Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

JoeKarlosi In 1958 Brooklyn, we follow the Lords (or grammatically incorrect "Lord's", according to their jackets and the main title), a group of leather-wearing, greased-haired, immature, high school tough guys. At the head of the gang is Stanley (Sylvester Stallone), an intimidating thug with a guarded heart of gold, who's in a dilemma when his rough-talking girl Frannie (Maria Smith) announces she's pregnant. Her best friend Annie (Renee Paris) is dating the handsome Chico (Perry King), but Chico only uses her for sex while really setting his eyes on the new girl in school (Susan Blakely). Butchey (Henry Winkler) is the most bright of the Lords, and could make something better of himself if he wanted. Wimpy (Paul Mace) is a short member of the group who hangs out with his friends for the security it gives him.Most of what occurs on screen has no plot, and consists of vignettes with its cast members. Stallone fares best of all, and some good moments include him bullying a rival gang member in a pool hall, and especially the film's best scene near the end that takes place inside a jewelry store, when Frannie and Annie push Sly into buying a $1600 engagement ring against his will. Henry Winker's promising part was, unfortunately, under-written... but he's got one good scene occurring after hours alone in the local candy store hangout, where the shop owner tries to drill some sense into his head about how much more wisely he could be spending his time. Perry King's Chico is the main character, but he's such a jerk in the movie that he's hard for us to invest in.Ultimately, the movie has a good deal of problems and is only average. At best, this is watchable to me every few years as being one of those nostalgic guilty pleasures that I first saw in the theater when I was around 11 (it even featured the now-defunct Sunrise Drive-In, which was not far from where I lived back then). It's a very cheap film that was shot on 16mm and blown up, which accounts for its rough looking quality, and also for some poor sound issues that make it difficult to discern occasional dialogue. It's got a 1970s rock n roll soundtrack of made up '50s tunes of varying quality, some of which drown out moments of talking at times. But it's still worth at least one viewing to see a young Sylvester Stallone (who would later become ROCKY) and Henry Winkler (in a rough draft for his Fonzie character of HAPPY DAYS) getting to shine in a couple of brief moments. ** out of ****

inspectors71 No review here. Just a memory of seeing The Lords of Flatbush, a cheapjack greaser of a nostalgia flick that was designed to cash in on the whole '50s nostalgia craze thirty-odd years ago.I saw it once at the drive-in and once more on ABC a year or two later. In the short time between its theatrical release and television debut, Perry King, Sly Stallone, and Henry Winkler had hit it from moderate to big and I thought my opinion would have improved with the recognition of early work from a talented group of actors. It didn't, and it still hasn't.TLOF is dull and embarrassing, sporting one deep and memorable observation about a character, something to the effect that he weeps when he ejaculates.Them thar's great writin', huh! Skip this greasy mess.

Woodyanders Hothead Stanley (a pre-"Rocky" Sylvestor Stallone, who wrote his own dialogue), smartaleck Butchey (Henry Winkler doing a dry run of his famous Fonzie character on "Happy Days"), amorous Chico (Perry King of "Mandingo" and "Class of 1984") and runtish Wimpy (Paul Mace) are the titular foursome, a scruffy bunch of tough guy teenage greasers knocking around Brooklyn in the late 50's. The main thrust of the amiably rambling and episodic narrative centers on Stanley planning to marry his loving, yet shrewish girlfriend Frannie (cute Maria Smith) and Chico dating sweet upper-class suburbanite Jane (the pretty and winsome Susan Blakely).Directors Stephen F. Verona and Martin Davidson, who co-wrote the bright, colorful and insightful script with Gayle Glecker, meticulously evoke the era with an infectiously sincere wealth of acuity, accuracy and affection, capturing the pent-up bubbling under the surface violence, repressive conservative morals and sense of carefree innocence which defined the period in an admirably frank and unsentimental manner. Moreover, the film works beautifully well as an alternately funny and touching teen rites of passage saga, depicting the awkward transition of adolescence into encroaching adulthood -- maturity, loss of one's virginity, accepting responsibility, getting married, coming to terms with one's station in life -- with a great deal of heart and humanity. The individual vignettes are quite enjoyable; the definite highlights are a clumsy robbery of a car and the uproarious sequence where Stanley buys Frannie a very expensive wedding ring. Moreover, the rather scrappy, but overall accomplished cinematography by Joe Mangine and Edward Lachman, Joe Brooks' bouncy, catchy and tuneful score, and especially the uniformly excellent and engaging performances by a personable cast further add to the picture's sterling quality. Better still, the low-key, unadorned, naturalistic semi-documentary style and nicely observant and unobtrusive straightforward storytelling give the movie a certain irresistibly gritty you-are-there lived-in charm and conviction. Popping up in nifty bits are Dolph Sweet as Frannie's dad, Ray Sharkey as a high school student and Armand Assante as a wedding guest. A real treat.

ewarn-1 The Fifties nostalgia craze started about 1971, and lasted all through the 70s, right into the early eighties, a whole decade of nostalgia devoted to half of a decade one decade previous! I thought it was insane at the time and still do, even though the nostalgic image reduced one of the most interesting decades in American history to irritating clichéd images of leather jackets. It hasn't really ended either, which is just as well, because no sane person could stand nostalgia for the 70s."Lords of Flatbush" might seem like just a cheap cash in on a fad, but it's actually very well written. It features minimalist dialogue and slice of life vignettes with very honest performances by King and Stallone. It looks cheaply produced but to me that added to the attraction, it seems to be done in an almost documentary style. AS such, its not really a film about the "Fifties"---besides the leather jackets and hairstyles, it has little to say about a specific era, but a lot to say about the human condition.This tale of four friends could have been set at any period in history, and the dialogue for once is a true indicator of the mental states of 17 and 18 year olds, there's no breathless philosophizing here. The characters seem to struggle with what they want to say, unable to express their feelings with limited vocabulary and intellect. Watching it is sometimes painful. The best scenes involve Chico's relationship with Jane Bradshaw. (This guy deserves a medal for his taste in females) Chico tries to express his emotions, but hes too young and impatient. He thinks he knows what to say and do, but his words and actions just don't match up.In the end, his efforts at a relationship are too clumsy. I still feel bad for him.I was never a fan of Stallone, but I like his performance here. The main problem with this film is that it's too short. The honest performances make me want to know more about these guys, and it ends abruptly while everything is still going on. Still, taking a look at this movie is worth the time, especially nowadays when finding an honest film made with integrity is very rare. Its kind of---nostalgia for nostalgia! Besides, even if you hate it, you still get to look at Susan Blakely.