

no, it wasn't the leading man's age that doomed this turkey.

anthony quayle was kind of fun, though.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Art, boxing and detecting quite a parlay
bkoganbing8 February 2021
I'm in agreement with the other reviewers. For this to have worked it would have to have been a Nero Wolfe type situation with Glenn Ford doing the cerebral detecting and a young Archie Goodwin type sidekick to do the action when required. Art, detecting, and boxing is quite a triple parlay of skills.

Though the late welter and middleweight champion Mickey Walker became a noted painter in real life. Some real life basis for Ford's title character Jarrett.

Looking like they were having a ball with their characters as the competing villains were Anthony Quayle and Forrest Ticker.

Ford is a detective specializing in art and antiquities and he and the others are interested in a lost book of the bible called the Adam and Eve chronicles. It purports to tell what happens to the whole crowd after they got terminated from the Garden Of Eden. It's quite a read this book and Tucker wants to build a church around all the licentious behavior it condones.

Anthony Quayle is a James Bond type villain who is a collector of all kinds of things. The final fight scene looks like something from The Avengers. Quayle and Tucker are just chewing up the table legs and having a ball.

Jarrett is a fun movie despite its flaws in a goofy sort of way. But it wasn't TV show.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
I can see why this one was a failure.
planktonrules24 October 2020
Warning: Spoilers
In the 1970s, it was not uncommon for networks to show a pilot movie for a potential TV series in order to either gauge the public's reaction to it or to essentially recoup some of the development cost for a rejected pilot. Either way, "Jarrett" is one I can easily see why it was never approved as a television series.

Sam Jarrett (Glenn Ford) is a private eye who is looking into some ancient scrolls that MIGHT predate the Dead Sea Scrolls. The investigation leads to a Brit who is up to no good (Anthony Quayle) and a ridiculous traveling preacher (Forrest Tucker) with his utterly ridiculous show...complete with a mostly naked dancing girl (Yvonne Craig)! If you think this really doesn't make any sense, you are right....as well as the 'preacher' mispronouncing words from the Bible or a private eye who just looks too old to be catnip for the various women in the movie.

According to IMDB, the leading man was supposed to be younger and more believable. This doesn't surprise me as often good scripts can be ruined by insane casting. But in this case you not only have poor casting but a second-rate script with parts that simply don't make sense...such as the things mentioned above AND the use of a cobra to kill Jarrett (it's a VERY unreliable and silly method). A poor film...even on its own and a waste of a good leading man.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed