source: Harry in Your Pocket

I liked this film, but contemporary viewers might find it somewhat less than exciting. Viewers who weren't around in the early '70s are liable to be distracted by the bad fashions and bad hair of the day, even though this film is relatively conservative in that respect. Sex and violence do exist in the film, but by today's standards are extremely mild. The main characters, in any case, are portrayed superbly. All four actors who play these roles are charismatic, each in his or her own way. I thought the ending of the film was a little disappointing, although it undoubtedly was meant to send a message. This is a film that needs to be rated according to the standards of the time. While categorized as a comedy, it is far more serious than amusing.

This is a nice film that would have to be made by an independent today because it wouldn't have the blockbuster potential studios are looking for. Or the studio would add too much sex and violence to appeal to today's targeted demographics. As someone who first saw Walter Pidgeon as Cinderella's father when I was 9 years old, it was a shock to see him as a drug sniffing thief when I was in college. The scene where he gets caught was heartbreaking. He and Coburn are so smooth here you almost feel sorry for Sarrazin and Van Devere. They may look better but Coburn and Pidgeon are the better actors. The story is interesting because you don't see many movies about pickpockets. Heck, everything i know about pickpocketing I learned from this movie. They made it look easy and fun, or at least easy once you spend a lot of time practicing. One thing I've always wondered is how many people became pickpockets after watching this movie. At least it's better than other forms of crime. I hope it comes out on DVD since it's better than a lot of the stuff the studios put out today.

James Coburn and Walter Pidgeon are quite interesting in this quirky film. Dismiss the soundtrack, absorb the scenery. Michael Sarrazin and Trish Van Devere, at the time were also popular film personalities. Hate to admit it, but the scenes with Walter Pidgeon, snorting coke and teaching Sarrazin how to become a world class pick-pocket are quite funny. James Coburn always adds his persona to a film; I have loved his performances since the 1970's. This film almost seems like something Quentin Tarantino may watch now, and brainstorm for a new project. I guess I have missed my calling, but I think audiences are again ready for quirky films like this, with realism and edge. 8/10.

Just re-saw this movie after some thirty-three years. I first saw it at the now long gone Circle Theater in Miami Springs, Florida. I was a big fan of James Coburn and Micheal Sarrazon, and just had to see this movie. It was enjoyable when I was fifteen years old, and it was still enjoyable now. Very good acting from everyone involved. The movie plays almost like a play and the focus is on the four main characters, with little in regards to the supporting cast. Pick-pocketing was and always will be around. The film tends to make it an art with a romantic flavor, but then again, it's Hollywood. A bit of a surprise ending, but if you're expecting car chases, punch-outs, and shootouts, you will be greatly disappointed. Just a well-acted and entertaining little flick. Harry in Your Pocket is a pocketful of entertainment.

Harry In Your Pocket is one of the 20 best films of the 1970s. Rather than being a superifical film about thieves...this film is an intense character study involving guts, emotions, egos, lust and addictions. I feel this is one of James Coburn's best films...he puts on quite a convincing performance as a veteran pickpocket who is head of a 4 person team of thieves. Trish Van Devere as the love interest created quite a strong character for the screen that really impressed me and Walter Pidgeon as the old pro who has developed shaky hands from having a young person's drug addiction is outstanding in every way. This film can be very hard to hunt down but is well worth it...a time capsule from the 1970s and a guilty pleasure for those of us lucky enough to have seen film multiple times. It is difficult to create sympathetic characters when you have innocent victims constantly having their wallets and purses stolen but Coburn manages to pull it off. This a film about small dreams and not overreaching in life...as Coburn says about the idea of going to New York City....no easy marks in New York (this movie takes place in the mid west). This film is a 1970s classic that you will still be thinking about with a smile on your face for days afterward. Tom Wilson, New Jersey, USA (HardToFindMovies)

This Movie is Fantastic, the acting is great . It was shot in Victoria B.C. and Seattle.It shows our city Victoria how it use to look in 1973 and has a very to real story line. IF any one should be thinking on traveling to different cities this movie is the one to watch on how people are taken back to the fact of people being the victim of theft.This movie is a great way on how to protect yourself from these people before they get to you.

This recalls pleasant French films that celebrate petty thieves and rascals. Bruce Geller obviously had great potential for other films. James Buchanan and Ronald Austin provided an entertaining and almost believable script. Michael Sarrazin unfortunately plays his role in his usual wooden, implausible style but the old masters James Coburn and Walter Pidgeon enrich with their usual nuances. Trish Van Devere almost overcomes some early ambiguities in the script. The professionalism of the cinematography by Fred Koenekamp and editing by Arthur Hilton enhance, without in any way distracting from, the narrative. The score by Lalo Schifrin does call attention to itself but, nonetheless, works. As someone who has visited Salt Lake City several times, I enjoyed that locale. Seeing some place outside L.A. helps sometimes. This is not a ground-breaking work. It is not especially ingenious. It is not reflective or thoughtful. However, the film is not trivial, except for Michael Sarrazin who seems unable to play any but flat roles. Watching this movie diverts one on a sultry summer afternoon.

I was an extra, in the crowd. The last scenes. Were filmed, during an equestrian horse show, in salt lake city, Utah. It was interesting, to see all the production crew and cameras. An add was in the paper, to show up, and be a member of the crowd. So i went. We were given coupons, for hamburgers and drinks. It was a long time ago, but i sure remember it. When i went to the movie, in a theater, i swear i saw myself. It was the last scenes of the movie, where they caught "harry". The people filled the stands, on one side only. It took most of the day, to film it. There were trucks and cameras, and they kept telling you, if you saw a camera, to not look, at it. It was very interesting, and i am glad i went to do this.

Harry in your pocket is not a lost masterpiece but more of a lost movie of the decade that was famous for it's crime genre cinema. It's one of the better Coburn films of the 70's and pretty decent all around. All four principal characters take the equal burden of the story, which never becomes boring, predictable or tedious. There are some great scenes that show us the tricks of the trade, but every bit of it remains interesting to the end. Walter Pigeon and James Coburn lead the way in a story of life on a day to day basis, never looking beyond tomorrow, and doing a job that might just take you down in flames, so enjoy it while you can. And they do, best clothes, best hotels, best food and coke, but never in one place for more than a week. Michael Sarrazin and lovely Trish Van Devere are great as well as a no future lovers who immerse themselves in Harry's combustible world of fast money and quick pleasures. The job is risky and takes it's toll, that's how it goes and the ending serves the story. I don't know why this movie wasn't released on DVD but it surely deserves the attention of all fans of 70's cinema. Find and enjoy.