Product Details

• Actors: Tiffany Bolling, Edward Faulkner, Ann Jillian, Peter Mamakos, Paul E. Richards
• Directors: Bernard Glasser
• Format: Color, DVD, NTSC
• Language: English
• Region: All Regions
• Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
• Number of discs: 1
• Rated: NR (Not Rated)
• Studio: Televista
• DVD Release Date: March 17, 2009
• Run Time: 87 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B001MEJY3C
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #214,657 in Movies & TV (See Top 100 in Movies & TV)

Editorial Reviews

TRIANGLE - DVD Movie

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Rare 70s Treat, October 11, 2009

By 

Trevor William Douglas (Gorokan, NSW Australia) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Triangle (DVD)

For many years this title has eluded us. With a great cast including Tiffany Bolling, Dana Wynter, Ray Danton and Paul Richards, it is one worth adding to your collection Nice full screen print, not remastered, but quite watchable.

2 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Been waiting since the mid 1980s to see this film again., January 27, 2009

By 

David (Seattle,WA) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Triangle (DVD)

I saw this in April 1978 and never saw this movie again so I can't wait to order it. The movie was only 7 years old when I saw it and there was a difference between the hard rock & bad girls of the early 1970s and the bad girls of Donna Summer & the late 1970s yet there were still lots of similiarities. Tiffany is a Lita Ford-type bad girl in this film.

I thought this might released around 1986-1988 when lots of 1970s movies were put onto VHS tape but it never happened so I am really glad I will finally get to see this movie again.

This was one of those "bad girl" movies before they were even called that.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have now bought and seen this movie again as of March 2009 but I guess my preceptions of the movie were off some because the scene at the wine party did not have hard electric rock music in that scene and it was at a winery not a barn. I could have sworn Sharon once called her teacher at a pay phone and told him to go to h*ll but I did not see this on the DVD. She did, however say that to her uncle(who managed her deceased parents trust fund) on the phone at the all-girls school in the dean's office.

Other things I did not remember or notice the first time I saw this film were both positives and negatives such as the easy-going, gay professor who tries to get Todd Pearson to give up his interest in Sharon and move to NYC with him. Sharon seemed like a cool, tough, bad girl 30 years ago(and even now like when she smiles after turning onto a dirt road to get a cop off her tail while speeding) but now she seems to be slightly disordered at times and her teacher seemed really passive and sullen back hen but now in 2009 he seems predator-like and ethics-deprived for taking advantage of a confused, young woman to have involved himself with Sharon to the point of having a sexual relationship with her.

Sharon is promiscious with young men her age and has control over them and these are the types of men she should have stayed with. Sharon seems like a victim now in 2009 not a wound-up bad girl telling people off and running wild and having fun like she seemed 31 years ago when I first saw this film.

I never remembered anyone being gay in this film but Carlo is open about his sexuality and on the box of this film it says teacher Todd Pearson is bisexual but from watching the film itself I can't tell if Pearson is bisexual or is close friends with Carlo simply because he is the type who prides himself on being a certain type of enlightened person.

Todd leaves his girlfriend in the beginning of the film before going to teach at the girls school. If there is a sexual affair between Carlo and Todd as the dvd cover implies it is not shown in the movie and you have to consider this is an early 1970s film. Todd tells Sharon she figuratively makes a lot of noise and waves her arms and doesn't even know why and he is right, but that is typical for a rebellious teen who is having fun.

I was turned off by the scene of the unmarried school psychiatrist and female dean(actress Dana Wynter) being in bed together(they're too old for this) but their conversation about keeping the private school girls away from sex while they are young and not yet "desperate" were 100% correct but I am assuming the dean meant that the girls would not reach a "privileged state of amorality" until they waited long enough to know they were running out of time for sex/love opportunities and not because their strong sex drives made them "desperate."

It was also turn off to see Sharon become so distraught that she became involved in a car crash (intentional?) when she thought her teacher looked down on her for having sex with Carlo, or so he claimed.

Sharon McClure does an excellent depiction of a rebellious girl in the beginning of the film when she walks into class late and says "Not really!"

Some will say the issues in this movie are dated but I disagree because the issues in this movie were all sexual issues going as far as bisexuality and homosexuality which are always controversial subjects while the more widely covered, run-of-the-mill (endlessly covered actually) issues of the early 1970s (e.g. religion, race, poverty) are thankfully left out of this film about a wealthy rebellious girl whose parents were killed (somehow?) which would have left any teen traumatized.

I've read this movie was made in 1970 and also in 1971 but within the film hearts of love are carved into a tree with one heart having a '72 near the top of it, so the film's makers wanted this out by early 1972.
At the wine party the wine barrels are labeled "69 gals" for 69 gallons of wine. I don't know if this was because the writers wanted reminders of sexuality everywhere or if this was to make a young adult audience laugh back in 1971.

Sexual issues everywhere in this film but the reason it stands apart from other movies with endless sexual themes is that the film isn't raunchy by having endless and meaningless sex scenes but there are however, good philosophies and interesting characters to accompany this film. Also, being that it was made in the early 1970s, there isn't endless screaming and yelling to try to make an impact on an audience like Hollywood films are notorious for doing since sometime in the 1980s and the characters have actual personalities instead of endless, annoying, weird "quirks" which is about all you get for characters within Hollywood movies for over 20 years now.

They didn't do any technical lightening up of this film or digital enhancements that I know of, but for a film to keep my attention for about 100 minutes made it worth the price. I still wish they put it out over 20 years ago.