Customer Reviews

Save the Tiger [VHS]

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Interesting story with great performances by both Jack Lemmon and Jack Gilford. Lemmon won the Best Actor Oscar for his intense portrayal of a businessman and WW2 vet contemplating insurance fraud and arson, who is having a nervous breakdown while longing for the clarity of the past. Forget the critics who gave this a lukewarm reception, this is an excellent movie with memorable performances.

Harry Stoner (Jack Lemmon) isn't having a good day. He's burned out on his seemingly successful life. He's in hock up to his eyeballs and is an example of Paul Simon's observation about the "quiet desperation" of American lives. Lemmon picked up a deserved Academy Award for his portrayal of Harry with its echoes of other Lemmon characters throughout the latter part of his life.

"Save the Tiger" looks particularly good. Paramount has done a nice, crisp and clean transfer here. While the film occasionally looks soft with noticeably grain in some sequences that's the result of age, the film stock and lighting conditions for the film. The 2.0 audio has nice clarity and presence.

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere when this was released (or on the box that I received with my preview copy) but there is a great commentary track from producer/writer Steve Shagan and director John G. Avildsen ("Rocky"). Both recall the difficulties they had in making the film and Lemmon's consummate professionalism in shooting this film. It's a pity that Lemmon wasn't tapped to provide a commentary while he was alive (and it's a pity that this wasn't issued earlier to take advantage of that) but having Shagan and Avildsen (much less any commentary track) relate their stories about the making of the movie is a delight.

An essential drama with a great performance by Jack Lemmon, "Save the Tiger" looks exceptionally good in this transfer from Paramount. Featuring a nice commentary track by Shagan and Lemmon, "Save the Tiger" is an enjoyable movie and fans will savor having this classic on DVD.

Even though Save The Tiger May not of been a commercial sucsess
it still shows how great filmaking was once made. Basically
the story is about a day & a half in the Life of Harry Stoner
owner of a garment manufactuing company who's going through a
midlife crisis is in debt considers arson to his warehouse as a way of his troubles and manages to commit adultry. Jack Lemmon's
amazing performce which earned him a well deserved oscar plays
with sheer brillance and belivablity that he is pratcally in every scene of this film. One great scene was when Harry litterly
breaks emotinally thinking back to his army days seeing his friends wounded & killed when giving a speech at a fashion show.
No Matter how dated or strange this film may be today it's still
a great film it's defintely not a film for visual & special
effcts nuts but a film with certain amount of intelligence
and should be held as a clasic film.

Few people remember that this was the movie that Jack Lemmon won his Oscar in but it was well deserved. Dated in that obviously reeks of the late 60's and early 70's but a story line that would hold up today. Any business owner with a high rent, high life style and lots of people depending on you to produce understand the pressure that Harry Stoner was going through.

Great Actor in an interesting part. Movie gets low ratings by some critics as they think it is impossible for a business owner to be a sympatethic figure. Lemmon makes the part work and is an incredibly performance in a movie that is a true insight into how the world can get ugly at times.

Don McNay...

Jack Lemmon gives a performance that more than justifies his Oscar. Although difficult at first to sympathize with a Lincoln Continental-driving, Beverly Hills CEO, (this was 1973, and pre-Lexus), one cannot help but finding a purity and honesty in Lemmon's performance. Although far from a commercial hit (Lemmon agreed to do the film for scale wages),it's success lies as being a triumph in acting, interpretation, and honesty.

The aspect ratio is fake.
The top and bottom of the regular full screen version has been cropped out of the picture to give the illusion your getting a widescreen - what your getting is less picture!
The studios should label the DVD's as they did when they cropped VHS video picture " this film has been modified to fit you tv screen" as in modified to fit a 16x9 tv in this case.
You have already lost one third of the picture when it was modified to full screen, now you loose an additional one third to one fourth of the movies image!
The reason leterbox and widescreen has a demand, is that the audience or consumer wants to view the Movie as it was filmed and framed by the filmaker, and not loose out on portions of the movie that the director intended.
In other words the idea to release in widescreen was for the intention of showing MORE not LESS of the movies image.
The studios believe they can get away with this, since the average buyer does not have a full screen video version to compare with, or the consumer is just unaware.
I compared this DVD to a full screen VHS version, and in many cases where some DVD's come with both Full & Wide Screen on a flip disc, compare them before watching, many of the widesreen sides are just chopped versions of the full screen.
The picture quality is great on this and most DVD's, it is unfortunate though that it has to be a conciliation for cropped picture.

Jack Lemmon won the Oscar in 1973 for his performance in this movie. Jack Gilford was nominated for best supporting actor and it was also nominated for writing. The performances are very good. Theyer David makes a great impression as the professional arsonist Charlie Robbins, as well. The women in the movie are all more or less victims and are there to provide to the sense of moral decay in the movie. Not necessarily because they themselves are corrupt, but because they are consumed by the appetites of the men in the movie.

It is hard to capture the sense of America in 1973. Vietnam was in its death throes, the sexual revolution and drug culture were in full swing (hence all the casual promiscuity in the film), the schismatic rage over the Equal Rights Amendment was underway, Roe v. Wade was pushed on the country, Watergate was underway as were other corruption charges in the Nixon administration, and women were beginning to enter the workforce in large numbers.

Lemmon plays Harry Stoner. He is clearly suffering from what we would now call Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, but that wasn't really known at the time of this movie or was just beginning to be discussed because of Vietnam. Stoner is a World War II vet. He is unsuccessful in developing personal relationships because he deals with his pain by focusing on numbing it through work, through gratification of his sexual appetites, and fleeing intimacy. He dwells on his war experiences and is on the verge of a crackup.

His business is also about ready to fail because of bad finances. How much of his stress is caused by the business pressures or whether the business situation is caused by his narcissistic way of living is hard to distinguish. However, his partner, Phil Greene (the wonderful Jack Gilford) is caught up in this mess. They are coming out with a great new line they both believe in, but the bank won't give them any more money. So, do they get it from mob or do they burn some insured building down and use the proceeds from the policy. Phil doesn't want to commit any crimes and is the voice of the old morality in the movie. Still, he doesn't fight Stoner too hard.

The whole movie takes place in less than two days and in the end doesn't resolve the issues it raises. We get the problems raised, given a tour of what is eating at Stoner, and left to ourselves to decide what it all means and guess as to how it comes out. This was more fashionable in those days than today. It was somehow supposed to be more sophisticated. Maybe it just avoiding writing a satisfying ending that would be difficult to pull off was the real point.

I am now the age of Stoner's character and find him to be selfish, self-destructive, and do not believe that his war experiences justify what he setting about doing. Life has a way of pounding pretty much everyone who gets to their fifties. Most do not do the things he resorts to and the behavior he justifies. He sees others more as a means than ends in themselves, and there is the beginning of his moral dilemma.

Lemmon does a fine job with the character as do the other actors, but it is 70s fashionably bleak. So, it is up to you whether you think it will wear well for you.

Director John Avildsen created a bleak, grey feeling for his movie set (as well as made) in the early 70s, a time of transition in this country in many ways. The 70s was really the last decade where we were still fully recognized as more of an industrial economy, before the 80s and years to follow changed that in many ways. The textile industry was not exempt from people continuing to go through their normal factory job routines, but with less than optomistic visions of the future. I vividly rememberr men just like Jack Lemon's Harry Stoner character in "Save The Tiger"- guys who looked like they were going through the routines of their jobs though the future looks bleak, and not really knowing where else to turn to. Lemon's fifty-ish character is an anachronism, lost in current times, not understanding why contemporaries can't relate to things he talks about, and still haunted by the past, particularly his war involvement and all the war implied. A feeling of despair permeates through this movie, and the combination of Lemon's performance and Avildsen's pacing and location selections, even today, still captures the feel of many cities in the early 70s that seemed hollow though one time fully viable. And the early 70s era of Watergate and Viet Nam that left many with a "where do we turn to" mentality didn't escape Lemon and his partner (Jack Gilford), particularly Lemon who can't escape a mindset of how much better things were in the past. This isn't a fast paced movie by any stretch. It's not the type of movie that will garner a young audience today, especially with subject matter that would test anyone's cultural literacy. And frankly, those who lived in the 70s may actually appreciate the mood created by Avildsen more than those who did not. Which isn't to say this movie can't be appreciated otherwise. In fact, you'd miss Jack Lemon's last great performance if you don't see this movie. I saw this movie pretty young- Jr. High I believe- and though I didn't fully understand it, I definitely felt and appreciated it. Years later I found it even more compelling given a better understanding of names and places Lemon refers to when flashing back to the past. With recent DVD release and more viewings on the premium movie channels, I liked it even more when seeing it again. A very well kept secret of the 70s.

Not a movie for the average person seeking visual trills. This is a cult clasic, with real life situations. Drama, tension, stress in the business worls all are superbly portrayed by stller performances by Lemmon and Guilford. Jack's best role since Days of Wine and Roses. His dramic acting skills are great, and once this movie is seen, you will either say, forget it, or think about it for the rest of your days. It exemplifies small businesses run on a shoestring. What is it he wanted? Just another season. The movie contains real life characters and situations. It will reach your inner most feelings. Critics poo poo ed this movie, but do not let it stop you from at least seeing it once. If I am right you willnever look at a dress in the same way. Enjoy the deep drama.

Harry Stoner snaps those brutal words about a client of his, a man who's just suffered a heart attack during a session with a high-priced call girl ... but Harry's talking about himself, as well. This brilliant, searing film follows Harry through 36 hours of an unrelenting descent into his personal Hell, where he's brought face to face with the emptiness of his life & the fading ghosts of his youthful dreams.

If Henry Fonda was the ideal American Everyman, Jack Lemmon was surely the harried American Everyman. He fully deserved his Oscar for this role, a painfully naked performance of a man who believed in the American dream, who did his best to make it work, yet finds that he now has nothing real to grasp. It's an unsparing portrait of the middle-aged, middle class man at the end of his tether. There's no attempt to soften his ravaged soul ... and yet it's a sympathetic portrait, understanding if not entirely forgiving.

In a quietly powerful scene, Harry finally gets around to talking with his cutter Meyer, an old man who has lived through pogroms, exile, countless losses & disappointments, but who still cherishes his life. When Harry confesses that all he wants is one more season, Meyer asks sadly, "Just survival? Don't you have any dreams?" And we realize with Harry that all of his dreams are gone, turned into memories of a simpler, more golden past. He knows that he's lost something precious, and even recognizes his own complicity in that loss. Yet he doesn't know what he can do to save himself now.

Although there's no mention of it on the DVD case, the DVD itself boasts an illuminating commentary track by the director & the writer/producer. This film was clearly a labor of love for all concerned, so much so that they worked without salary to get it made. Their passion for the material shows in every frame. And as the commentary makes clear, the material remains all too relevant today.

The supporting cast is uniformly superb, from Jack Gilford as Harry's partner, to the dangerously gorgeous Lara Parker as the call girl Margo, to Thayer David's professional arsonist, and Laurie Heineman as the rootless but warm hippie girl who spends a few hours with Harry. But in the end, it's Jack Lemmon's show, and he delivers flawlessly. That final image of Harry watching the children play baseball, as Bunny Berigan plays "I Can't Get Started," is haunting & heartrending. Most highly recommended!