source: Girl on a Chain Gang

Moviecut—Girl on a Chain Gang

While on a secret trip in the Deep South to assist in voter registration two men by the names of "Ted Branch" (Ron Segal) and "Audie Dixon" (uncredited) along with one woman, "Jean Rollins" (Julie Ange) are pulled over by two redneck deputies for speeding. Not content to simply give them a ticket and allow them to drive off, the two deputies then proceed to take them to the city jail. It's there that the 3 travelers meet the local sheriff, "Sonny Lew Wymer" (William Watson) who happens to be both corrupt and extremely vicious as well. Anyway, after shaking them down for $150 he eventually allows them to leave. Unfortunately, rather than leaving town they decide to stop off at a local tavern and have a drink first. Big mistake. Now rather than reveal any more of this movie and risk spoiling it for those who haven't seen it I will just say that I found this film to still be somewhat entertaining in spite of its obvious flaws. Admittedly, the plot was heavy-handed and the characters were a bit over-the-top. No question about it. Additionally, I thought the ending was too abrupt and left much to be desired as well. Even so, many of us who lived in the United States during this particular time can probably admit that, as a nation, this wasn't one of our finest hours. And it's the memory of this that gave this film such a haunting charm. At least it did for me. Likewise, having two attractive actresses like Arlene Farber (as "Nellie") and the aforementioned Julie Ange certainly didn't hurt either. Be that as it may, I liked this particular film and I have rated it accordingly. Slightly above average.

If there were ever a contest of the worst film of all time, the most wasted use of celluloid in the history of film, this item would qualify hands down. I saw it by chance in 1967 in Reno, Nevada, with two other patrons who were obviously sleeping off their binge from the night before. I should have walked out after the first few minutes, but this is one of those "films" (I hate to use that word to describe this fiasco) that is so bad, I wanted to see just how bad it got. I suppose the worst part is where the leading lady, the "girl," after being raped by her jailer, is taken to court and pleads her innocence before a Southern judge. This "film" is an absolute insult to the people of the South and to anyone having any taste whatsoever. I noticed also that it's not even listed in Leonard Maltin's Movie Review book. The only reason that I'm writing this much about it is that in order to leave the one line summary (above), I have to write ten lines here.

source: Girl on a Chain Gang

If there were ever a contest of the worst film of all time, the most wasted use of celluloid in the history of film, this item would qualify hands down. I saw it by chance in 1967 in Reno, Nevada, with two other patrons who were obviously sleeping off their binge from the night before. I should have walked out after the first few minutes, but this is one of those "films" (I hate to use that word to describe this fiasco) that is so bad, I wanted to see just how bad it got. I suppose the worst part is where the leading lady, the "girl," after being raped by her jailer, is taken to court and pleads her innocence before a Southern judge. This "film" is an absolute insult to the people of the South and to anyone having any taste whatsoever. I noticed also that it's not even listed in Leonard Maltin's Movie Review book. The only reason that I'm writing this much about it is that in order to leave the one line summary (above), I have to write ten lines here.

While on a secret trip in the Deep South to assist in voter registration two men by the names of "Ted Branch" (Ron Segal) and "Audie Dixon" (uncredited) along with one woman, "Jean Rollins" (Julie Ange) are pulled over by two redneck deputies for speeding. Not content to simply give them a ticket and allow them to drive off, the two deputies then proceed to take them to the city jail. It's there that the 3 travelers meet the local sheriff, "Sonny Lew Wymer" (William Watson) who happens to be both corrupt and extremely vicious as well. Anyway, after shaking them down for $150 he eventually allows them to leave. Unfortunately, rather than leaving town they decide to stop off at a local tavern and have a drink first. Big mistake. Now rather than reveal any more of this movie and risk spoiling it for those who haven't seen it I will just say that I found this film to still be somewhat entertaining in spite of its obvious flaws. Admittedly, the plot was heavy-handed and the characters were a bit over-the-top. No question about it. Additionally, I thought the ending was too abrupt and left much to be desired as well. Even so, many of us who lived in the United States during this particular time can probably admit that, as a nation, this wasn't one of our finest hours. And it's the memory of this that gave this film such a haunting charm. At least it did for me. Likewise, having two attractive actresses like Arlene Farber (as "Nellie") and the aforementioned Julie Ange certainly didn't hurt either. Be that as it may, I liked this particular film and I have rated it accordingly. Slightly above average.

Girl on a Chain Gang

If there were ever a contest of the worst film of all time, the most wasted use of celluloid in the history of film, this item would qualify hands down. I saw it by chance in 1967 in Reno, Nevada, with two other patrons who were obviously sleeping off their binge from the night before. I should have walked out after the first few minutes, but this is one of those "films" (I hate to use that word to describe this fiasco) that is so bad, I wanted to see just how bad it got. I suppose the worst part is where the leading lady, the "girl," after being raped by her jailer, is taken to court and pleads her innocence before a Southern judge. This "film" is an absolute insult to the people of the South and to anyone having any taste whatsoever. I noticed also that it's not even listed in Leonard Maltin's Movie Review book. The only reason that I'm writing this much about it is that in order to leave the one line summary (above), I have to write ten lines here.