Who? (1974) User Reviews

For Fans of Oddities

[LynxMatthews · 6/10 · 24 July 2003]

For those like myself who enjoy films that fit into no particular genre, and would enjoy a scene like a silver-headed metal man happily driving a tractor, this thing may be for you. ROBO MAN, as it is known on the video box, is a pretty strange affair. It is actually more psychological cat and mouse game than anything else, with the poor, metal-headed guy caught in the middle. The movie intercuts scenes of Gould trying to pick the metal man's brain to find out if he is who he says he is/was, with scenes of Trevor Howard appearing to brainwash the same guy at an earlier date. The intriguing notion is that Gould has such respect for the ability of his perceived enemy (Howard), that NOTHING the metal man says will prove who he is to Gould. I left the movie uncertain whether Gould's stubbornness helped or harmed humanity.

Also, it may have been intentional, but Gould acts more robot-like than Mr. Metalhead. The performance of Metaldude is actually quite affecting. Kudos to Joe Bova.

Very unusual paranoia thriller, probably TOO low-key for its own good though the plot is undoubtedly thought-provoking.

[barnabyrudge · 5/10 · 1 February 2006]

"Who?" is an intriguing, low-key, totally unusual Cold War thriller that has faded undeservedly into obscurity. While not a lost classic by any stretch of the imagination, it remains a commendable little film which explores issues of identity and political paranoia in an affecting way. Based on an Algis Budrys novel, and adapted for the screen by John Gould, it is a film of much talk and little action.... therefore, viewers will need to give it a certain level of attention in order to follow the plot and understand the characters. Those who prefer special effects, explosions and other such brain candy will probably not enjoy it.

American scientist Lucas Martino (Joseph Bova) is badly injured in a car accident whilst in the Eastern Bloc. He is rushed to hospital and saved by Communist doctors, but his face and much of his body is so grotesquely disfigured that they have to use metallic plating to rebuild him. By the time Martino is "repaired", he looks more like a robot than a man. A while later, Martino is returned to the U.S, but his startling new "look" arouses immediate suspicion. The American government wonder whether the real Martino has been sent back to them or if they have, in fact, been handed a Soviet spy disguised as this strange robotic man. Agent Sean Rogers (Elliot Gould) is given the task of interrogating the robotic man, to find out if he is who he claims to be or an impostor. Martino insists that he is still the same man, and that only his appearance has altered, but Rogers suspects that there is more to the case than meets the eye. Could the whole thing really be an audacious Russian spy plot? Or perhaps the Americans DO have Martino but he has been brainwashed by the Russians into carrying out espionage activities for them? Or maybe even the bewildered metal man is genuinely telling the truth, struggling to come to terms with his incredible new appearance in a paranoid world where all around him refuse to trust him?

Gould is good as the "hero", a man whose sense of accountability towards national security motivates, and occasionally clouds, his quest for the truth. Also good is Trevor Howard as the Russian Colonel Azarin, who is seen in flashback trying to brainwash the injured Martino (not until the end of the movie do we learn if his brainwashing efforts were successful). But best of all is Joseph Bova as the robotic victim, evoking a mix of sympathy and suspicion with his voice and mannerisms, despite the fact that his face is concealed behind an inexpressive metal mask. Indeed, "Who?" is a well-acted offering throughout. The film's faults lie elsewhere. Jack Gold's direction is too pedestrian and low-key for the movie's own good. Many of the scenes are so dully staged and detached and grey that the film has a somewhat cold feel to it. An air of cynicism hangs over the proceedings - one might almost call it "anti-entertainment" or "anti-cinema". This actually damages the film in some ways and undoes the effect of the good performances and thought-provoking story-line. I'd still recommend "Who?" if just for its relatively strange ideas, but it is undoubtedly a picture that could have amounted to much, much more.

Roboman... Good Grief... Did They Even Make An Extra Nickel From This Lame Re-Titling?

[hokeybutt · 6/10 · 30 July 2005]

WHO? (3 outta 5 stars) Actually, the movie was re-titled "Roboman" for its video release (let me guess... some time after "Robocop" came out?) and has some trashy cover art making it look some kind of killer-robot-on-the-loose kind of movie... which this most definitely is not! It's actually a very interesting suspense film/character study... kind of philosophical and very low-key. Elliot Gould stars in one of his finest roles... as a US agent who has to decide whether an important American scientist returning from a Soviet country is, in fact, who he claims to be. A nasty car accident on foreign soil almost killed Dr. Lucas Martino (Joseph Bova). Russian scientists saved his life by placing him in a newly-developed robotic body... but he is hardly recognizable as human anymore... so there is some questions as to whether he really IS Dr. Martino... or a Soviet agent pretending to be him to gain access to an important defense project. The entire movie deals with Gould's quest for the truth... and a very interesting story it is, too. The ending is particularly interesting... cross-cutting a final meeting between Gould and Martino with flashbacks to the medical procedure. Is Martino really Martino? And does it really matter? You won't know until the final, fascinating moments.

Offbeat, unsung thriller

[lor_ · 20 January 2023]

My review was written in October 1982 after a screening at Thalia theater on Manhattan's UWS.

Produced in 1974 by British Lion using German tax shelter funding, "Who?" is a very affecting though minor science fiction film. Acquired for U. S. release by the since-defunct Allied Artists (along with other pictures produced by Canadian Barry Levinson -not the U. S. director of "Diner"), picture was shelved and has had domestic exposure only through nontheatrical bookings. It's a shame, since this is a nice little picture which, despite its anticipating the sic-fi boom by a couple of years and its non-reliance on hardware, could have attracted a small following.

Adapted from Algis Budrys's novel by the late British playwright John Gould (no relation to pic's star Elliott Gould), "Who?" is an action-espionage thriller examining, from a science-fiction perspective, the nature of identity. Joe Bova gives a beautiful, underplayed performance as diminutive U. S. scientist Martino, whose face and arm are remade in metal after a car accident in Berlin. The film's mystery-suspense plot derives from iterated flashbacks showing Martino grilled and/or indoctrinated by East German intelligence officer Azarin (Trevor Howard).

Once back in the U. S., Martino is subjected to gruelling questioning and investigation by F. B. I. Operative Rogers (Elliott Gould) to check his new security clearance for continuing a top secret research project in Florida. Gould examines the reactions of Martino's old associates to his transformed, robot-like appearance.

The action sequences, including a standard Remy Julienne-piloted car chase,are not the main area of interest in "Who?", but rather the vulnerable, ultimately lovable little man Martino's saga of self-discovery. Constantly crushed by people's pitying or frightened reaction to his cyborg appearance. Marino only snaps out of his depressive state when he realizes that he has lost his identity by depending too much on the opinions of others. In terms of story development, this central theme is tied directly to his immediate (unwilling but internalized) need to impress Rogers with the proven fact of his identity as physicist Martino rather than some imposter planted by the Communists.

After the flashbacks ultimately reveal Martino's new identity, film concludes with a terrific scene where Rogers and Martino come to a mutual understanding and latter has found his self-realization at last by working anonymously on a farm where his fellow workers accept him at "face" value -he doesn't have to prove anything anymore. This elegant finale carries a simple philosophical punch unusual for the sci-fi film genre.

Crisply directed by Jack Gold, "Who?" is a technically adroit low-bugeter, with excellent makeup for Martino executed by Colin Arthur, famed for his superb makeup effects recently in "Christiane F." and "Conan the Barbarian".

Bova does wonders in the central role, creating intense viewer identification though restricted to vocal and body acting rather than his face, which is covered with the silver, metal look. Bulling his way through the picture in the tough guy lead roe familiar from many British B-pictures featuring a U. S. actor for marquee value. Gould brings humor to the assignment. Trevor Howard is seen only in the flashbacks.

Interesting, to say the least

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 30 April 2016]

WHO? is an interesting little Cold War thriller with an existential theme. It involves a top American scientist who is involved in a car accident in communist Germany. When he's returned home, due to horrific burns his whole head is encased in a metal mask, which makes him look like a robot. However, the powers that be question his very identity, and wonder whether he is in fact a Russian spy...

It's certainly an intriguing set-up, and what I loved about this film is that it deals with questions of identity and existence in a thought-provoking way. The whole movie hinges on the acting of Joseph Bova inside the mask, and very good he is too, despite looking ridiculous. He brings a real sense of sadness to the part so that you feel for his plight.

The mystery aspects of the storyline are acceptable, and there are a few action scenes to perk things up a little bit. Elliott Gould is the nominal protagonist in this one but he plays rather a dull and stuffy character, although Trevor Howard is fun in his flashback scenes. WHO? isn't an entirely successful film, which is why it's virtually forgotten these days, but it's definitely worth a look for those with a penchant for offbeat cinema.

Dreadfull

[1bilbo · 2/10 · 30 December 2017]

I sat through this just waiting for something meaningful to happen.

Was or wasn't the metal headed scientist really who he said he was or had he been replaced by a spy - after 30 minutes I stopped caring.

In the end the result is an anticlimax that makes the viewer wish he hadn't bothered to watch to the end.

Some great actors in this but all wasted.

Billed as sci-fi but it consists of nothing but boring dialogue all through.

A film I had never heard of or seen stills from is certainly worth a look

[christopher-underwood · 7/10 · 18 March 2021]

This is pretty strange. An eminent US scientist has been seized by the Russians and after an element of brainwashing seek to return him to act on their behalf. Unfortunately, perhaps, for them he has had a serious accident out there and has been given considerable surgical reconstruction. The upshot is that the guy looks like a tin man and it is hard to know if her really is who everyone thinks he is. It is a slight story with insufficient set-up for us to care one way or the other but as questions arise as to whether he even wants to be who he might be things get interesting and certainly no less weird as he strolls about trying to find himself. A film I had never heard of or seen stills from is certainly worth a look. For me, Trevor Howard just about holds it together but Elliott Gould is brilliant and makes it all much better than it might have been.

Who? Who Cares!

[Rindiana · 3/10 · 22 July 2009]

Just when you think Cold War espionage films can't get any more absurd, along comes this positively robotic sleep-inducer, which strives to be much more clever than it actually is.

To be frank, the plot itself has opportunities for a nice if silly play on identities and the shuffled chronology offers a good basic premise, but it's all ruined by weak direction, a lame narrative, lackadaisical acting (although Gould is his usual lovably crumpled self) and a terrible score.

Dumas used an iron mask to much better effect...

3 out of 10 ridiculous car chases

A very odd seventies spy thriller

[Mikew3001 · 6/10 · 28 March 2003]

1973: American scientist Lucas Martino is seriously hurt and mutilated during a car accident in East Germany. The best doctors in the Communist state are doing the best to save his life, making him a kind of early cyborg with his head and most parts of his body covered or replaced by metal. Returning to the U.S.A. with a completely new "outfit", the F.B.I. tries to find out if it's the same person or an Eastern spy who's aim is getting information on a top secret military project.

What could have been a very interesting and thrilling seventies spy story is just a lame movie about a robot man walking around stupidly. The acting is dull, but you can't blame main actor Joseph Bova as is is constantly acting with a mask on his face. The Cold-War-Conflict is just a background for a silly love story, and the worst is Bova's "make-up", as the robot outfit looks rather like the iron man of the "Wizard of Oz" or a funny figure from an old Disney movie instead of being a symbol for a human tragedy. The "Who?" script is a promising idea for a film, but the production itself is disappointing, and even stars like Elliot Gould and Trevor Howard can't rescue this movie.

Zzzzzz

[artpf · 2/10 · 27 September 2013]

Interesting concept poorly realized.

American scientist is in an accident and East Germans save him. He comes back to America with his head in a metal casing and American agents don't know if it's really the same guy or a spy.

Very low budget. Elliot Gould stars in this vehicle as the US agent who doesn't think the guy is the real deal.

I suspect this movie was the beginning of Gould's demise as an actor. It come after all his great movies and he hasn't done much of substance since.

He walks through this role reading lines in a stiff fashion. Interestingly this movie was made nearly 15 years before the original RoboCop. Wonder if they got the idea from it. It's basically the same concept without the law enforcement angle.

The giant fatal flaw in this film is if they really wonder if this is the real scientist, why don't they just take his fingerprints and compare them?

Plus, flashbacks make it apparent it IS the guy. So all the suspense is lifted n the first 10 minutes.

There's no drama no tension. Just a guy with a silver head wandering around.

Super disappointment.

Underrated & hugely misunderstood - but highly intelligent and rewarding

[rabbitmoon · 8/10 · 3 December 2017]

Some of the negative reviews here seem to be because of not paying proper attention to the story (particularly, understanding the clever flashback structure), and/or getting hung up over the makeup/tin head effects. Its a huge shame that these might dissuade people from seeing this brilliant film.

The appearance of Lucas Martino (the tin man) is irrelevant. What matters is that all the FBI has to go on to identify him is his responses. Another reviewer (no doubt distracted by facebook rather than actually watching) mentioned 'why don't they just compare his fingerprints?' but its explained in the film that whilst the arm may belong to Martino, it doesn't guarantee that the head/mind does.

At its heart, the film explores a fascinating theme about identity, what makes a person who they are in a way that couldn't be imitated and taught to someone else. Between the lines is a chess-game style thought-battle between two sides, figuring out what to do with this guy, and trying to solve the puzzle of how to prove that someone is who they say they are. There's a desperate, tragic and lonely feeling underlying the conversations, when trying to distill the very essence of a person's humanity.

What really makes the idea work is the meticulous structure of the film - we see the present day situation of the FBI trying to figure out who he is, intercut with flashbacks of the Russians questioning him and figuring out whether to send back a spy instead. So the audience has to think and consider all the angles along with both the Russian spy commander and the FBI agent, trying to second guess events but never really knowing for sure who the man is (or more importantly - HOW to know) until the very end.

I've seen this film at least six times and still enjoy its ideas and main philosophical puzzle each time, despite knowing the outcome. Its such a great shame that people are so blind-sided by the lack of action, the dodgy makeup effects, the woeful mis-marketing and obvious low budget of the film to recognise what is actually a great story, and a very intelligently structured film.

There are two particularly ropy moments - a car-chase/shootout at an airport, and a completely pointless/unnecessary moment where an agent chases our mystery man across a road, runs into the side of a car, then leaps over its hood and ends up dead. Next scene: mystery man says "Sorry about Finchley". FBI agents ignores it, moves into next line of questioning. Its pretty absurd. If these stupid shoe- horned attempts at 'action' were cut out completely, it would be a better film.

I would love to see a polished remake of this story by someone like Chris Nolan or Denis Villeneuve - taking the flashback structure and running with it to really explore the themes and push the emotional side into new territories. It would surely be a classic of philosophical sci-fi.

Genuinely, this is one of my favourite movies of all time.

A metal man staring out of a metal head.

[mark.waltz · 4/10 · 4 May 2022]

A very bizarre science fiction thriller dealing with the alleged reconstruction of a famous American badly burned up in a car accident yet surviving, given a metal head and limbs and trying to get on with his life, but part of an international conspiracy to where you're never sure if he's really the person that was in that explosion. That's Joseph Bova inside the bazaar over the head mask, and basically all you hear is his voice. Elliott Gould is the man behind the operation, making this film during an era where critics were saying it was an event when you saw a film that didn't have Elliott Gould in it. Indeed, he seemed to be in every other film that came out around this time. Trevor Howard co-stars, with James Noble of "Benson" same in a smaller part.

There's lots of action going on, but the film is so bizarre and convoluted, one of those futuristic films that probably only makes sense to the person who wrote it. The best scene for me was when Bova was walking down the street in his skull mask, and people either just slightly stare or ignore it. The purpose of the scene is for Bova to notice that Gould is following him, having finally been allowed to go out in public, yet not having a moment of privacy. The point of the film is never clear except to make the audience wonder who really is inside this facade, as it has insinuated throughout the film that it's not the man who was in the car that blew up in the opening scene. Irregardless, it's a bizarre film that left a cold taste for me after it was done.

The spy thriller meets Alexandre Dumas.....

[dbdumonteil · 8/10 · 27 September 2012]

...and "Le Vicomte De Bragelonne" and its iron mask. At the beginning of his career ,Jack Gold made movies which were anything but derivative: think of "Catholics"(also featuring T.Howard) or "the Medusa touch" .

"Who" is an overlooked spy thriller ,which takes elements from "Manchurian candidate", "seconds " and Alexandre Dumas and brings them all back home;without special effect,or almost,he creates a thoroughly disturbing atmosphere ,helped by a superlative performance by J.Bova who succeeds in making his character endearing and extremely moving ,against all odds.

Eliott Gould's investigation does not matter much,it's not essential;the subject of the movie is "is life worth living when you've become "inhuman"?" (that perfectly explains the final death of the "second " Martino).

Some scenes are extraordinary,spooky ,without the usual horror paraphernalia :Martino walking through the streets of the city is a great moment;the mask ,which could look like that of an ET ,a serial killer or a clown, is more frightening (and more human because of those eyes)than the bandages of the invisible man.

The message is not "can he resume the Neptune project?" but "how can

he find a reason to believe and to live?"If you find a way,everything's possible:it's hope for people who think they are no longer part of the human race (is there a reason to be proud of being part of them anyway?)

let this sleeper be an introduction to the other Gold movies I mention above.

But Oz Never Did Give Nothing To The Tin Man...

[azathothpwiggins · 23 November 2021]

In WHO?, Martino (Joseph Bova), a famous American physicist, returns from Russia after an automobile accident. Upon his arrival, we notice that his head, left arm, and upper body have been replaced with metal. Martino is taken to a secret debriefing facility for interrogation.

A fairly slow-building film, nothing really happens for the first 50+ minutes. Once Martino leaves the government building, the "action" begins. Sort of. There's an assassination attempt, a car chase, an explosion, and the big reveal.

An odd artifact from the 1970's, it gets points for originality. Modern audiences may have trouble staying awake long enough to enjoy its more nuanced approach.

Co-stars Elliott Gould as Rogers, the suspicious government agent...

More like, "Whaa?"

[Wizard-8 · 7 May 2015]

It was around this time that Elliot Gould's career started to go downhill. He must have been desperate for work if he had to star in this quite low budget British thriller. Actually, while watching the movie one can see signs that a promising movie could have been made from this material; the premise is intriguing and original. Unfortunately, the filmmakers pretty much botch all of it up. It's way too talky for its own good, and much of the dialogue is dry and not very interesting. As a result, the movie becomes quite boring; Gould himself gives a very uninterested performance. There are a couple of chuckles from the sight of the cyborg since he looks like the Mexican wrestler Santo, but even he becomes boring in short notice.

One last thing: Does the FBI really have jurisdiction in Europe?