I haven't been able to decide if this movie is so bad it's good, or, to quote Enid Coleslaw, "so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again." No matter, it forced me look much the same way a pile of weird coloured vomit might, and it offers up a number of scenes that you won't forget even if you want to. There's a sneering young Ray Liotta telling a pigtailed Pia that her creative writing trophy looks like a penis. A bit later, there's Ray again, molesting Pia, not with the appropriately shaped trophy but a garden hose. There's a firm chinned Pia telling her domineering Mom that she wants to go to bed with Ray's geezer father, Walter. There's the actress in the graveyard scene yowling the best line ever written by Pia or anyone else: "WWWWHHHYYYYYYY!" There's that garden hose again, as Walter waves it Pia's face and roars "Is this more to your liking!?" There's Pia and her date so turned on by closeups of each other masticating salad that they start tearing each other's clothes off. There's Pia showering but forgetting to remove her dress. Perhaps best of all, there's Pia's typewriter, but instead of keys there are the miniature talking heads of those who have tormented her the most (afterwards, I was afraid to open my laptop). And finally there's Pia at "The Awards" exposing Hollywood for the cesspool it is, spitting out the second best line ever, "I guess I'm not the only one who has ever had to **** her way to the top." I see I have already spent more time commenting on "The Lonely Lady" than I have on far better pictures, so I'll quit. Be forewarned, though, that once you start watching you probably won't be able to take your eyes off the screen until two hours of your life have vanished forever.
45 Reviews
"Maybe THIS is more your 'kick'!!!!"
cchase29 October 2005
The memory banks of most of the reviewers here must've short-circuited when trying to recall this Cubic Zirconia of a gem, because practically everyone managed to misquote Lloyd Bochner's Walter Thornton, when in a fit of peevish anger, he hurls the phallic garden nozzle at his new wife, Jerilee Randall-Thornton, (a nearly comatose Pia Zadora) which was used to sexually assault her earlier in the movie...but I'm getting ahead of myself. In any case, poor Lloyd could've been snarling that line at the speechless audience as much as he was his put-upon co-star.
Hard as it is for most of us to believe, especially these days, nobody in Hollywood sets out to INTENTIONALLY make a bad movie. This is certainly not the most defensible argument to make, since there just seem to be so damn many of them coming out. But then again, there is that breed of film that one must imagine during the time of its creation, from writing, casting and direction, must've been cursed with the cinematic equivalent of trying to shoot during the Ides of March.
THE LONELY LADY is in that category, and represents itself very well, considering the circumstances. Here we have all the ingredients in a recipe guaranteed to produce a monumentally fallen soufflé: Pia Zadora, a marginal singer/actress so determined to be taken seriously, that she would take on practically anything that might set her apart from her peers, (which this movie most certainly did!); a somewhat high-profile novel written by the Trashmaster himself, Harold Robbins (of THE CARPETBAGGERS and DREAMS DIE FIRST fame); a cast who probably thought they were so fortunate to be working at all, that they tried to play this dreck like it was Clifford Odets or Ibsen; plus a director who more than likely was a hired gun who kept the mess moving just to collect a paycheck, (and was probably contractually obligated NOT to demand the use of the 'Alan Smithee' moniker to protect what was left of his reputation.) Like Lamont Johnson's LIPSTICK, Meir Zarchi's I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE, Roger Vadim's BARBARELLA, Paul Verhoeven's SHOWGIRLS or the Grandmammy of Really Bad Film-making, Frank Perry's MOMMY DEAREST, THE LONELY LADY is still often-discussed, (usually with disgust, disbelief, horrified laughter, or a unique combination of all three), yet also defies dissection, description or even the pretzel logic of Hollyweird. Nobody's sure how it came to be, how it was ever released in even a single theater, or why it's still here and nearly impossible to get rid of, but take it or leave it, it IS here to stay. And I don't think that lovers of really good BAD movies would have it any other way.
Hard as it is for most of us to believe, especially these days, nobody in Hollywood sets out to INTENTIONALLY make a bad movie. This is certainly not the most defensible argument to make, since there just seem to be so damn many of them coming out. But then again, there is that breed of film that one must imagine during the time of its creation, from writing, casting and direction, must've been cursed with the cinematic equivalent of trying to shoot during the Ides of March.
THE LONELY LADY is in that category, and represents itself very well, considering the circumstances. Here we have all the ingredients in a recipe guaranteed to produce a monumentally fallen soufflé: Pia Zadora, a marginal singer/actress so determined to be taken seriously, that she would take on practically anything that might set her apart from her peers, (which this movie most certainly did!); a somewhat high-profile novel written by the Trashmaster himself, Harold Robbins (of THE CARPETBAGGERS and DREAMS DIE FIRST fame); a cast who probably thought they were so fortunate to be working at all, that they tried to play this dreck like it was Clifford Odets or Ibsen; plus a director who more than likely was a hired gun who kept the mess moving just to collect a paycheck, (and was probably contractually obligated NOT to demand the use of the 'Alan Smithee' moniker to protect what was left of his reputation.) Like Lamont Johnson's LIPSTICK, Meir Zarchi's I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE, Roger Vadim's BARBARELLA, Paul Verhoeven's SHOWGIRLS or the Grandmammy of Really Bad Film-making, Frank Perry's MOMMY DEAREST, THE LONELY LADY is still often-discussed, (usually with disgust, disbelief, horrified laughter, or a unique combination of all three), yet also defies dissection, description or even the pretzel logic of Hollyweird. Nobody's sure how it came to be, how it was ever released in even a single theater, or why it's still here and nearly impossible to get rid of, but take it or leave it, it IS here to stay. And I don't think that lovers of really good BAD movies would have it any other way.
For a "lonely" lady, she sure gets around
allexand10 May 2013
Warning: Spoilers
"The Lonely Lady" is the story of Jerilee Randall, a young girl who in search of fame and recognition basically puts out to get ahead. It's sleazy, campy fun for all if you can stand the gratuitous nudity.
The reason this movie is so entertaining is its star. Pia Zadora is a bad actress who was fortunately blessed with the gift of accidental comedy. Sometimes you can't help but bust out laughing even before she opens her mouth. I can't help but wondering if maybe she would've had more success if she tried to make comedies rather than angst-ridden melodramas like this that only spotlight her lack of talent.
She is further hindered by utterly atrocious dialogue as is the supporting cast. The lines range from unintentionally funny ("You've already had one abortion, don't make it two", "I don't suppose I'm the only one who's had to f**k her way to the top", "Is this more your kick?") to downright alien (Jerilee's high school award acceptance speech at the beginning and her book reviews, which laud her for depicting "rape and violence with a sensitivity beyond her years" and showing "the inadequacy of liberal values in the face of evil???")
The writers' bad dialogue and poor choice of wording really deserve a mention because this movie is about drum roll, please screenwriters! Nevermind the fact that Jerilee thinks her ticket to fame is becoming a successful screenwriter, she modifies a script by excising an actress's entire monologue and replacing it with "Why?" and it is treated as brilliant! We're also supposed to believe that the actress would rather say one word than give a monologue. Of course it's all worth it as watching the actress act out her new line change is rife with narm.
Bad acting and dialogue aside, it's really hard to feel any sympathy as Jerilee goes from one obvious bad choice to another. She dumps her nice-guy boyfriend in the beginning to run off with a famous screenwriter's son. Her reward for this is getting raped at his house by one of his smarmy friends with a garden hose, no less. The description is absurd on its own, but this scene has to be seen to be believed. Our imperiled heroine writhes on the ground while shrieking her head off as she waits for a soon-to-be-embarrassed Ray Liotta to insert his hose (not a metaphor) inside her. He rips her blouse open so the audience gets a boob shot (first of many) as a bonus while overwrought "scary" music blares. In a more competent movie with a competent cast, this scene would be upsetting to watch. Here, it's so ridiculous that the filmmakers have achieved the impossible: a comedic rape scene.
Later she marries the boy's father (the screenwriter's son, not the garden hose rapist, though given some of her later choices in men, it would've made as much sense) and continues to live in the same house where she was raped! Though it can almost be forgiven as it leads to another memorable scene where her older husband, after battling impotence, waves the garden hose in her face and taunts her with it. It's so jaw-droppingly insensitive you just can't help but laugh.
She follows with a succession of increasingly sleazy boyfriends though once again, it's forgiven as it gives us Jerilee's nervous breakdown scene. Of course, it's memorable for all the wrong reasons.
Jerilee is also given a mother who's every bit as comically insensitive and abusive as her lovers. She repeatedly puts her daughter down after getting raped, getting an abortion, and even going to the loony bin. She throws herself at her daughter's husband, knowing full well that her daughter got violated at his house and that the boy would go unpunished because of hubby's status.
However, the filmmakers obviously felt that the movie could not stand on its own so they added nudity and it gets ramped up as the movie progresses. First, we get an occasional topless shot, then a sex-in-the-shower scene, and then five straight minutes near the end of Jerilee and her latest boyfriend cavorting in the buff. Most of the shots are of Ms. Zadora herself (though we do get to see quite a lot of "Saturday Night Fever's" Joseph Cali) so they clearly thought her body was something special. She even has women coming on to her! Pia Zadora's not a dog, mind you, but she's certainly not attractive enough to have every man and woman fawn over her. The fact that her older, rich husband backed this movie makes it rather icky, as well.
Finally, the movie has an overall generic feel to it. Buildings are not named, the ersatz Oscar ceremony which bookends the film is simply called "The Awards," and one of Jerilee's books is shown with a white cover and blocky letters. Many of the film's songs have a bizarre anonymous vibe to them with simple, uncreative lyrics. Character names are rather dull and uninspired, except for Jerilee, but the movie undercuts even this by having her compete with another woman named Jerilee for a screen writing Oscar sorry, "Award." Not only are the screenwriters for this film out of touch with reality, they're woefully unimaginative.
This movie finally ended Pia's bid for movie stardom. What's strange is how much this movie seems to mirror Pia's own career. Both Pia and Jerilee married older, rich men, used them to get ahead, had their careers ruined at the end of the movie, and bared enough skin to make people call Pia's self-respect into question. Thankfully, those of us in the real world knew better than to give Pia an Oscar.
The reason this movie is so entertaining is its star. Pia Zadora is a bad actress who was fortunately blessed with the gift of accidental comedy. Sometimes you can't help but bust out laughing even before she opens her mouth. I can't help but wondering if maybe she would've had more success if she tried to make comedies rather than angst-ridden melodramas like this that only spotlight her lack of talent.
She is further hindered by utterly atrocious dialogue as is the supporting cast. The lines range from unintentionally funny ("You've already had one abortion, don't make it two", "I don't suppose I'm the only one who's had to f**k her way to the top", "Is this more your kick?") to downright alien (Jerilee's high school award acceptance speech at the beginning and her book reviews, which laud her for depicting "rape and violence with a sensitivity beyond her years" and showing "the inadequacy of liberal values in the face of evil???")
The writers' bad dialogue and poor choice of wording really deserve a mention because this movie is about drum roll, please screenwriters! Nevermind the fact that Jerilee thinks her ticket to fame is becoming a successful screenwriter, she modifies a script by excising an actress's entire monologue and replacing it with "Why?" and it is treated as brilliant! We're also supposed to believe that the actress would rather say one word than give a monologue. Of course it's all worth it as watching the actress act out her new line change is rife with narm.
Bad acting and dialogue aside, it's really hard to feel any sympathy as Jerilee goes from one obvious bad choice to another. She dumps her nice-guy boyfriend in the beginning to run off with a famous screenwriter's son. Her reward for this is getting raped at his house by one of his smarmy friends with a garden hose, no less. The description is absurd on its own, but this scene has to be seen to be believed. Our imperiled heroine writhes on the ground while shrieking her head off as she waits for a soon-to-be-embarrassed Ray Liotta to insert his hose (not a metaphor) inside her. He rips her blouse open so the audience gets a boob shot (first of many) as a bonus while overwrought "scary" music blares. In a more competent movie with a competent cast, this scene would be upsetting to watch. Here, it's so ridiculous that the filmmakers have achieved the impossible: a comedic rape scene.
Later she marries the boy's father (the screenwriter's son, not the garden hose rapist, though given some of her later choices in men, it would've made as much sense) and continues to live in the same house where she was raped! Though it can almost be forgiven as it leads to another memorable scene where her older husband, after battling impotence, waves the garden hose in her face and taunts her with it. It's so jaw-droppingly insensitive you just can't help but laugh.
She follows with a succession of increasingly sleazy boyfriends though once again, it's forgiven as it gives us Jerilee's nervous breakdown scene. Of course, it's memorable for all the wrong reasons.
Jerilee is also given a mother who's every bit as comically insensitive and abusive as her lovers. She repeatedly puts her daughter down after getting raped, getting an abortion, and even going to the loony bin. She throws herself at her daughter's husband, knowing full well that her daughter got violated at his house and that the boy would go unpunished because of hubby's status.
However, the filmmakers obviously felt that the movie could not stand on its own so they added nudity and it gets ramped up as the movie progresses. First, we get an occasional topless shot, then a sex-in-the-shower scene, and then five straight minutes near the end of Jerilee and her latest boyfriend cavorting in the buff. Most of the shots are of Ms. Zadora herself (though we do get to see quite a lot of "Saturday Night Fever's" Joseph Cali) so they clearly thought her body was something special. She even has women coming on to her! Pia Zadora's not a dog, mind you, but she's certainly not attractive enough to have every man and woman fawn over her. The fact that her older, rich husband backed this movie makes it rather icky, as well.
Finally, the movie has an overall generic feel to it. Buildings are not named, the ersatz Oscar ceremony which bookends the film is simply called "The Awards," and one of Jerilee's books is shown with a white cover and blocky letters. Many of the film's songs have a bizarre anonymous vibe to them with simple, uncreative lyrics. Character names are rather dull and uninspired, except for Jerilee, but the movie undercuts even this by having her compete with another woman named Jerilee for a screen writing Oscar sorry, "Award." Not only are the screenwriters for this film out of touch with reality, they're woefully unimaginative.
This movie finally ended Pia's bid for movie stardom. What's strange is how much this movie seems to mirror Pia's own career. Both Pia and Jerilee married older, rich men, used them to get ahead, had their careers ruined at the end of the movie, and bared enough skin to make people call Pia's self-respect into question. Thankfully, those of us in the real world knew better than to give Pia an Oscar.
How bad is it?
heckles4 July 1999
How bad is it? Well, I lived in central Pennsylvania during Hurricane Agnes in 1970, the Great Blizzard of 1993, and was in northern Vermont for the Ice Storm of 1998. Someday, my grandkids will ask, "Grandpa, what was it like?" and I will say, "Well, it was bad. But not as bad as watching 'The Lonely Lady!'"
I worry that someday the world will see a major nuclear war. And if it does, the survivors will say while digging out, "That was horrible. But come to think of it, it wasn't as horrible as 'The Lonely Lady!'"
Please folks, if you want to see an '80s flick with lots of skin, see "Summer Lovers." Do NOT see this film unless watching a dwarfish leading lady getting raped and spouting unendurable dialog to a bargain basement cast is your idea of an enjoyable movie experience.
I worry that someday the world will see a major nuclear war. And if it does, the survivors will say while digging out, "That was horrible. But come to think of it, it wasn't as horrible as 'The Lonely Lady!'"
Please folks, if you want to see an '80s flick with lots of skin, see "Summer Lovers." Do NOT see this film unless watching a dwarfish leading lady getting raped and spouting unendurable dialog to a bargain basement cast is your idea of an enjoyable movie experience.
Absolute zero
Joe-38510 September 2000
Immediately after renting and watching this movie several years ago, a friend and I decided that it defined the absolute zero on the movie scale. There was nothing about the movie that could have been done worse than it was. To this day we still rate movies, even very bad ones, by how much better than "The Lonely Lady" they are.
A long time ago I saw an interview with Eleanor Perry, who wrote the screenplays for, among other things, "Last Summer" and "Diary of a Mad Housewife," and she related that she had been asked to write a screenplay for the Harold Robbins' book "The Lonely Lady." She said that she sent in a treatment and it was rejected because they didn't think she understood the difficulties of a female screenwriter in Hollywood. She then said "I think they got someone else to write it." The interview was filmed before the movie was released. She died in 1981, and I bet the first thing she did on arrival in heaven was personally thank God for saving her from involvement in the result.
A long time ago I saw an interview with Eleanor Perry, who wrote the screenplays for, among other things, "Last Summer" and "Diary of a Mad Housewife," and she related that she had been asked to write a screenplay for the Harold Robbins' book "The Lonely Lady." She said that she sent in a treatment and it was rejected because they didn't think she understood the difficulties of a female screenwriter in Hollywood. She then said "I think they got someone else to write it." The interview was filmed before the movie was released. She died in 1981, and I bet the first thing she did on arrival in heaven was personally thank God for saving her from involvement in the result.
Lousy even by the low standards of Harold Robbins adaptations
dave13-119 July 2008
This early Pia Zadora vehicle followed a familiar Harold Robbins formula: ambitious main character wallows in decadence while pursuing the path to the top of some randomly chosen but glamorous world, in this case the movie industry. But despite being so formulaic as to be completely predictable, this movie manages at the same time to be completely unbelievable. Zadora (to call her inexperienced as an actress is to be charitable) never convinces as a screenwriter. One would expect a movie about movie-making to have some insights into its own industry and creative process. But the script gives her none of the qualities which make writers interesting movie characters: observance, skill with words, a love-hate relationship with one's own creative abilities. Her character is as empty as a donut hole. And this is just a taste of the incompetence on display here. The cinematography is so murky that it is sometimes hard to see what is happening. And the scenes never really hang together, so everything seems like a succession of random moments at bad Hollywood parties. Avoid.
Ew
DaCritic-219 December 2000
Even when I saw this movie at a teenager, I wondered just how ironic it was that Pia Zadora starred in a movie about an artist who slept her way to the top. As beautiful and sexy as Ms. Zadora is, even she couldn't keep this sorry-ass excuse of a movie from tanking. Not even her photoshoot for Penthouse, in which "The Lonely Lady" was promoted "back in the day," could keep this movie from tanking. The only thing that could have saved this movie? A completely different script. Give this one a miss.
More like "f***** her way to the bottom..."
JonDubya20048 July 2004
Wow! Only a movie this ludicrously awful could inspire the similar "Showgirls." I mean where to begin? The indescibably horrid theme song? Pia Zadora's non-expressions throughout the movie? The fact that despite being set in Los Angeles, aka "land of the casting couch" EVERY single man (and woman!) is fawning all over themselves to sleep with Pia Zadora, by any contrived means necessary? Or what about the fact that every person in the movie is totally unsympathetic because they're either mind-numbingly stupid (Pia) or obvious despicable sleazeball (everyone else)? And given that this flick was written by actual "screenwriters (sorta), it shows a shocking lack of understanding of the movie-making industry (who the Hell would admire and kiss up to a SCREENWRITER?)
But it's (unintentionally) funny as hell though. The "breakdown" scene alone will have you giggling, and after seeing the climatic "I'm not the only one who had to **** her way to the top" scene at the "Awards" (all done in the usual bargain-basement acting level we expect from such quality thespians as Pia), I sincerely hope that our dear Pia actually reused that speech when she "won" her Golden Globe. It's fitting and that would totally make my day.
Anyway, if you're a fan of bad, tashy camp, give this otherwise tacky movie a try.
But it's (unintentionally) funny as hell though. The "breakdown" scene alone will have you giggling, and after seeing the climatic "I'm not the only one who had to **** her way to the top" scene at the "Awards" (all done in the usual bargain-basement acting level we expect from such quality thespians as Pia), I sincerely hope that our dear Pia actually reused that speech when she "won" her Golden Globe. It's fitting and that would totally make my day.
Anyway, if you're a fan of bad, tashy camp, give this otherwise tacky movie a try.
I don't think it could be worse
Scoopy19 March 1999
There is absolutely nothing to redeem this movie. They took a sleazy story, miscast it, miswrote it, misfilmed it. It has bad dialogue badly performed in a meandering and trashy story.
As badly as it fails as art, it fails even worse as commerce. Who could have been the target market for this. What age group? What interest group?
Someone should make a movie about how and why they made this movie. That I would pay to see.
I've seen thousands of bad movies, and this ranks with "Sailor Who Fell from Grace" and "Manos" ... my choices as the three most unredeemably bad movies I've ever seen. Everybody associated with it should be forced to make conversation with VanDamme for all eternity.
I challenge you. Watch this movie and perform an academic exercise - how could you take this and make it worse? I can't think of one way.
As badly as it fails as art, it fails even worse as commerce. Who could have been the target market for this. What age group? What interest group?
Someone should make a movie about how and why they made this movie. That I would pay to see.
I've seen thousands of bad movies, and this ranks with "Sailor Who Fell from Grace" and "Manos" ... my choices as the three most unredeemably bad movies I've ever seen. Everybody associated with it should be forced to make conversation with VanDamme for all eternity.
I challenge you. Watch this movie and perform an academic exercise - how could you take this and make it worse? I can't think of one way.
If I was Harold Robbins, I'd sue..
quamp1 March 2000
Once again, Pia Zadora, the woman who owes her entire career to her husband, proves she can't act. This disaster of a film butchers the Harold Robbins novel. Ray Liotta must have been hogtied and carried to the set to appear in this one.
Avoid this at all costs. I doubt even doing the MST3K thing would save it.
Avoid this at all costs. I doubt even doing the MST3K thing would save it.
Bad? Effing awful!
Rodrigo_Amaro2 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
One must envy Oediphus for having the nerve of taking his eyes out, to me the act in itself just sounds painful enough, and it's unimaginable. For those who aren't versed in the classics, forget Oediphus, and let us go back to not long ago: I envy the British man who ripped his eyes out, apparently possessed while attending a mass in Rome. I envy him more than the literary character not only because he's real but because while doing it he said to the doctors he didn't felt a thing while doing it. No pain at all! Why am I being grotesque while criticizing this movie? Well, simply because "The Lonely Lady" is one of those things that makes you wanna commit those acts. The atrocity your eyes are put to see are so shocking that one has two options: to go blind and vow to never watch a movie again or erase your memory because all of those terrible moments stays with you for a long while. But since the company who provides the memory erasing device from Michel Gondry's "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" doesn't exist (YET but one day will), your eye must be put to death.
Let us be frank, I'm responsible for committing such crime to myself, guilty as charged. Often listed one of the worst stinkers ever made, I just felt the need to see it with my own eyes how bad this could get, reserving some hope this might a bad good film or maybe not that bad as they say. It turned out be to a sickening, gut-wrenching and almost pointless experience. I say almost because I learned a few things from it: 1) I don't have the strength nor the health to watch those kind of films. It's life threatening and from now on I'll try to avoid at all costs when I sense a movie is going terrible. I'll allow myself more and more walkouts. 2) to trust a little more when a whole bunch pans something, go forward it with them, join them. They're right! Why bothering wasting time with garbage? You're being warned as I was, just don't go one step beyond like I did. You'll feel better afterwards. My advice: read all the reviews written in here about this thing, you'll find some funny material of the highest quality.
The average easy reading book written by Harold Robbins was translated to the screen as a corny, almost soap-operish flick ruined from practically scene one. To the director, writer and producer of this it must have been quite a luck that Robbins was suffering from aphasia at the time of the release of this, otherwise I think he would sue those people, ask for his name to be risked from the credits and would disown this with passion. Weird soundtrack, insanely bad script and lousy acting by almost the entire cast (poor Ray Liotta in one of his earliest roles, and here's an infamous one as the main character's rapist). What's this all about? The adventures and misfortunes of Jerilee Randall (Pia Zadora) trying to establish herself as a serious screenwriter, fighting against Hollywood's misogynist conventions, learning that the only way to get to the top in the entertainment business and being a successful person is to be ON top of a bunch of cruel, hedonist yet powerful man (and some women!). It's almost like if this was a silly biographical account of someone relatively famous who had to go through the same experiences the main character had to.
Won't go further in details on why this fails because this is almost common knowledge for those of us who know about films out there. From the one line written by Jerilee changing a whole film written by her husband (WHY?) to the hilarious montage sequence with her breakdown smashing objects, not a single moment was good in this junk. We can almost forgive the acting problems but we can't forgive how negative the script is towards women and their representations of being needy, naive and with limited talents, and we certainly cannot forgive the infamous hosing rape scene which was, in the lack of a better word and reaction, laughable. This isn't a funny issue in life but somehow everything (terrible music combined with the awful editing and lousy acting) contributed to such laughable reaction (in my defense, never during the scene but a little afterwards to quickly disappear with shock when of Jerilee's mother reaction to the event - the doctor quoting "She was attacked" to which she replied "But not raped!").
The only redeeming quality of this is the final scene. Yes, they made something good out of that which was better than was in the book. I almost felt something for the character in that moment. She wins the Oscar, after going through hell trying to sell her script, and in the acceptance speech she gives the movie's best bad line and gets booed of the stage. In Robbins novel, it's the same thing except...she strips naked painted in gold as the Oscar and addresses herself against the men in Hollywood. Can you imagine this scene filmed? They would probably erase the mentions of this film as if never existed in history. Too bad it exists and can be found out there. Thankfully, not that easily. 1/10
Let us be frank, I'm responsible for committing such crime to myself, guilty as charged. Often listed one of the worst stinkers ever made, I just felt the need to see it with my own eyes how bad this could get, reserving some hope this might a bad good film or maybe not that bad as they say. It turned out be to a sickening, gut-wrenching and almost pointless experience. I say almost because I learned a few things from it: 1) I don't have the strength nor the health to watch those kind of films. It's life threatening and from now on I'll try to avoid at all costs when I sense a movie is going terrible. I'll allow myself more and more walkouts. 2) to trust a little more when a whole bunch pans something, go forward it with them, join them. They're right! Why bothering wasting time with garbage? You're being warned as I was, just don't go one step beyond like I did. You'll feel better afterwards. My advice: read all the reviews written in here about this thing, you'll find some funny material of the highest quality.
The average easy reading book written by Harold Robbins was translated to the screen as a corny, almost soap-operish flick ruined from practically scene one. To the director, writer and producer of this it must have been quite a luck that Robbins was suffering from aphasia at the time of the release of this, otherwise I think he would sue those people, ask for his name to be risked from the credits and would disown this with passion. Weird soundtrack, insanely bad script and lousy acting by almost the entire cast (poor Ray Liotta in one of his earliest roles, and here's an infamous one as the main character's rapist). What's this all about? The adventures and misfortunes of Jerilee Randall (Pia Zadora) trying to establish herself as a serious screenwriter, fighting against Hollywood's misogynist conventions, learning that the only way to get to the top in the entertainment business and being a successful person is to be ON top of a bunch of cruel, hedonist yet powerful man (and some women!). It's almost like if this was a silly biographical account of someone relatively famous who had to go through the same experiences the main character had to.
Won't go further in details on why this fails because this is almost common knowledge for those of us who know about films out there. From the one line written by Jerilee changing a whole film written by her husband (WHY?) to the hilarious montage sequence with her breakdown smashing objects, not a single moment was good in this junk. We can almost forgive the acting problems but we can't forgive how negative the script is towards women and their representations of being needy, naive and with limited talents, and we certainly cannot forgive the infamous hosing rape scene which was, in the lack of a better word and reaction, laughable. This isn't a funny issue in life but somehow everything (terrible music combined with the awful editing and lousy acting) contributed to such laughable reaction (in my defense, never during the scene but a little afterwards to quickly disappear with shock when of Jerilee's mother reaction to the event - the doctor quoting "She was attacked" to which she replied "But not raped!").
The only redeeming quality of this is the final scene. Yes, they made something good out of that which was better than was in the book. I almost felt something for the character in that moment. She wins the Oscar, after going through hell trying to sell her script, and in the acceptance speech she gives the movie's best bad line and gets booed of the stage. In Robbins novel, it's the same thing except...she strips naked painted in gold as the Oscar and addresses herself against the men in Hollywood. Can you imagine this scene filmed? They would probably erase the mentions of this film as if never existed in history. Too bad it exists and can be found out there. Thankfully, not that easily. 1/10
So god awful that it's absolutely brilliant!!!
will-1053 February 2002
Bad script, bad direction, over the top performances, overwrought dialogue. What more could you ask for? For laughs, it just doesn't get any better than this. Zadora's over-acting combined with the cliched scenarios she finds herself in make for an hilarious parody of the "Hollywood" machine. Almost as funny as "Spinal Tap" even though it was clearly not intended as such. Don't miss Ray Liotta's debut film line, "Looks like a penis."
"It's a cookbook!" or is that a cooked book?
aromatic-28 October 2001
Lloyd Bochner, totally sleazy, got second billing in two movies, The Lonely Lady and Drums of Africa. Mr. Bochner has done a magnificent job as a guest star on TV for 40 years. As a lead film actor, Mr. Bochner's presence suggests that the movie was done ona budget of $50,000 or less. In this case, it was more like 50,000 Lira.
Mr. Bochner of course is famous for the Twilight Zone episode, "To Serve Man" about an advanced alien race that regales humankind with many advanced benefits. Bochner finally translates their "Bible" to serve man, only to find that it is a cookbook, and the Aliens are bring earthlings to their planet to cook and eat them. Hence the line, that was well sent up in the one of the Naked Gun movies. And, it's appropriate here because they took Harold Robbins' sleazy book, cut away the book part, and just left the sleaze!
Actually, I didn't think Pia Zadora acted poorly at all. The character was a ridiculously bizarre caricature but so were all the others. Accomplished players who happened to be in Europe at the time such as Joseph ("Saturday Night Fever") Cali, Ray ("Field of Dreams") Liotta, Bibi Besch, and Shane ("Dr. Strangelove") Rimmer were all made to look equally ridiculous.
And all that being said, I'll disagree with many of the other reviewers. I did find it bad enough to be funny. I often think of the outrageous dialogue and inappropriate costumes, and just laugh out loud.
So, I don't think you should avoid it. It's short enough, and it gives you something to talk about for years afterward. Just don't take it seriously.
Mr. Bochner of course is famous for the Twilight Zone episode, "To Serve Man" about an advanced alien race that regales humankind with many advanced benefits. Bochner finally translates their "Bible" to serve man, only to find that it is a cookbook, and the Aliens are bring earthlings to their planet to cook and eat them. Hence the line, that was well sent up in the one of the Naked Gun movies. And, it's appropriate here because they took Harold Robbins' sleazy book, cut away the book part, and just left the sleaze!
Actually, I didn't think Pia Zadora acted poorly at all. The character was a ridiculously bizarre caricature but so were all the others. Accomplished players who happened to be in Europe at the time such as Joseph ("Saturday Night Fever") Cali, Ray ("Field of Dreams") Liotta, Bibi Besch, and Shane ("Dr. Strangelove") Rimmer were all made to look equally ridiculous.
And all that being said, I'll disagree with many of the other reviewers. I did find it bad enough to be funny. I often think of the outrageous dialogue and inappropriate costumes, and just laugh out loud.
So, I don't think you should avoid it. It's short enough, and it gives you something to talk about for years afterward. Just don't take it seriously.
This stunk so bad, you could smell it through your TV!!
lambiepie-230 June 2003
The wonderful "Z" Channel in Los Angeles showed this Pia Zadora film about six months or so after "Butterfly". I had such high hopes for the actress, and then she goes from bad to obviously WORSE in this film.
Again, it was the 80's and I gotta tell you Harold Robbin's work had been eclipsed by smarter writers. Jacqueline Susann ripped into him (she hated his way of writing women), Irwin Shaw's work caught on with many women, and of course Sidney Sheldon had his kingdom in the late 70's early 80's and then came Jackie Collins who made women stronger and as equal to men in every way in her books, even more so. Which is why this work smelt. Harold Robbin's work in the 80's just didn't catch on with audiences. Pia Zadora acting in one of Robbin's work was like throwing kerosine on a fire. The supporting cast was not a help either.
Oooooh... this was awful to look at then and even 20 more years later, it looks even worse. I had a hope for Pia as an actress and it all got shot to heck when this was done. It would be tough for Pia to redeem herself as an actress (although John Waters casting her in "Hairspray" was a spark) although she has a nice singing voice.
Hey, Pia, wherever you are...Hairspray may go on tour! Join the show. You may be the biggest comeback story yet.
I just hope they burn this film for ya if you do.
Again, it was the 80's and I gotta tell you Harold Robbin's work had been eclipsed by smarter writers. Jacqueline Susann ripped into him (she hated his way of writing women), Irwin Shaw's work caught on with many women, and of course Sidney Sheldon had his kingdom in the late 70's early 80's and then came Jackie Collins who made women stronger and as equal to men in every way in her books, even more so. Which is why this work smelt. Harold Robbin's work in the 80's just didn't catch on with audiences. Pia Zadora acting in one of Robbin's work was like throwing kerosine on a fire. The supporting cast was not a help either.
Oooooh... this was awful to look at then and even 20 more years later, it looks even worse. I had a hope for Pia as an actress and it all got shot to heck when this was done. It would be tough for Pia to redeem herself as an actress (although John Waters casting her in "Hairspray" was a spark) although she has a nice singing voice.
Hey, Pia, wherever you are...Hairspray may go on tour! Join the show. You may be the biggest comeback story yet.
I just hope they burn this film for ya if you do.
Not the worst of all time, but in the top 5
DanB-44 May 1999
The depth of the creative bankruptcy in this film is most evidence in the final scene. The writers gave Pia Zadora's character a reasonably interesting name, Jerilee. (That's as close as I'll come to complimenting this picture). Then, when the nominees at the Oscars are being read, another screenwriter is named Jerilee, too. Bafflingly stupid.
This is one of the few movies so bad that it would even be passed over by nude-scene-hunting horny teenagers. Everything about is bad. There is not a single redeeming quality, not one scene that works, not a single character that isn't a benign, idiotic one-dimensional drip.
I can't call this the worst film ever made but it's close. However, the single worst scene in a movie I have ever seen is Pia Zadora's nervous breakdown.
Quite simply a waste of vital resources. 1/2* out of ****.
This is one of the few movies so bad that it would even be passed over by nude-scene-hunting horny teenagers. Everything about is bad. There is not a single redeeming quality, not one scene that works, not a single character that isn't a benign, idiotic one-dimensional drip.
I can't call this the worst film ever made but it's close. However, the single worst scene in a movie I have ever seen is Pia Zadora's nervous breakdown.
Quite simply a waste of vital resources. 1/2* out of ****.
Pathetic
DaddyMike21 December 1999
I simply could not finish this movie. I tuned out after what I would say is my nomination for the most wretched attempt at sexual suggestion award: a scene in which Pia Zadora, at a picnic, stands between two boys who want her. One (the good boy) pleads for her to see the error of her ways. The other (the bad boy) simply asks if she'd like a hot dog, which he then holds out for her. At crotch level. I hope I'm not spoiling anything to say she turns, and takes the hot dog, with a smile. Just pathetic.
A classic example of a movie being the cinematic equivalent of a traffic accident.
Hey_Sweden2 January 2018
God knows, this is far from being a "good" picture. It's an ultra-trashy, ultra-ridiculous Hollywood soap opera based on Harold Robbins' novel. One may bemoan the fact that the material should yield for better results. Certainly, even those of us who are not in "the business" know that it can be mean, manipulative, selfish, and cruel. Some good people get hurt.
Pia Zadora may never have been one of the great talents to ever come down the pike, but she does try as hard as she can, in the role of Jerilee Randall, a promising young writer. Jerilee does manage to get a few books published, but screenwriting is an entirely different matter. There's no shortage of vile males (and even females) looking to take advantage of her, while she courts the vague hope that they might actually be able to (or want to) help her career get going. She has stormy relationships with a variety of flawed men: veteran, renowned screenwriter Walter Thornton (Lloyd Bochner), self-centred film star George Ballantine (Jared Martin), and club owner Vincent Dacosta (Joseph Cali).
It would be hard not to feel some sympathy for this Jerilee character. There are few supportive influences in her life, and there are so many rotten men. At first, Walter seems to be a good catch, even if he IS old enough to be her father. But even he suffers from a fragile male ego. The film actually aims its lowest early on, when a creep played by Ray Liotta (in his film debut) molests Jerilee with a garden hose. I kid you not.
Some of the cast do struggle to keep their dignity intact. Bochner is pretty good, under the circumstances, as is Anthony Holland as a film director who befriends Jerilee.
It's usually standard practice for me to give "so bad they're good" movies a five out of 10. As long as they entertain, even if it's not in the manner intended, then the experience isn't a total loss.
It wraps up with one of the funniest lines in movie history, at a mock "awards" ceremony, as Jerilee decides to do away with decorum and be at her most brutally, painfully honest.
Five out of 10.
Pia Zadora may never have been one of the great talents to ever come down the pike, but she does try as hard as she can, in the role of Jerilee Randall, a promising young writer. Jerilee does manage to get a few books published, but screenwriting is an entirely different matter. There's no shortage of vile males (and even females) looking to take advantage of her, while she courts the vague hope that they might actually be able to (or want to) help her career get going. She has stormy relationships with a variety of flawed men: veteran, renowned screenwriter Walter Thornton (Lloyd Bochner), self-centred film star George Ballantine (Jared Martin), and club owner Vincent Dacosta (Joseph Cali).
It would be hard not to feel some sympathy for this Jerilee character. There are few supportive influences in her life, and there are so many rotten men. At first, Walter seems to be a good catch, even if he IS old enough to be her father. But even he suffers from a fragile male ego. The film actually aims its lowest early on, when a creep played by Ray Liotta (in his film debut) molests Jerilee with a garden hose. I kid you not.
Some of the cast do struggle to keep their dignity intact. Bochner is pretty good, under the circumstances, as is Anthony Holland as a film director who befriends Jerilee.
It's usually standard practice for me to give "so bad they're good" movies a five out of 10. As long as they entertain, even if it's not in the manner intended, then the experience isn't a total loss.
It wraps up with one of the funniest lines in movie history, at a mock "awards" ceremony, as Jerilee decides to do away with decorum and be at her most brutally, painfully honest.
Five out of 10.
Don't always blame the cast when a film is below par
bbhlthph27 August 2004
This film is a Pia Zadora special! When viewing it, I was reminded of the classic cartoon showing a Hollywood starlet; in urgent need of another role but afraid of becoming typecast for 'B' movie or soft porn roles; who says at her casting session "Well of course I do not normally do roles requiring nudity, but if it is artistically necessary for the film...............". This recollection brought up a very naughty image of a similar cartoon showing Pia at such a session saying "Well of course I do not normally take any roles requiring actual acting, but if it will really give me sufficient exposure to enhance my status as a sex symbol..................". This is probably grossly unfair, the rather sordid tale is the fault of Harold Robbins book; considering the nature of the story Pia's exposures certainly do not receive undue attention, and perhaps Pia (who once won an acting award in Butterfly) is deliberately satirising her part rather than attempting to act in an almost unplayable role. Critics usually point first to the actors as the problem whenever a film proves disappointing, but this is grossly unfair; the scriptwriters and director are far more often the guilty parties. The real problem with "The Lonely Lady" is that the screenplay, like the original book, looks for sensation rather than substance, and nothing can help with this.
The screenplay for this film is abysmal, but whether the story could have been filmed more successfully with a better script, tauter directing and really competent acting must remain a matter of personal judgement. As it was released, my viewers rating for it would depend upon whether I am assessing my personal opinion, or assessing to what extent the film succeeds in providing what it aims at doing. My personal rating for it would be two out of ten; but to some extent this film probably provides exactly what its sponsors intended, and judged on this basis a quality rating of four out of ten would be reasonable. Being in a charitable mood, and wanting to make it clear that I am not blaming Pia for my disappointment, I will give an IMDb rating of four.
The screenplay for this film is abysmal, but whether the story could have been filmed more successfully with a better script, tauter directing and really competent acting must remain a matter of personal judgement. As it was released, my viewers rating for it would depend upon whether I am assessing my personal opinion, or assessing to what extent the film succeeds in providing what it aims at doing. My personal rating for it would be two out of ten; but to some extent this film probably provides exactly what its sponsors intended, and judged on this basis a quality rating of four out of ten would be reasonable. Being in a charitable mood, and wanting to make it clear that I am not blaming Pia for my disappointment, I will give an IMDb rating of four.
The Lonely Lady...in concentrate!
jaws17801 December 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I COULD describe how this is one of the worst theatrical releases of all time with awful screenplay, but it would better to just let the horrendous dialogue speak for itself. So here's a review/synopsis of the Lonely Lady in it's own words:
"Can't be anybody if she doesn't have an escort."
"LOOOOONELYYYYYY LA-DAY. OOOOOOOONLYYYYYY YOU CAN HELP YOURSELF."
"Sometimes, when I sit a home and write my stories, it seems as though I'm talking to myself"
"It looks like a penis."
"I'm gonna show you something special. I'm gonna GIVE you something special!"
"A PRO-MISE OF LOOO-OO-OOVE! A PROMISE OF LOOOOVE!"
"I admire him, I want to be with him. I want to go to bed with him." "I am not listening to this. I am NOT listening to THIS!"
"In this business you can't afford self-respect."
"Gently. Gently."
"I hope you can you spell, darling?" "D-A-R-L-I-N-G."
"WHYYYYY?!"
"Or is THIS more you kick?"
"Mother I had an abortion." "I don't know you ever left Walter."
"MY HEARTS ON FIRE!"
"He know's a lot of people." "So does my garbage man."
"If I write for anyone Vinnie, I write for MEEEEEE!"
"Your eyes are most beautiful."
"Ahahahahahaha"
"Damn you!"
"She's always been difficult."
"You already had one abortion sweetheart, don't make it two."
"Won't you come an join me Jerry-lee? It's wonderfully relaxing."
"I don't suppose I'm the only one who had to **** her way to the top."
"LOOOOONELYYYYYY LA-DAY. OOOOOOOONLYYYYYY YOU CAN HELP YOURSELF."
OK yes it IS missing something without the garden tool molestation and Swirling Head Vortex freak-out (with the above-quoted lines repeated for emphasis) and other scenes of sleazy, poorly acted debauchery. But I'm sure these delectable morsels of half-baked cheesy dialogue are more than enough to whet your appetite for the cinematic feast of unintentional camp that is the Lonely Lady!
"Can't be anybody if she doesn't have an escort."
"LOOOOONELYYYYYY LA-DAY. OOOOOOOONLYYYYYY YOU CAN HELP YOURSELF."
"Sometimes, when I sit a home and write my stories, it seems as though I'm talking to myself"
"It looks like a penis."
"I'm gonna show you something special. I'm gonna GIVE you something special!"
"A PRO-MISE OF LOOO-OO-OOVE! A PROMISE OF LOOOOVE!"
"I admire him, I want to be with him. I want to go to bed with him." "I am not listening to this. I am NOT listening to THIS!"
"In this business you can't afford self-respect."
"Gently. Gently."
"I hope you can you spell, darling?" "D-A-R-L-I-N-G."
"WHYYYYY?!"
"Or is THIS more you kick?"
"Mother I had an abortion." "I don't know you ever left Walter."
"MY HEARTS ON FIRE!"
"He know's a lot of people." "So does my garbage man."
"If I write for anyone Vinnie, I write for MEEEEEE!"
"Your eyes are most beautiful."
"Ahahahahahaha"
"Damn you!"
"She's always been difficult."
"You already had one abortion sweetheart, don't make it two."
"Won't you come an join me Jerry-lee? It's wonderfully relaxing."
"I don't suppose I'm the only one who had to **** her way to the top."
"LOOOOONELYYYYYY LA-DAY. OOOOOOOONLYYYYYY YOU CAN HELP YOURSELF."
OK yes it IS missing something without the garden tool molestation and Swirling Head Vortex freak-out (with the above-quoted lines repeated for emphasis) and other scenes of sleazy, poorly acted debauchery. But I'm sure these delectable morsels of half-baked cheesy dialogue are more than enough to whet your appetite for the cinematic feast of unintentional camp that is the Lonely Lady!
Not quite so bad it's good
jellopuke8 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This is a bad movie. Bad acting, out of place music, bad sets, bad costumes, bad make up, pretty much just bad all around. That said, it was almost a camp classic in that there are some truly awful lines that are laugh out loud funny and a couple of scenes so over the top that they transcend the boringness of the movie, and some absolutely ridiculous melodrama. What I found most hilarious was that the thing that made Zadora's character feel the worst about herself was sleeping with a woman, as if that was the lowest she could go. Her breakdown scene following that was epic. Too bad the rest of the movie was dull.
Not bad enough to be a guilty pleasure...but it can be fun.
maeander6 August 2003
The truth is that a film based on a Harold Robbins novel is not going to win any awards. This is no exception. "The Lonely Lady" is a pure B picture in budget, cast and execution. Technically, it looks like a made-for-tv film. The acting is very uneven. Joseph Cali is especially terrible. Anthony Holland is an embarrassment. As one reviewer said of a certain Katherine Hepburn performance, her range goes from A to B. Ms Zedora manages to get to G. The rest of the cast is solid (and wasted in their respective roles). Lloyd Bochner and Bibi Besch deserved better. Still, the whole thing can be a great deal of fun in a trashy sort of way. As befits Robbins, everything revolves around sex and nudity. If you're looking for some fun...and you're not too sober...this could be for you.
A classic
stef-7224 July 2022
Could not have been better. A triumph. When the film-and it must be called a film and not a movie-begins with teenaged Pia winning a high school award for Outstanding Achievement in Creative Writing and giving a speech about her artistic goals, you will feel your life change. Transformative.
Only The Lonely - OK TV Movie Style Drama
ninjaalexs26 November 2021
The Lonely lady is considered something of a flop. It was nominated for 11 Golden Raspberry Awards at a time when the Razzies actually held water. Judging by the poster art the film was marketed almost as an erotic thriller, a genre that died off by the mid-90s with the coup-de-grâce being Showgirls.
Doe-eyed Pia Zadora plays a naive novelist who tries to make it as a Hollywood screenwriter. To get a leg up, she must get a leg over and ends up having sex with various men in brief, but quite graphic scenes.
The film feels a bit like a TV movie in premise and it is a well crafted film, but it manages to feel cheap. The film has had a bit of a resurgence as it is regarded as camp in the same league as the aforementioned Showgirls, but this is nowhere near as much fun.
Pia Zadora enjoyed a modicum of success both as an actress and singer, but she never quite became a household name, but is instantly recognisable as she looks like nobody else. I think she has been unfairly slated as she is convincing in this film.
The Blu-Ray from Shout Factory features a nice print and is about as good as it gets.
Doe-eyed Pia Zadora plays a naive novelist who tries to make it as a Hollywood screenwriter. To get a leg up, she must get a leg over and ends up having sex with various men in brief, but quite graphic scenes.
The film feels a bit like a TV movie in premise and it is a well crafted film, but it manages to feel cheap. The film has had a bit of a resurgence as it is regarded as camp in the same league as the aforementioned Showgirls, but this is nowhere near as much fun.
Pia Zadora enjoyed a modicum of success both as an actress and singer, but she never quite became a household name, but is instantly recognisable as she looks like nobody else. I think she has been unfairly slated as she is convincing in this film.
The Blu-Ray from Shout Factory features a nice print and is about as good as it gets.
Why All the Hate?
kamikaze-423 June 2022
To say the film The Lonely Lady is a classic is stretching it. To say the film version of The Lonely Lady is a trash classic is more on the line. I can't see how much hate this movie receives. After all, what were the viewers expecting? The Lonely Lady is a film adaptation of a really trashy Harold Robbins best seller. The viewer wasn't seeing an adaptation of Dickens's novel. Just take the film for what it is. An adaptation of a trashy sexploitation potboiler. The cast knew that and played it as such.
If you want to hate, try the Shout! Factory release which includes a second-generation copy of the network broadcast premiere. The print is almost unwatchable.
So why all the hate? Pia Zadora was interviewed on the Shout Factory presentation, and she took it with a sense of humor. You should too.
If you want to hate, try the Shout! Factory release which includes a second-generation copy of the network broadcast premiere. The print is almost unwatchable.
So why all the hate? Pia Zadora was interviewed on the Shout Factory presentation, and she took it with a sense of humor. You should too.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
