I first saw this film when I was fifteen. Again it's cover appealed to me as well as it's story. I bought the video at the end of that year and watched it again and again as if I had an addiction. I can't believe some of the really negative reviews this movies got. People have labelled it "Trash" or given it nothing. But we're all our own critic, it's our right just like democracy. We have an embittered ex Vietnam vet, played with utter brilliance by evangelist turned actor, Marjoe Gortner who really found he's calling. When you see his performance, you'll see why. We see a naked Candy Clark, washing herself down in a stream, and we see stranger Gortner, watching approvingly through a set of reflecting shades, standing from a mountain top high above. In this first forty minutes that succeeds, we see life through the lives of some quite pathetic types, in this small Texas town that almost ceases to exist, we have Gortner who's pushed his van (no help from the police) into the gas station/cafe/motel. This cafe's frontage holds a lot of history and provides a great location setting, that's memorable, where inside there's even more history, with it's black and white checkered floors and old coffee taps. From here till the end of the movie is the real meaty heart of it. Marjoe creates trouble the moment he and his girl, walk through the louver doors, his facetious manner which itself is a little frightening. What starts from here becomes a claustrophobic nightmare of intimidation, where almost the rest of film takes place in the diner. Gortner begins his own sick game of vengeance, especially towards a rich couple, (Hal Linden, and Lee Grant, superb in this) staying in the back motel of this cafe, Grant, a gifted violinist, who becomes the worst victim of humiliation here, when exposed from the waste up. The tension mounts when Linden tries to defy Gortner and gets shot in the arms for his troubles, so he's not going nowhere. Then low and behold we intercut to a church scene of singing townfolk. Why? So now we have a Key Largo sort of situation, the diners now hostages, Gortner making them do some really out there s..t as seen mostly in role playing, a really interesting angle here. Wannabe tough guy, Peter Firth who's name is of the title, is involved greatly in this, where Gortner brings out this boy's real inner and killer self as seen later, where Gortner grandly states that he really is a chicken s..t. Firth delivers an amazing performance, the second best, with a first rate American accent, you'd truly think was ligit. He's aged amazingly as compared to his role in Eqqus only a few years earlier. He so much wants to vacate this town with a dream that comes true at the end, as he becomes the hero of our torrid violent tale. The movie really builds up to an intensity, that's terrifyingly real in it's last twenty minutes, that ends with a classic showdown in these sandhills. The exterior surrounds of this movie are superbly chosen, one pre cafeteria scene with Gortner in his van, head sticking out the sun roof, as his girl blazes it along, playing to a stones track, rules. Gortner is given a lot of awesome and thought provoking dialogue, funny and shocking, the makings of sheer writing brilliance which he exorcises through a brilliant performance, one again, I stress, must be witnessed. Pat Hingle as the old crippled attendant, and Stephanie Farracy as a fat ugly duckling, the only female waitress here are two examples of pathetic types, they convince us of so well. I love the wide Texan scenic shot of Firth walking to his trailer, where he and his poor suffering mother live. She's the prey of men who just use her for you know what, including the local copper who's heart is as big as his ego. Her latest flame, has taken off with her car, so she too is going nowhere. I guess the really sad thing about this tale, is at the end of it, where Farracy and Firth go driving off into the dust covered distance, the remainder of these pathetic types just go on about their business as usual. And that's what's really sad.
33 Reviews
How Far Can You be Pushed?
SSteveL2 November 2000
Gortner's character is smarter and tougher than anyone else in the diner. In an experiment in depravity, he decides to see how far he can humiliate and bully people before they stand up to him--if they do at all. He uses his worldliness and intelligence to insult them in ways that they might not detect, or pretend not to notice. When he learns that a young man bears the nickname Red Ryder, he sets out to show the banality and hypocrisy of American culture.
It's an anti-Western: the antagonist, a Vietnam veteran, finds that America is not the home of the brave, that perhaps the free and heroic spirit embodied in the popular conception of the Old West has vanished--or has it?
While the character is reminiscent of *Blue Velvet*'s Frank Booth (played by Dennis Hopper), *Red Ryder* is the superior film. Its predator is more comprehensive, realistic, and transparent. Booth, like many of Lynch's characters, is ultimately a cipher, and therefore uninteresting.
It's an anti-Western: the antagonist, a Vietnam veteran, finds that America is not the home of the brave, that perhaps the free and heroic spirit embodied in the popular conception of the Old West has vanished--or has it?
While the character is reminiscent of *Blue Velvet*'s Frank Booth (played by Dennis Hopper), *Red Ryder* is the superior film. Its predator is more comprehensive, realistic, and transparent. Booth, like many of Lynch's characters, is ultimately a cipher, and therefore uninteresting.
Good film.
Talos1 July 2003
I would like to see this film out on DVD. Actually, Mark Medoff's scripts are pretty rich in dialogue and character development ("Children of a Lesser God" for example). I thought Candy Clark and Pat Hingle were fine in this movie as well. This is just a fun film but nothing outstanding.
Unexamined lives are not worth living
Austin392hemi23 September 2002
Most descriptions of this movie read something like "psycho Vietnam veteran terrorizes roadside diner patrons" or "bad movie adaptation of Medoff's stage play" and though these may be accurate surface descriptions, the movie deserves far more comment than that. As the movie progresses, each character's deepest motivations and fears are revealed and what is exposed is the shallow values, ignobleness and dark fears of mankind.
Marjoe Gortner's youthful rage manifest's itself strikingly as he rants on a each of the diner patrons. His cynism is directed at pretentious city intellectuals (Hal Linden and Lee Grant), small town folk (Stephanie Faracy), self-righteous do-gooder (Pat Hingle), bad-ass-wannabe (Peter Firth) and even the protagonist's girlfriend (Candy Clark). The film gives a whole new meaning to the American perception of machismo and much of this can be difficult as well as fascinating to watch.
The most interesting thing about this film however is that it has gone virtually unnoticed since the day it was released. It lasted in the theaters only a few weeks and the edited versions, which have only rarely appeared on non-cable TV, truly ruined the entire effect of RR. The movie was overlooked by the critics and the public for several reasons.
The critics labeled the movie "better as a stage play" and "it's been done before" and "overacted". For reasons that I have never completely understood, movie critics typically dislike stage plays made in to movies unless a lot of flashy camera work and new spirited locations make the play-now-a-movie fit more conventionally into the film art form. What critics fail to realize is that the general public does not have access to good theater and even if a movie is literally a play shot on film, one can now get the subtle nuances of close-up facial expressions and the quality dialogue that stage plays require and movies often go without. Some critics said the film was similar to other films such as The Petrified Forest yet these same critics can never seem to get enough gangster movies, boxer movies or movies about Hollywood professionals. Red Ryder has about as much in common with Petrified Forest as Platoon had in common with Green Berets. And the criticism that Gortner overacted ...... my god that WAS the point !!!
The public overlooked the movie mainly due to the marketing. A long non-descriptive title stunted audience draw and RR lacked the graphic exploitative violence that so often the public looks for in a movie that was touted as "he is getting even with every woman who slapped your face and every man that ....". A more accurate title (possibly "Unexamined Lives") and a descriptive byline like "he is here to prove to you that there is really nothing decent about anyone" may have at least got the right people in the movie house. Of all the mind pap available on video these days, such as Armageddon, it is a crime that this masterpiece has been lost to history.
Marjoe Gortner's youthful rage manifest's itself strikingly as he rants on a each of the diner patrons. His cynism is directed at pretentious city intellectuals (Hal Linden and Lee Grant), small town folk (Stephanie Faracy), self-righteous do-gooder (Pat Hingle), bad-ass-wannabe (Peter Firth) and even the protagonist's girlfriend (Candy Clark). The film gives a whole new meaning to the American perception of machismo and much of this can be difficult as well as fascinating to watch.
The most interesting thing about this film however is that it has gone virtually unnoticed since the day it was released. It lasted in the theaters only a few weeks and the edited versions, which have only rarely appeared on non-cable TV, truly ruined the entire effect of RR. The movie was overlooked by the critics and the public for several reasons.
The critics labeled the movie "better as a stage play" and "it's been done before" and "overacted". For reasons that I have never completely understood, movie critics typically dislike stage plays made in to movies unless a lot of flashy camera work and new spirited locations make the play-now-a-movie fit more conventionally into the film art form. What critics fail to realize is that the general public does not have access to good theater and even if a movie is literally a play shot on film, one can now get the subtle nuances of close-up facial expressions and the quality dialogue that stage plays require and movies often go without. Some critics said the film was similar to other films such as The Petrified Forest yet these same critics can never seem to get enough gangster movies, boxer movies or movies about Hollywood professionals. Red Ryder has about as much in common with Petrified Forest as Platoon had in common with Green Berets. And the criticism that Gortner overacted ...... my god that WAS the point !!!
The public overlooked the movie mainly due to the marketing. A long non-descriptive title stunted audience draw and RR lacked the graphic exploitative violence that so often the public looks for in a movie that was touted as "he is getting even with every woman who slapped your face and every man that ....". A more accurate title (possibly "Unexamined Lives") and a descriptive byline like "he is here to prove to you that there is really nothing decent about anyone" may have at least got the right people in the movie house. Of all the mind pap available on video these days, such as Armageddon, it is a crime that this masterpiece has been lost to history.
rebel without a cause for the early 70s
PeteStud10 September 2003
Dont listen to the bad reviews, this is one of the greatest psychological dramas of all time, right up there with WHOSE AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOLFE & THE ANNIVERSARY but with way more dark overtones and up dated by utilising the political confusion of the transition between the early 50s and late turbulent 60s. Marjoe Gortner is on fire here as the psychotic ex Nam vet Teddy who singlehandedly terroises the inahbitants and few customers at a roadside diner with psychological terror and intimidation. Sure, the movie drags a little in the first half hour, setting up the case scenarios of the players ala PULP FICTION but by golly when they all meet up at the deserted diner are you in for a treat in psychological warfare. Peter Firth is absolutely fantastic in the role as Stephen (Red) Ryder and this really can be seen as a coming of age film and a depressing view into the life of Jerry Springer style poor white trash in small country towns. There is a 90s movie titled ALBINO ALLIGATOR that borrows heavily from this movie but falls oh so short. Red Ryder improves with repeated viewings and starts to resmble a black comedy in places. Itll make you laugh, sigh, frightened and when it gets going will have you at the very edge of your seat.This movie is awesome and should be re-submitted for its deserved (but currently out of reach) cult status. My second favourite movie of all time. love it or hate it you wont regret it. For those who hated it I plead for you to check this out again. There is way more in this film that meets the eye.Although far from being first rate technically this is without doubt a brilliant film on many other rare untouched levels.Now can some one out there release this on DVD already!??? I also recommend seeing the MARJOE documentary..AFTER this movie....essential viewing.
Marjoe is a true force of nature in this one.
Hey_Sweden19 July 2016
Memorably uncomfortable, fairly interesting drama was produced by 70s icon Marjoe Gortner himself, and is notable for its showcasing of his live wire personality. The Gortster plays Teddy, a drug dealing, mangy Vietnam vet traveling with his girlfriend Cheryl (Candy Clark). Forced to stop over in a nowhere New Mexico town, he ends up taking over a diner and holding staff and customers at bay. In long and intense confrontations, he asks some hard questions of his prey and reveals them for what they are. Among those threatened by his presence are big city intellectuals Clarisse and Richard Ethridge (Lee Grant and Hal Linden), sweet waitress Angel (Stephanie Faracy), eager to please, crippled businessman Lyle Striker (Pat Hingle), and wanna be tough guy Stephen Ryder (Peter Firth).
Playwright Mark Medoff wrote the script, based on his play, and turns "When You Comin' Back, Red Ryder?" into a lengthy examination of what it means to be a macho man. Although the presentation does largely belie the stage origins, director Milton Katselas does give it some cinematic flair when he can. It consists of a number of character vignettes before eventually getting down to business. And when Marjoe is dominating his victims, the result is a similarly captive audience at home. You can't take your eyes off him; he treats Teddy as the role of a lifetime, and gives it everything he's got. But that's not to take away from a sterling supporting cast. Grant is especially fine when she finally tries standing up to this charismatic antagonist. Familiar faces in smaller roles include Anne Ramsey, Bill McKinney, Alex Colon, Audra Lindley, Ron Soble, Robert Easton, and Barry Cahill. Medoff himself plays a faith healer.
Effective location filming, enjoyable rural atmosphere, and a top soundtrack all help to make this a pretty good entertainment.
Seven out of 10.
Playwright Mark Medoff wrote the script, based on his play, and turns "When You Comin' Back, Red Ryder?" into a lengthy examination of what it means to be a macho man. Although the presentation does largely belie the stage origins, director Milton Katselas does give it some cinematic flair when he can. It consists of a number of character vignettes before eventually getting down to business. And when Marjoe is dominating his victims, the result is a similarly captive audience at home. You can't take your eyes off him; he treats Teddy as the role of a lifetime, and gives it everything he's got. But that's not to take away from a sterling supporting cast. Grant is especially fine when she finally tries standing up to this charismatic antagonist. Familiar faces in smaller roles include Anne Ramsey, Bill McKinney, Alex Colon, Audra Lindley, Ron Soble, Robert Easton, and Barry Cahill. Medoff himself plays a faith healer.
Effective location filming, enjoyable rural atmosphere, and a top soundtrack all help to make this a pretty good entertainment.
Seven out of 10.
So real its scary!
breezelow12 June 2004
I recall thinking this movie would be uninteresting when I first saw it on HBO back in 1984, but this in not the kind of movie I could forget about a month later. No wonder so many stage recreations have been done. The many characters are so identifiable, so authentic in their behavior. I have to wonder where the writers got their material. As one who was born and spent many years in west Texas, this is like a compressed version of many years of my life. Thank God, the extreme bad guys like Teddy are rare, but they do exist. I recall a guy like him who started a serious fire at the school during the summer. It's too bad that this movie is not available anywhere or ever shown these days.
There's a petrified forest in his brain.
mark.waltz10 May 2022
Warning: Spoilers
There is no doubt in my mind. Marjoe Gortner is an excellent actor. He just is not an appealing one. His characters are some of the most vile creatures ever to walk the planet, and even if they're fiction, you long to see him get a violent end. Watching him in this film is the equivalent of seeing a car accident and watching all the bodies burn inside before taking off. It's hideous but you can't move your eyes away from it. An All-Star cast of excellent actors are among the staff and customers at a roadside cafe out in the middle of nowhere, emotionally and verbally harassed by Gortner before he turns violent. The cast,
featuring Candy Clark, Stephanie Faracy, Lee Grant, Hal Linden, Peter Firth, Pat Hingle, Audra Lindley, and Anne Ramsey (in a small role at the beginning) are excellent, but the subject matter, even just passed the crisis of a mad man holding a bunch of innocent people hostage, is very depressing and filled with moments when you wish someone would just pick up a knife and stab this man to a bloody demise. With all of those witnesses, no way would they be convicted.
I usually never write a review with such they just taste for a particular character where I described the end I want them to have, but in Gortner's case here, the fury I felt over just watching him became an outrage that made it difficult watching this. You're supposed to feel sympathy for him because he's a Vietnam veteran, and with many anti-vietnam films made at this time, there were many more veterans who deserves sympathy. Grant and Linden as an upperclass married couple who already have problems are very good, with Grant having an outburst that shows why she was one of the great featured actresses in the 70's and 80's, and Firth is outstanding as the night cook whose name, in addition to the comic book character, influences the title. I don't know if I can ever watch this as a stage play, having seen other movie versions of plays with similar themes ("Petrified Forest" and "Desperate Hours" immediately come to mind) which did not anger me as much. This is a type of film where you can see why the actors work interested in appearing in it, but for the audience, it's the type of movie that just brings on depression and makes them want to stay out of rural communities and roadside diners where anything can happen as much as nothing can happen.
I usually never write a review with such they just taste for a particular character where I described the end I want them to have, but in Gortner's case here, the fury I felt over just watching him became an outrage that made it difficult watching this. You're supposed to feel sympathy for him because he's a Vietnam veteran, and with many anti-vietnam films made at this time, there were many more veterans who deserves sympathy. Grant and Linden as an upperclass married couple who already have problems are very good, with Grant having an outburst that shows why she was one of the great featured actresses in the 70's and 80's, and Firth is outstanding as the night cook whose name, in addition to the comic book character, influences the title. I don't know if I can ever watch this as a stage play, having seen other movie versions of plays with similar themes ("Petrified Forest" and "Desperate Hours" immediately come to mind) which did not anger me as much. This is a type of film where you can see why the actors work interested in appearing in it, but for the audience, it's the type of movie that just brings on depression and makes them want to stay out of rural communities and roadside diners where anything can happen as much as nothing can happen.
Cracks in the Mirror
boydru23 January 2007
Left alone to watch my Grandfather's Florida home sometime during the early 80's, I stumbled across this lost classic on one of the cable movie channels and found myself drawn in by the mesmerizing performance of Marjoe Gortner. For seven consecutive days I continued to be moved during repeated viewings by the powerful, yet tragic vision of Marjoe's Teddy, a disgruntled, disillusioned child of the 50's and victim of his service in a war that no one has quite learned to come to terms with. Teddy lashes out against the lies, the corruption, the restrictions, and the myths that shaped many of his generation which, when applied to the darker, cynical realities that he and his brethren met upon their coming of age, fell woefully short of the truth. Added to the terrors that Teddy subjects his fellow cast members and viewers to are glimpses into the psyche of an America not yet ready to confront itself, but standing on the cusp of discovery. They are in need of push which they get in the form a good swift kick (actually many repeated kicks) by the verbally, physically, and psychologically abusive young rebel. In the end, each one is held up to the mirror and confronts the reflection that his or her reality. I took the ride along with them from opening to closing scene for that long week of viewing and haven't forgotten the film's affect on me for a single day since. Gortner's performance may have indeed been too powerful, too real, and too biting for release on video and DVD. It's really too bad because we need to confront ourselves now every bit as much as we did in the days following that war that no one wants to remember, but none of us will ever forget. When, you coming back Red Ryder? We sure could use you.
Quite the "curio"
gregorycanfield10 June 2023
This is one "hard to find" movie that is somewhat worth seeking out. First, be advised that "Red Ryder" is not the Marjoe Gortner character, but the character played by Peter Firth. Curious, considering that Gortner's long, curly hair happened to be red. In real life, Gortner subsequently became an evangelist. You may have a bit of a problem reconciling that with the despicable character he plays in this movie. Gortner's character is a psychotic Vietnam vet who winds up terrorizing a group of people inside a diner. Some curious casting choices were made, including Candy Clark and Lee Grant. Not only do we get to see Candy nude, but also Lee momentarily topless! Not bad, I must admit! However, the movie has an overall feel of everyone "going through the motions." Therefore, not as convincing or effective as the movie could have been. Hal Linden, as Lee Grant's husband, was particularly ineffectual here. Lee Grant was a better actress than what she did here. Like I mentioned previously, her topless scene wasn't bad. However, she didn't need to go that route, in order to make people watch her. Overall, an interesting movie that could have been better.
Worst movie ever made?
jvframe29 August 2001
If it weren't for a recent viewing of the American produced version of the local comedy "He Died With A Felafel In His Hand" I would have had to say that 'Red Ryder was easily the most excruciatingly poor film I have ever seen.
My nightmare scenario would be to suffer sudden total paralysis in front of a TV when this movie comes on and therefore to be unable to either suicide or destroy the television, rather than watch it again.
My nightmare scenario would be to suffer sudden total paralysis in front of a TV when this movie comes on and therefore to be unable to either suicide or destroy the television, rather than watch it again.
Amazing Performance from Marjoe Gortner!
raegan_butcher14 June 2006
Marjoe Gortner's performance in this film will amaze you. He holds your attention the way a snake will stare down its prey to keep it docile and thoroughly cowed until dying time. One gets a taste of the incredible reserves of passion and energy he exuded as a preacher in his performance here as a scruffy criminal who holds a disparate group of characters hostage in a roadside diner in the middle of New Mexico.(For more on this amazing man watch 1972's Oscar-winning MARJOE)
Gortner is supported by a fine cast which includes Hal Linden, Lee Grant,Peter Firth and Pat Hingle, among others. This is another one of those undeservedly unknown movies that will really knock your socks off if you can manage to see it anywhere. Highly recommended.
Gortner is supported by a fine cast which includes Hal Linden, Lee Grant,Peter Firth and Pat Hingle, among others. This is another one of those undeservedly unknown movies that will really knock your socks off if you can manage to see it anywhere. Highly recommended.
Excellent psychological thriller!!
markstool15 April 2000
This unique psychological thriller is a decent adaptation of Mark Medoff's brilliant play in which a psychopathic Viet-Nam vet holds a diverse group of individuals hostage in an isolated New Mexico diner in 1968. He then slowly exposes each of the their fears, faults, desires and ulterior motives while challenging American ideals, morals and heroism in transition.
This rarely seen film's box office was marred its long title, difficult to market subject matter and lack of well-known stars. However, each of the half dozen or so actors turn in brilliant performances as their fascades are slowly torn down by the vet (played by former child evangelist, Marjoe Gortner) whose intuition and captivating rants are exceeded only by his intimidating demeanor, and mind-blowing innuendo - the crux of which is born upon Red whose James Dean persona makes him an easy target considering the timeframe.
Comparatively speaking, this film can best be be described as a darker, grown up version of "The Breakfast Club" although much more fascinating and thought-provoking.
This rarely seen film's box office was marred its long title, difficult to market subject matter and lack of well-known stars. However, each of the half dozen or so actors turn in brilliant performances as their fascades are slowly torn down by the vet (played by former child evangelist, Marjoe Gortner) whose intuition and captivating rants are exceeded only by his intimidating demeanor, and mind-blowing innuendo - the crux of which is born upon Red whose James Dean persona makes him an easy target considering the timeframe.
Comparatively speaking, this film can best be be described as a darker, grown up version of "The Breakfast Club" although much more fascinating and thought-provoking.
Easily one of my top five movies of all time.
rjodbriggs6 July 2003
Every actor and actress delivered powerful performances, especially Peter Firth and Marjoe Gortner. It was a stirring, disturbing plot that let you see the affect on people by someone who truly does not care for people or even himself. In fact he cares for nothing in the world. I would recommend it to anyone. If someone would get this movie on video, many more people could enjoy this work of art.
A great film that is suspenseful, full of vengeance and attitude.
hanoirocks30 October 1999
A drifter of sorts comes into town and grips the minds of a local diner's occupants. He wreaks havoc on the people who he holds captive. Acted beautifully. One of those films where the character is played so brilliantly that you hate him from the start. Check this one out!
Slowly draws you in, then pays out.
Hereafter22 April 2003
You need some patients to appreciate the masterful little film. Its stage play heritage has it heavy in dialogue and connecting with all of the characters in the early stages of the film is important. It is in fact the key to understanding why this film was made as we will soon witness how our new acquaintances hold or fold under a relentless physiological assault measured out by an unpredictable nemesis.
The start of film is bruding rather than slow, however when the menacing 'Teddy' joins the others that have come to be together in a lonely diner the naked humanity of all is brutally exposed as Teddy systematically terrorizes them all with condescending mind games and humiliation. The surreal climax and resolution package a very watchable film. If nothing else Marjoe Gortner's applied and brilliant portrayal of 'Teddy' is a must see for anyone interested in strong character studies.
A classic piece of much overlooked American cinema.
The start of film is bruding rather than slow, however when the menacing 'Teddy' joins the others that have come to be together in a lonely diner the naked humanity of all is brutally exposed as Teddy systematically terrorizes them all with condescending mind games and humiliation. The surreal climax and resolution package a very watchable film. If nothing else Marjoe Gortner's applied and brilliant portrayal of 'Teddy' is a must see for anyone interested in strong character studies.
A classic piece of much overlooked American cinema.
An interesting ride
herumesueni29 July 2003
The first 20 to 30 minutes of this film are almost intolerable, but once all the major characters come together it transforms into a considerably better film. Marjoe Gortner turns in an excellent performance as the psychotic Teddy. The characters are all well thought and dynamic, all stay true to their motivations, and the interplay between Teddy and Red, and Richard (played extremely well by Hal Linden) creates so much dramatic tension you can't pull yourself away from the screen.
Excellent film!!
rockndog14 June 2003
It's been over 20 years since I've seen this movie and it's every bit as good as I remember it. Marjoe Gortner is most convincing as a sociopath tormenting small town folks and passersby with a touching love story in the background. Great soundtrack too! When You Coming Back Red Ryder? deserves to be rereleased on DVD.
FANTASTIC MOVIE!
bondjames26 December 2002
Warning: Spoilers
I am not sure what qualifies as a "spoiler" but I will put a disclaimer here just in case.
This movie has become somewhat of a cult classic. The first 15 to 30 minutes will bore you to no end; however, if you stick with it - you will be pleasantly surprised. The movie really takes off when Marjoe Gortner's character "Teddy" reaches the diner.
I recently watched this movie after not having seen it for 20 years. It is a little dated and some of the film techniques are rather raw but it is an overall good movie. When I began watching it again, I kept asking myself, "Why am I watching this horrible thing?" After all characters meet up in the diner I quickly realized what made me love it in the first place.
I would love to see a remake of this movie. I little TLC and effort could make this movie outstanding. Everyone that I have shown this movie all approach it with the same, "This sucks" attitude and by the end of the movie they end up loving it! It is agreed that this movie is not for everyone; however, if you give it a fair chance I think you will be pleasantly surprised. This is by far Marjoe Gortner's best performance.
This movie has become somewhat of a cult classic. The first 15 to 30 minutes will bore you to no end; however, if you stick with it - you will be pleasantly surprised. The movie really takes off when Marjoe Gortner's character "Teddy" reaches the diner.
I recently watched this movie after not having seen it for 20 years. It is a little dated and some of the film techniques are rather raw but it is an overall good movie. When I began watching it again, I kept asking myself, "Why am I watching this horrible thing?" After all characters meet up in the diner I quickly realized what made me love it in the first place.
I would love to see a remake of this movie. I little TLC and effort could make this movie outstanding. Everyone that I have shown this movie all approach it with the same, "This sucks" attitude and by the end of the movie they end up loving it! It is agreed that this movie is not for everyone; however, if you give it a fair chance I think you will be pleasantly surprised. This is by far Marjoe Gortner's best performance.
A forgotten gem that's worth its weight in gold
bob_meg10 July 2011
I bought a pirated VHS of this title a few years back out of extreme frustration at this maverick '70s film's patent neglect.
It's one I saw back in the early days of HBO/Cinemax and it made that big an impression on me, as it probably will on you, if only for the extreme freakishness of the storyline.
Teddy (Marjoe Gortner) is a disenfranchised Vietnam vet turned drug dealer who gets stranded in a small nowheresville town with his girlfriend Cheryl, played by Candy Clark. While waiting for his car to be fixed, Teddy fixes his attention on the goings-on at the diner next door and finds it might be fun to...mentally terrorize and torture the patrons inside, just for laughs. And that's basically it.
Sound boring? It's anything but. Red Ryder is a throwback to a day when scripts really were about something. Something layered, something complex...beyond mere storyline and plot points in a ProgramAScript project. They were closer to indie theater projects than big studio star vehicles.
Of course, there's a lot of subtext behind Teddy's vindictiveness and rage, but none of it is obvious or boring, and neither are the performances from a wide array of master craftsmen, including Lee Grant, Peter Firth, and Pat Hingle.
I've never talked to anyone who's seen this film and not had their a** knocked sideways by it. It's just that raw, well made (kudos here to Milt Kaselas), well written (thank you Tony award winner Mark Medoff), and well performed.
Rent it, steal it, bootleg it.
Just see it.
It's one I saw back in the early days of HBO/Cinemax and it made that big an impression on me, as it probably will on you, if only for the extreme freakishness of the storyline.
Teddy (Marjoe Gortner) is a disenfranchised Vietnam vet turned drug dealer who gets stranded in a small nowheresville town with his girlfriend Cheryl, played by Candy Clark. While waiting for his car to be fixed, Teddy fixes his attention on the goings-on at the diner next door and finds it might be fun to...mentally terrorize and torture the patrons inside, just for laughs. And that's basically it.
Sound boring? It's anything but. Red Ryder is a throwback to a day when scripts really were about something. Something layered, something complex...beyond mere storyline and plot points in a ProgramAScript project. They were closer to indie theater projects than big studio star vehicles.
Of course, there's a lot of subtext behind Teddy's vindictiveness and rage, but none of it is obvious or boring, and neither are the performances from a wide array of master craftsmen, including Lee Grant, Peter Firth, and Pat Hingle.
I've never talked to anyone who's seen this film and not had their a** knocked sideways by it. It's just that raw, well made (kudos here to Milt Kaselas), well written (thank you Tony award winner Mark Medoff), and well performed.
Rent it, steal it, bootleg it.
Just see it.
Marjoe Gortner's finest hour on film
Woodyanders18 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
1968, New Mexico. Marjoe Gortner gives an incredibly intense, commanding, and charismatic performance as Teddy, a bitter, crazed, and disgruntled Vietnam veteran hippie drug dealer psycho who along with his loyal, but scared girlfriend Cheryl (nicely played by the adorable Candy Clark) terrorizes a motley assortment of people in a remote roadside diner at gunpoint. Teddy forces the folks to own up to ugly truths about Vietnam, America, and, most of all, themselves. Director Milton Katselas, working from a biting and incisive script by Mark Medoff, cranks up the seething tension to an almost unbearably nerve-wracking fever pitch and milks the protracted diner confrontation sequence for all its worth. The bang-up acting from a tip-top cast qualifies as a substantial sterling asset: Hal Linden as pathetic weakling Richard Ethridge, Lee Grant as Richard's fiery, fed-up wife Clarisse, Peter Firth as surly greaser short order cook Stephen Ryder, Stephanie Faracy as sweet, dumpy waitress Angel Childress, Pat Hingle as amiable, crippled, and lonely old man Lyle Striker, Audra Lindley as Stephen's sad burn-out mother Ceil, Bill McKinney as macho local hot shot Tommy Clark, and Anne Ramsay as Angel's shrewish mom Rhea. However, this picture still rates as Marjoe's show all the way: Whether he's suffering a painful and humiliating rectal search from a border official or trying to get Stephen to act on his swaggering false bravado, Gortner's electrifying portrayal of a cruel and dangerous sociopath remains strong and riveting from start to finish. Jules Brenner's sharp, agile cinematography, Jack Nitzsche's rattling, throbbing score, and an excellent soundtrack of mournful country ballads and groovy 60's rock songs are all likewise smack dab on the money. However, it's the way this film reveals the darker aspects of machismo (Teddy talks with an affected drawl and has an obsession with rugged cowboy heroes of the past), the disillusionment of the 60's Vietnam generation, and the hypocrisy, complacency, and emptiness existent in everyday American lives that really gives it an additional shattering impact. Although a bit too stagy and overlong, this movie still packs one extremely powerful and lingering gut punch all the same.
A great American film.
ianmck158 January 2012
This is one of the greatest films about America that has ever been made. Be warned however, this film doesn't cut close to the bone, it cuts right into it. Marjoe Gortner shows an aspect of American life which was not so obvious when he produced Red Ryder but is very much on display nowadays. He gives an excellent performance in the lead role and the rest of the cast are top notch as well, especially Stephanie Faracy as the waitress who is superb. The earlier reviews praising this film are spot on in my opinion. The good news is that When You Comin' Back, Red Ryder? can be purchased from http://www.j4hi.com. It is a DVD taken from a VHS tape so the quality is not the best but it is still watchable and well worth getting. Great script, great direction and great acting make this a film that deserves the highest praise though if you see it you will understand why it was not at all popular with the mainstream American movie going public of the time. Well and truly worth 10 out of 10.
Intriguing (Long, with Spoilers)
eldontyrrell30 September 2003
Warning: Spoilers
I recently paid up on eBay to purchase this film after my interest was piqued by what I read on the web and IMDB. I had stumbled across it during a search for pictures of Candy Clark that didn't quite pay off, but that's another story...
I liked this film. I'm glad I watched it. It isn't easily "recommended" because it isn't exactly "pleasant" or "fun", but I think it's worth seeing for the subject matter and message.
After the fact, I no longer agree that the first half-hour was bad. It might have unfolded slowly, but I relished the vignettes on the night before the action started. I then realized that the characterizations trotted out, which seemed one-dimensional at first, were actually comments on the lives that these people were dealt (Angel, Red, Red's mom) or themselves pursued (the Ethridges). I think it set up the understanding of who these people were and how they would react to the goings-on in the diner.
I found Teddy's initial discourse, when he's warming up and testing the crowd, to be more rewarding than the showy exposition that developed afterwards. Still, it was the latter part that forced the gang to face (what *Teddy believed* were) their weaknesses and failings. For Angel, Red and Lyle it was the first time they had been brought to their attention. It was clear, though, that the Ethridges knew exactly what Teddy was talking about. This dichotomy drove my opinion about what the film's message is.
(Spoiler Alert)
What I found most interesting is that, as intelligent as Teddy is portrayed to be (rage notwithstanding), he gets it dead wrong on Angel, Red, and Lyle. I believe this is the point of the film.
When Teddy finally turns upon Angel in the simple terms she can understand, his comments are certainly cruel and "revealing" of things she never considered or talked about -- but his points are not character failings. He calls her fat. So what? It runs in her family, she is neither in denial nor sad because of it, and it does not bother her or inhibit her self-awareness. Is she "too sweet" for him? Is she wrong for being genuinely nice to people in a place where - until Teddy showed up -- the ugliness of the "real world" hadn't tarnished everyone's view of it? Should she distrust others more? He's off base. There's nothing wrong with how she lives her life, other than that (he thinks) she hasn't reached high enough. If she hasn't, it's because she doesn't really know what's out there, but she's giving it her best shot here.
Next, Red is clearly Teddy's main target. He's the first to flash an attitude when Teddy enters the diner, but that's the same look he shows everyone. More important is that Teddy doesn't think Red's rebel act is justified by having suffered the pains of the "real world" first-hand. So Red has a tattoo that Teddy thinks he hasn't earned? What would make Red's persona "legitimate" -- going to Vietnam and coming back a psychotic killer? Is that `better'? Another thing about Red is that, of all the characters, he knows his future lies somewhere outside of town, and he knows it may be difficult or even impossible to pursue it. But he's realistic and responsible about it -- he wants to replace his mother's car before he can leave, and (until the events in the diner) he doesn't want the assistance that Lyle offers in that regard. He'll do it all himself, even if he doesn't know quite how. He might not have the answers, but he's asking the questions, so is he really such a failure?
(Even Lyle might not look like he's got a lot left in the tank, but he still manages to successfully direct the confused girlfriend away from Teddy, and he rigs the VW to break down just outside of town.)
Meanwhile, the outlook for the Ethridges is uncertain. They are going home to their young child, but are they willing to jettison the superficial routine that consists of his management of her music career? Will they decide whether something really exists between them or not? Difficult to say, but not by accident is their future least clear -- of the main players, they are the only ones who *knowingly* live a lie. I believe this is why they have the least reward awaiting them after having been forced to face their reality.
This is the irony of the film. Teddy seems to be the worst nightmare for these people, an unstoppable force who knows what's wrong with their lives and punishes them for it. Then it becomes clear that his assault has only served to motivate the dreamers, the ones who wanted more (whether they knew it or not), to try to improve their lives. They have nothing but upside. The ones who knew the truth but didn't care to improve don't get quite the rosy outlook -- they disappear.
Much credit goes to the lead actors who agreed to play in this film, because they either understood or came to understand what the meaning of the movie would be. It sure as hell wasn't because they thought it was going to land them that Oscar. And if Gortner, as producer, was the driving force behind the film's creation, then he gets props as well because he had to realize there wouldn't be measurable upside from it, only a lesson that he wanted to tell.
Thanks for reading my take on the film. I hope you found it of interest. See also the "message forum" for a question I have about one part of the flick; perhaps you wondered about it as well.
I liked this film. I'm glad I watched it. It isn't easily "recommended" because it isn't exactly "pleasant" or "fun", but I think it's worth seeing for the subject matter and message.
After the fact, I no longer agree that the first half-hour was bad. It might have unfolded slowly, but I relished the vignettes on the night before the action started. I then realized that the characterizations trotted out, which seemed one-dimensional at first, were actually comments on the lives that these people were dealt (Angel, Red, Red's mom) or themselves pursued (the Ethridges). I think it set up the understanding of who these people were and how they would react to the goings-on in the diner.
I found Teddy's initial discourse, when he's warming up and testing the crowd, to be more rewarding than the showy exposition that developed afterwards. Still, it was the latter part that forced the gang to face (what *Teddy believed* were) their weaknesses and failings. For Angel, Red and Lyle it was the first time they had been brought to their attention. It was clear, though, that the Ethridges knew exactly what Teddy was talking about. This dichotomy drove my opinion about what the film's message is.
(Spoiler Alert)
What I found most interesting is that, as intelligent as Teddy is portrayed to be (rage notwithstanding), he gets it dead wrong on Angel, Red, and Lyle. I believe this is the point of the film.
When Teddy finally turns upon Angel in the simple terms she can understand, his comments are certainly cruel and "revealing" of things she never considered or talked about -- but his points are not character failings. He calls her fat. So what? It runs in her family, she is neither in denial nor sad because of it, and it does not bother her or inhibit her self-awareness. Is she "too sweet" for him? Is she wrong for being genuinely nice to people in a place where - until Teddy showed up -- the ugliness of the "real world" hadn't tarnished everyone's view of it? Should she distrust others more? He's off base. There's nothing wrong with how she lives her life, other than that (he thinks) she hasn't reached high enough. If she hasn't, it's because she doesn't really know what's out there, but she's giving it her best shot here.
Next, Red is clearly Teddy's main target. He's the first to flash an attitude when Teddy enters the diner, but that's the same look he shows everyone. More important is that Teddy doesn't think Red's rebel act is justified by having suffered the pains of the "real world" first-hand. So Red has a tattoo that Teddy thinks he hasn't earned? What would make Red's persona "legitimate" -- going to Vietnam and coming back a psychotic killer? Is that `better'? Another thing about Red is that, of all the characters, he knows his future lies somewhere outside of town, and he knows it may be difficult or even impossible to pursue it. But he's realistic and responsible about it -- he wants to replace his mother's car before he can leave, and (until the events in the diner) he doesn't want the assistance that Lyle offers in that regard. He'll do it all himself, even if he doesn't know quite how. He might not have the answers, but he's asking the questions, so is he really such a failure?
(Even Lyle might not look like he's got a lot left in the tank, but he still manages to successfully direct the confused girlfriend away from Teddy, and he rigs the VW to break down just outside of town.)
Meanwhile, the outlook for the Ethridges is uncertain. They are going home to their young child, but are they willing to jettison the superficial routine that consists of his management of her music career? Will they decide whether something really exists between them or not? Difficult to say, but not by accident is their future least clear -- of the main players, they are the only ones who *knowingly* live a lie. I believe this is why they have the least reward awaiting them after having been forced to face their reality.
This is the irony of the film. Teddy seems to be the worst nightmare for these people, an unstoppable force who knows what's wrong with their lives and punishes them for it. Then it becomes clear that his assault has only served to motivate the dreamers, the ones who wanted more (whether they knew it or not), to try to improve their lives. They have nothing but upside. The ones who knew the truth but didn't care to improve don't get quite the rosy outlook -- they disappear.
Much credit goes to the lead actors who agreed to play in this film, because they either understood or came to understand what the meaning of the movie would be. It sure as hell wasn't because they thought it was going to land them that Oscar. And if Gortner, as producer, was the driving force behind the film's creation, then he gets props as well because he had to realize there wouldn't be measurable upside from it, only a lesson that he wanted to tell.
Thanks for reading my take on the film. I hope you found it of interest. See also the "message forum" for a question I have about one part of the flick; perhaps you wondered about it as well.
Rude Awakening
jzappa3 April 2011
What we have here is a buried gem of low-budget 1970s realist filmmaking. And man, does it tell a story obsessed with the 1970s. Even its poster, a dimly lit diner milieu with the leather-clad back of a long-haired figure turned, and the title seemingly asking a question, emitting a smoke signal to Red Ryder, the popular Western B movie cowboy of the 1940s and '50s, a hero in the classic, oversimplified sense. Teddy, Red Ryder's would-be enemy, coerces the bucolic characters under his control to enact the obligatory final scene of a Red Ryder picture, with the hero, the girl and the horse riding off into the sunset. And the more he strains them with perfectionist direction, the more we realize their dream, that someone or some idea will save them from the predicament in which Teddy holds them captive, is only but a dream.
No one is more suited than Teddy to impel the rude awakening of the petrified America that is least prepared for the onslaught of the new generation. He emerges into the ideal backdrop of a dying New Mexico town with tell-tale signs of having been part of the counterculture that had aimed to liberate themselves from social limitations, decide their own paths, discover new significance in life. One articulation of this is seen in his criterion of dress and grooming, making him immediately identifiable to the simple townsfolk, but Teddy loves it that way, not so much for the visual emblem of his individual rights but for its shock value, which he relishes inciting in any and everyone he meets.
Is this character meant to represent the hippie movement? Yes and no. He does in the insulated WWII minds of the people who here become trapped in his cage. In this world, he is an attacking force that won't leave them alone. From what we discover of their personal lives, that the people in this town are unhappily self-limited to doing and being what society has forever told them about themselves, it is the post-Vietnam doubt cast on authority that feels alien and threatening. They are the straights and squares hippies have always detached themselves from.
The setting is Foster's Diner, a rest stop that lost most of its trade when a new highway bypass came about. That's right; the world's passing them by. Staff include mousy waitress Angel, down-to-earth boss Clark, and a fidgety cook nicknamed after the eponymous hero. Lyle, owner of the neighboring gas station, stops by now and again to sever the tedium with his jolly chitchat. The dreary custom of the everyday slog is interrupted with the entrance of two couples, the fashionable Richard and Clarisse, and finally, the younger and stormier Teddy, the unhinged 'Nam vet, and Cheryl, his hippie girlfriend. Difficulties develop when drug dealing and guns cross the threshold both as foreshadowing and upon Teddy and Cheryl's conspicuous arrival, and Teddy turns to brute psychological torment when he holds everyone captive.
In the era of this plot, not only did America barely know or even comprehend Vietnam and our intervention there, we didn't know ourselves. But it is Teddy who passionately cuts off every layer of each character's shell till we cannot help but know them to a sometimes quite disconcerting extent. But what is Teddy, really? Does he have post-traumatic stress, or is he just a sociopath? It's natural to speculate as to the similarities between Marjoe Gortner and the character he plays. Both are defined by their flair for imitation and general audacity toward strangers and open venues, Marjoe having been exploited by his own parents which grew to warp him into something of an exhibitionist sociopath, much like the war might've done to Teddy. Not to mention, his submissive, frightened girlfriend Cheryl is played by Marjoe's real-life wife at the time, Candy Clark.
This is not a unilateral subversive slamming of traditional American life and the progressive new age. The thrill of the movie is in the tension created by the vulnerable humanity of each of Teddy's victims. Most memorably, Stephanie Faracy as Angel is not exactly a classic beauty, but she dreams of marriage to a Prince Charming and a happy home in a better world, as if she were a little girl, which pitifully bespeaks her complete romantic inexperience and lifelong feeling of loneliness. Life has not prepared her for the crushing blow Teddy will give her with a small handful of simple words. Pat Hingle fits right into another more pathetic character, Lyle, whose ritual diner visit seems more like a desperate latch onto something that doesn't resemble waiting alone to die. Then there are Lee Grant and Hal Linden as Richard and Clarisse, building a complex relationship with more cultivated urban characters, a well-heeled marriage whom you'd probably see at a swinging party, maybe two, but find it nearly impossible to communicate with each other and nearly unbearable know they'll never be able to.
But the key to the film is Peter Firth as Red Ryder. Imagine a parallel story where Superman were just a bus boy in Nowhereville, having no idea of his capabilities, and even less so did anyone else, and you may understand the implied significance of his underdog counterpoint to Teddy. But also there's simply his consumption with a wholly different subculture than Teddy, which is what defines all of his inadequacies and nearly insufferable humiliations at Teddy's hands, but also, ultimately, his dark-horse qualities.
No one is more suited than Teddy to impel the rude awakening of the petrified America that is least prepared for the onslaught of the new generation. He emerges into the ideal backdrop of a dying New Mexico town with tell-tale signs of having been part of the counterculture that had aimed to liberate themselves from social limitations, decide their own paths, discover new significance in life. One articulation of this is seen in his criterion of dress and grooming, making him immediately identifiable to the simple townsfolk, but Teddy loves it that way, not so much for the visual emblem of his individual rights but for its shock value, which he relishes inciting in any and everyone he meets.
Is this character meant to represent the hippie movement? Yes and no. He does in the insulated WWII minds of the people who here become trapped in his cage. In this world, he is an attacking force that won't leave them alone. From what we discover of their personal lives, that the people in this town are unhappily self-limited to doing and being what society has forever told them about themselves, it is the post-Vietnam doubt cast on authority that feels alien and threatening. They are the straights and squares hippies have always detached themselves from.
The setting is Foster's Diner, a rest stop that lost most of its trade when a new highway bypass came about. That's right; the world's passing them by. Staff include mousy waitress Angel, down-to-earth boss Clark, and a fidgety cook nicknamed after the eponymous hero. Lyle, owner of the neighboring gas station, stops by now and again to sever the tedium with his jolly chitchat. The dreary custom of the everyday slog is interrupted with the entrance of two couples, the fashionable Richard and Clarisse, and finally, the younger and stormier Teddy, the unhinged 'Nam vet, and Cheryl, his hippie girlfriend. Difficulties develop when drug dealing and guns cross the threshold both as foreshadowing and upon Teddy and Cheryl's conspicuous arrival, and Teddy turns to brute psychological torment when he holds everyone captive.
In the era of this plot, not only did America barely know or even comprehend Vietnam and our intervention there, we didn't know ourselves. But it is Teddy who passionately cuts off every layer of each character's shell till we cannot help but know them to a sometimes quite disconcerting extent. But what is Teddy, really? Does he have post-traumatic stress, or is he just a sociopath? It's natural to speculate as to the similarities between Marjoe Gortner and the character he plays. Both are defined by their flair for imitation and general audacity toward strangers and open venues, Marjoe having been exploited by his own parents which grew to warp him into something of an exhibitionist sociopath, much like the war might've done to Teddy. Not to mention, his submissive, frightened girlfriend Cheryl is played by Marjoe's real-life wife at the time, Candy Clark.
This is not a unilateral subversive slamming of traditional American life and the progressive new age. The thrill of the movie is in the tension created by the vulnerable humanity of each of Teddy's victims. Most memorably, Stephanie Faracy as Angel is not exactly a classic beauty, but she dreams of marriage to a Prince Charming and a happy home in a better world, as if she were a little girl, which pitifully bespeaks her complete romantic inexperience and lifelong feeling of loneliness. Life has not prepared her for the crushing blow Teddy will give her with a small handful of simple words. Pat Hingle fits right into another more pathetic character, Lyle, whose ritual diner visit seems more like a desperate latch onto something that doesn't resemble waiting alone to die. Then there are Lee Grant and Hal Linden as Richard and Clarisse, building a complex relationship with more cultivated urban characters, a well-heeled marriage whom you'd probably see at a swinging party, maybe two, but find it nearly impossible to communicate with each other and nearly unbearable know they'll never be able to.
But the key to the film is Peter Firth as Red Ryder. Imagine a parallel story where Superman were just a bus boy in Nowhereville, having no idea of his capabilities, and even less so did anyone else, and you may understand the implied significance of his underdog counterpoint to Teddy. But also there's simply his consumption with a wholly different subculture than Teddy, which is what defines all of his inadequacies and nearly insufferable humiliations at Teddy's hands, but also, ultimately, his dark-horse qualities.
a movie that you won't forget.
elbcab7 April 2004
Having not seen this movie for over twenty years, it has always been on my mind. And I could never remember the title just the name red ryder. I have been trying to find this movie, so that I can show it to friends because I know once they watch it, it will become something that they will always remember. Mor movies like this needs to be made, instead of some the things coming out of hollywood today. marjoe cortner and Candy clark really do their characters good, and it gives one the feeling that people like this should not be allowed to languish in the public's eye. But I could watch this movie every year and probably would get a different opinion everytime.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
