The Contract (1999) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski) and Tuna
Two thumbs down.

Scoop's notes in white.

Do you remember, "Wink, I can name that song in four notes". 

Well, "Readers, I can review this movie in two words" :  Jeff Fahey.
Camilla Overbye Roos continues to gain a stronger foothold in the B world, and "Titanic" now seems light years away.

This time she is the victim of a really bad day in which she was angry at everyone, got drunk, and vented her anger to a stranger in a bar. Oh, she was mad at her boss, her friend, the clerk at Safeway, just about everyone. On a nearby cocktail napkin, the mysterious stranger wrote down all the people she was pissed off at. Then he asked her to sign it. 

NUDITY REPORT
Camilla Overbye Roos was naked in the shower (seen through the glass), then she was naked in a very spirited and reasonably explicit sex scene. There are no pubes on display, but the rest of the goodies can be seen from time to time.
She could not see his face clearly.

Within several hours, all those people started kicking the bucket. Oops. The killer considered her cocktail napkin to be a license to kill. Interestingly, this is the same way James Bond started. Some lady in a bar was pissed off at Blofeld and Goldfinger, and you know the rest.

DVD info from Amazon

  • no widescreen

  • no features

  • not even a menu!
Both incidents are based upon an actual point of international law, which makes cocktail napkins acceptable binding contracts in the World Court, where they even supersede the evidentiary value of a deathbed confession. Plain napkins are binding contracts, but napkins with graphics and cutesy bar names like "Hanker's Aweigh" also provide the possessor with full binding legal authority for otherwise illegal acts.

There was a surprise ending. The killer here would have gotten off scot-free, but he accidentally used a plain napkin instead of the ones imprinted by the bar.

Oops.

TUNA's THOUGHTS
The Contract (1999) came and went pretty much without notice. The two reviews linked at IMDB aren't even there. One of the two who commented at IMDB liked the titles, but had little use for any other aspect of the film. That was the positive review of the two. IMDb readers have it at 4.5 of 10 based on 58 votes. That is probably all you really need to know about this one, but for the ones who are still reading ...

Anna (Roos) has not had a good week. Her creep of a magazine owner boss grabbed her ass, the grocery clerk was a total jerk, her best friend made light of her problems with the boss, her husband was much more interested in the equipment on the waitress than in her story, and they came home to find their baby sitter tangled up with her boy friend on the sofa. Anna retreats to the local bar, which, we learn, has been a too frequent occurrence, and pours her heart out to a kind stranger. He takes notes, has her sign them, then agrees to fix everything. Next day, her boss is murdered. Anna has no inkling why, and even the death of the store clerk isn't enough to send her to the police. When the babysitter is killed, she catches on, and the list is now down to people she actually likes.

Time to stop here in case some misguided few of you elect to see this, but I have never seen a more obvious red herring start to finish, a less likely killer, or a lamer final twist. And to top it off, they make no attempt at all to explain. Roos is worth seeing naked, but maybe watching this film is too high a price to pay. And as to the snazzy and touted MTV-style titles, I didn't care for them.

The Critics Vote

  • no major reviews online

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 4.5
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. G means that it is a Jeff Fahey movie.

Based on this description, this film is a G.

Return to the Movie House home page