Wed 24 May 2017
Movie Review: THE INTERNECINE PROJECT (1974).
Posted by Steve under Crime Films , Reviews[16] Comments
THE INTERNECINE PROJECT. Allied Artists, 1974. James Coburn, Lee Grant, Harry Andrews, Ian Hendry, Michael Jayston , Christiane Krüger, Keenan Wynn. Screenplay by Barry Levinson & Jonathan Lynn, based on the novel Internecine by Mort W. Elkind. Director: Ken Hughes.
The dictionary definition of the word “internecine” is “mutually destructive,” and as a description of what this movie is all about, it’s as an appropriate a word as I can think of. Based on the short amount of time I spent watching an interview with screenwriter Jonathan Lynn provided on the DVD of the film, the word is pronounced something like “in TERN neh seen,” and if you let it, it’s a word that will get stuck in your head all day long without being able to find a way to get out.
Also, before going any further, I’d like to mention that the novel the movie is supposedly based on, the one by Mort Elkind that’s stated in the credits, it doesn’t seem to exist. One of those anomalies of the film-making world that pops up every now and again, I imagine, and I no longer worry about such things.
So, where does the “mutual destruction” come in? It seems that what James Coburn, a high profile (and highly photogenic) professor of economics, wants more than anything else, is an appointment to a high government position. Rather than go through an embarrassing set of revelations in any confirmation hearings, he decides to clean up his past. That is to say, four most inconvenient former associates, unknown to each other, in some previous undesirable activities.
How? By setting each one a final task, that of killing off another one of the four. By an overdose of insulin, by death in a shower (someone must have seen Psycho), by a high tech electronic frequency transmitter, and last but not least, a stout clunk on the head, simple but always effective.
The timing of these four simultaneous assassinations is crucial, and so the movie plays out like a well-planned “heist” film, one in which if one step goes awry, the whole affair may fall apart quickly and immediately.
Twists and turns are expected, therefore, but alas, even though James Coburn’s character spends a lot of time pacing as he waits for the phone to ring at appropriate intervals from each of the participants he has sent into motion, there is only one twist that really counts, and you’ll have to wait to the ending for that.
The photography is very well done, and Lee Grant, who plays a journalist as well as a former romantic interest, is as beautiful as ever. Every once in a while there also seems to be a point at which she is important to the plot, but sadly enough, that point never quite comes. According to what I read on IMDb, a number of people have liked this film, but if you were to ask me, I’d have to tell you I found it a misfire, more often than not.
May 24th, 2017 at 3:51 pm
Never, never choose an obscure, unprounceable title for your film. Something the poster vainly tries to define.
May 24th, 2017 at 6:16 pm
The only Ken Hughes film I’ve seen is the thriller “The House Across the Lake” (1954). The characters and actors are sort-of-interesting, and the upscale events have a pleasant escapist value. But the film is low key and meandering, and hard to recommend.
My impression: Ken Hughes has very little reputation of any sort among film historians. Little that he did ever attracted much interest or impressed anyone. No one likes him, or hates him.
The word “internecine” is mainly used today by political journalists, to describe internal fights among a political party or organization: “internecine warfare has broken out in the Party over the new bill.” I’ve never seen it in any other context, such as a crime thriller.
May 24th, 2017 at 10:11 pm
I can recommend Hughes’ THE SMALL WORLD OF SAMMY LEE (1964). Tony Newley is the proprietor of a seedy Soho strip club trying to keep a step ahead of the bookies to whom he owes serious money. (The IMdB rating is 7.1).
I’d say I was surprised you’ve never seen CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG but I’ve never seen it either. In the 1960s version of CASINO ROYALE, I don’t recall which section was Hughes’, but that movie is one of guilty pleasures.
May 25th, 2017 at 6:10 am
Lynn was an actor turned writer and director, whose high point on television was as co-creator of YES, MINISTER and YES, PRIME MINISTER. His best movie as director was undoubtedly MY COUSIN VINNY, though NUNS ON THE RUN also had its amusing bits.
May 25th, 2017 at 7:49 am
I also liked Lynn’s “Trial and Error”, although admittedly it is not as side-splitting as “My Cousin Vinny”.
May 25th, 2017 at 8:11 am
James Coburn was a major movie star. Yet looking over his credits, he only appeared in two films I like: “Ride Lonesome” (Budd Boetticher) and “What Did You Do in the War, Daddy?” (Blake Edwards). Both by auteur directors.
Coburn is someone whose appeal I just don’t get. His appearances in old TV Westerns tend to be annoying, IMHO. Al Pacino, Jack Nicholson, Christian Slater are other much lauded stars whose popularity bewilders me.
May 25th, 2017 at 10:49 am
EVERY HIT IS A FLUKE.
In 1966, James Coburn was a character actor, mainly on TV, and nearly always playing heavies.
Our Man Flint was not a high-priority movie for 20th Century Fox that year; when the producers cast Coburn as the lead, it raised a lot of eyebrows in Hollywood – a TV villain in the lead of an action movie? Throwaway at best.
That Flint became a box-office smash took everyone by surprise, Fox most of all.
That everybody suddenly wanted Coburn as a Leading Man – well, that whole period was All Bets Are Off, wasn’t it?
Jim Coburn was lucky – since he’d already been Character Guy, he could go back to it once Star Guy wore off; aging worked in his favor.
A lot of other guys from the same era weren’t as lucky.
May 25th, 2017 at 2:16 pm
“EVERY HIT IS A FLUKE.”
I like that, and am going to have to think about it for a while. I guess it may depend on your definition of what a “hit” is.
May 25th, 2017 at 3:51 pm
I always liked Coburn. I liked him in THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN and CHARADE and THE GREAT ESCAPE.
May 25th, 2017 at 4:13 pm
Totally agree, Jeff. I also thought Coburn was spectacularly good as James Garner’s best friend who nearly gets Garner killed in THE AMERICANIZATION OF EMILY. He effortlessly segues from mostly comic relief to not-funny scary intensity,
May 25th, 2017 at 4:58 pm
He’s merely OK in INTERNECINE, in which he’s in all out villain mode. A sophisticated villain, to be sure, but what it means is that he doesn’t have to display a wide range of acting ability. I’d like to see EMILY again. It’s been far too long.
May 25th, 2017 at 5:00 pm
Hard Contract has a Coburn performance in a less than perfect picture that resonates.
May 25th, 2017 at 5:16 pm
A movie that I never heard of before, but now that I have, I’d like to see it.
It’s not available on commercial DVD, but it has been shown on the Fox Movie Channel, from which someone has uploaded it to YouTube:
May 25th, 2017 at 11:06 pm
Perfect cast, solid credits equal blah. It happens.
Coburn used right as in HARD CONTACT, HARRY IN YOUR POCKET, THE PRESIDENT’S ANALYST is great, but he needs something to work with, and doesn’t get it here.
May 26th, 2017 at 8:02 am
Coburn is one of my favorite actors to watch even when he is awful. It took awhile before he learned to use his body properly – its so lanky and all legs and arms.
I can’t think of many actors who have done more good movies no one has heard of. His range from comedy to over the top dramas is impressive and gives his fans a wide range to chose a favorite. For example I didn’t like him in the AMERICANIZATION OF EMILY (which was the point of the character). Yet I am willing to bet there is haters here for my favorite Coburn films LAST OF THE MOBILE HOT SHOTS and BALTIMORE BULLET. He was brilliant as a likable villain in the TV series KLONDIKE.
Even when he was just starting in TV you noticed him. He is one of the few actors who I will watch a film or TV show just for him.
May 26th, 2017 at 3:00 pm
Someone whose knowledge I trust has told me that the American way of pronouncing internecine is “In ter NESS een.”