User reviews

In the DVD introduction to this film, writer/director/actor Peter Bogdanovich explains how it happened. B-movie mogul Roger Corman came to Peter in late 1967 with a proposal: take 40 minutes of footage from Corman's film "The Terror", film 20 minutes of Boris Karloff (who owed Corman 2 days of work), film 40 minutes of other stuff with other actors to tie it all together, and complete a feature film all for a budget of $125,000.

You'd think this would be a recipe for a colossal turd of a movie, but on the contrary, it pushed everyone's creativity to the max and resulted in a remarkable work of cinema.

Peter & his wife grabbed their typewriters and wrote a modern horror story contrasted against a classic Victorian horror. Assisted by Peter's friend & successful writer/director Samuel Fuller (not credited), they churned out a profound & poetic script loosely based on the news story of Charles Whitman, a former marine sniper who went on a mass shooting rampage the year before. A bit was also inspired by the Highway 101 sniper shootings in which a 16-year-old boy killed 3 motorists in 1965. That's the "modern horror" part. The Victorian horror comes with the character Byron Orlock (played by Karloff) who is a classic horror icon at the end of his career, realizing that his brand of horror is outdated.

If you can see where this is going, you're in for a great experience. Yes, it's a story of change, out with the old & in with the new, but in a chilling way I've never seen before. The idea that fear has evolved into something far different. Ghost stories & creepy characters no longer cut it. The new brand of terror is faceless, anonymous, soulless and random. Enter the phenomenon of the mass killer.

"Targets" was ahead of its time, and Peter even mentions how its release was delayed because studio execs were afraid of how its message would be received, especially with the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr and Bobby Kennedy just months prior to release.

It is extremely relevant today, and even if it weren't so artistically done & expertly acted, I would recommend this film for its message alone. The directing, cinematography & acting is icing on the cake, and oh what icing it is! If you're like me, you probably know Boris Karloff as the lumbering creature in "Frankenstein" (1931)... a big, stiff lunk in electricians boots who drags himself around as if he's murderously constipated. Here in "Targets" he is eloquent, charming, tragic, comic and instantly worthy of our attention. My favorite scene is in a hotel room when he tells a ghost story. Director Bogdanovich is very respectful with his camera work in that scene: it opens wide and fixes itself on Karloff with its (and our) undivided attention as it slowly narrows on Karloff's face. No cuts, no jumps, no distractions, just pure Karloff.

The movie is full of thoughtful camera work like that. As you watch the film you get the idea that every camera angle, movement, pan & zoom, and every shadow and inch of background action was very carefully planned to the millimeter. I confess I've never seen a Bodanovich film, but I know he's a very respected director. Now I see why. On a tiny budget that, today, wouldn't cover the catering for a big studio film, he cranked out a magnificent film.

I would put "Targets" squarely in the class of Hitchcock, as compelling as my favorites "Rope", "Rear Window", "Vertigo" and so on. But as I mentioned earlier, it's the blending of Victorian horror (Hitchcock, Vincent Price, etc) with modern horror (Fox News, etc) that makes this an unforgettable show.

Just an epilogue to the story of how the film was made... Although prints caught the attention of major studios, it wasn't officially released until it caught the eye of a film professor who invited Paramount execs to a screening in his classroom. Paramount bought the film for $150,000 (netting Corman a whopping $25,000 profit... hope he didn't blow it all in 1 night!). The film was eventually released, and it received rave reviews from critics but never did well with the public at large. Way ahead of its time. Lucky for us it survived onto DVD 40 years later when perhaps the world will understand it better. Don't hesitate for one minute to see this film if you have the chance!

Ageing horror actor Byron Orlock (Boris Karloff) has just finished what will be his final film. The campy nature of the horror films he stars in, and the decline in moral society leads him to believe that horror films are no longer scary, especially when compared with what is happening in the real world. Young director Sammy Michaels (Peter Bogdanovich) has just written a great script especially for Orlock, and tries to persuade him to re-think his retirement plans on the build-up to Orlock's final public appearance at a drive-in for his new movie The Terror. Meanwhile, suburban husband and gun-obsessive Bobby Thompson (Tim O'Kelly) is planning a massacre using his sniper rifle, starting with his wife and family.

As usual when it comes to Roger Corman productions, the story behind the film is just as interesting (often more so) as the film itself. Karloff apparently owed Corman a couple of days work, so he was handed to Corman protégé Peter Bogdanovich, and told him to make whatever film he liked - as long as it was cheap, quick, included footage of his film The Terror (1963), and drew on the recent Charles Whitman killings. So, with the help of screenwriter Samuel Fuller, Bogdanovich crafted an intelligent, shocking, and extremely interesting film that what way ahead of its time.

Targets is many things. On one hand it is a warm love-letter to the legendary actors of old. In one scene, Michaels enters Orlock's hotel room, them both being drunk, and watch the end of Howard Hawks' The Criminal Code (1931), which starred a younger Boris Karloff. They briefly discuss the genius of Hawks and Michaels comments on what a fine screen presence Orlock (really Karloff) was, and still is. It is also a first-rate thriller. Tim O'Kelly is very effective as the clean-cut, all-American boy, who is becoming increasingly shaken about the person he finds himself becoming. In real-life, Whitman was found to have an aggressive brain tumour that was believed to be the cause of the sudden killing spree. The violence, though not gratuitous or exploitative, is shocking and nasty. The murder scenes are shot with a slow and detailed precision that are scary given the real-life occurrences.

Most interestingly, the film is a commentary on the generation gap, in both society and in cinema. Michaels states that "all the great films have already been made." Of course, this is not true - America was about to enter its true golden age, when the likes of Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, Dennis Hopper, Francis Ford Coppola, Michael Cimino, and Bogdanovich himself shook Hollywood to its core. But Michaels is reflecting Orlock's fear of the new. Orlock is retiring because "it's a young person's world," and he feels he no longer has his place. The film builds up to the inevitable meeting of Orlock and Thompson - the old vs. the new, if you will.

Targets is quite hard to sum up. It is genuinely a hidden gem, and a true original that should be seen by anyone interested in cinema. Karloff would sadly pass away a year after this film was released, and he gives what is possibly his finest career performance. He has no scary make-up or sets to drown him out. He is simply an old man, walking stick and all. Although he made a couple more films after this, Targets seems his true and fitting exit from cinema. This is close to an 'A'-movie that I've seen a B-movie get, and again proves that Roger Corman was a true cinema genius.

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

One of the things I truly like and admire about Boris Karloff was that he pretty much kept on playing in the same sort of movies and played the same sort of roles, throughout his entire career. Seems to me he looked for movies and parts that suited him and more let movies adapt to him, rather than the other way around.

It's also a well kept secret Karloff actually was a pretty good actor! In this movie he definitely gets to show some of his skills and I really enjoyed him in, what later turned out to be, one of his final roles.

But really, it's not a Karloff movie and I also most certainly don't see him as the lead role in this. It's actually best to know as little as possible about this movie, since that way you shall definitely enjoy it most, just as I pretty much did. It's a movie that constantly throws you off. The one moment you think the movie is going to be about one thing but it then later turns out it's being about something totally different and unrelated!

You could see this movie as one that has two simultaneous story lines in it. Both of them are seemingly unrelated to each other but they of course come together toward its end. Not in the most convincing way and it seems a bit random all but I don't know, the randomness of it seemed to sort of suit the movie.

It's because it also has some other very random things going on in it. I'm referring to the sniper, who truly randomly picks his victims and goes on a terrible killing spree. There is something very uncomfortable and horrendous about it and I'm not even kidding when I say that this is one of the most violent movies I have ever seen, purely due to the randomness and pointlessness of all the killings! And I really mean and say this all in a positive way.

It besides all gets shot and buildup in a very effective and also realistic way. Director Peter Bogdanovich certainly did a great job handling its tension and it will put you on the edge of your seat and let you hold your breath for a few seconds.

It's really surprising how great and original this movie is! I say surprising, since this isn't exactly being a movie that is well known anywhere. It makes this a criminal underrated movie, that most definitely deserves to be seen by more!

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Targets is directed by Peter Bogdanovich who also co-writes the screenplay and story with Polly Platt and Samuel Fuller. It stars Boris Karloff, Tim O'Kelly and Bogdanovich himself. Story is patterned around real life mass murderer Charles Whitman, who in 1966 murdered 16 people during a shooting rampage at the University of Texas in Austin.

Cineaste Peter Bogdanovich's debut directing effort, sadly, to this day remains a topical hot spot. Released as it was just after the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy, Targets carried much relevance even though it was hardly a success at the box office. Over the years it has come to gain a cult following that is much deserved, the low budget production value actually helping to keep it uneasily potent.

Story is structured by way of two separate narrative threads, one sees Karloff as veteran horror film actor Byron Orlock, who sees himself as an anachronism and announces his retirement from movie making. His reasoning, warranted, is that his type of horror is way behind the times, the real horror is out there on the streets, bleakly headlined in the local newspaper. The other thread concerns Bobby Thompson (O'Kelly), a handsome boy next door type who has a pretty wife but finds himself unemployed and still living with his parents. He is a ticking time bomb, his mind soon to fracture and devastation will follow. The two stories converging for a bloody finale at a drive in movie theatre, where Orlock is making a special guest appearance, the old time horror of the movies coming face to face with the real terror of the modern world.

Though uncredited by choice, the screenplay belongs to Fuller, something that Bogdanovitch has always been keen to point out, and it's with the writing where the film gets its quality factor. The messages within are serious and handled evenly by Bogdanovitch, his pacing precise and in Karloff he has the perfect icon from which to underpin the story. True enough the acting around Karloff is sub-standard, notably from the director himself, but with Bogdanovich deliberately keeping the psychological explanation for Bobby's actions vague, film manages to rise above its flaws to leave an indelible mark. 8/10

and for the right reasons as it contrasts a Monster from the pages of real life, a quite seemingly normal fellow who unexpectedly goes off the deep end and winds up on a killing spree, with an old Horror film icon named Byron Orlock, clearly based on the man who plays him Boris Karloff himself. Karloff gives one of the finest performances of his career here and thereby raises this film's overall quality. Along with a brisk pace and some scenes that disturb and haunt the viewer long after viewing, TARGETS is a masterpiece of terror.

Peter Bogdanovich is a man that, to me, is too intelligent to make a film without anything to say. With that in mind, however; if Targets does have a point to it, it is masked well. The only thing resembling any kind of comment is that the film professes the differences between screen horror and real life horror, but even this idea is put forward in a muddled way. That being said, however; Targets is a world away from being a bad film. The film marks one of the last performances for the great Boris Karloff, and serves as a nice swansong to his career, especially as he's almost sending himself up in this film. The great man plays Byran Orlock; an aging horror film actor who has decided that he wants to retire. However, things are not as simple as that as, on the same day that Orlock is due to make his final public appearance at the screening of last movie (Roger Corman's 'The Terror'), there's a serial killer on the loose who's taking pot shots at people with a sniper rifle. As real life horror and screen horror icon clash...who will be the resulting victor?

Despite the point being rather muddled, Targets makes up for that with the exciting way that the plot plays out and the stream of tributes and comments on Karloff's (sorry, Orlock's) career. It's nice to see Karloff enjoying himself, and the introspective nature of the movie ensures that he gets the chance to do this. Peter Bogdanovich is well known for being a director who is also a fan of cinema, and this movie also gives him a chance to tribute the medium that he evidently loves. As a fan of cinema myself, it always makes me happy to see this sort of thing, and that marks another reason for my enjoyment of this movie. The way that the plot plays out makes the movie predictable, but in a way that adds to the idea of 'real horror', as we can see what's going to come; it's like a car crash - it's obvious what's going to happen, yet all we can do is just sit back and watch. On the whole, this is a classy thriller and while it never hammers home it's point enough to ensure that you know it's actually got a point, it works because of it's tension and well paced plot. This will also be a must see movie for fans of the great Boris Karloff.

Not a great film, but a very interesting one. I don't know of many movies that even attempt to talk about the relation between fictionalized film terror and real life horrors, but Targets tackles this difficult topic without overstating its point of view. Karloff as an aging horror actor gives one of the best performances of his career. It's also interesting to see a film with ambitions shot in "Corman time." Many of the shots appear to be single takes with actors slightly blowing their lines, camera cues almost accidental, and sets practically nil in their design. This adds to the sense of documentary that pervades the film. Use of sound is very effective and prefigures later films by people like Altman -- background voices and noise are used to great effect. PatheColor has never looked better -- its garish intensities add to the sense of a true 20th Century wasteland that can produce a casual killer like the film's smiling protagonist. Addressing issues that are more powerful today than when the film was made, Targets is a wildly ambitious take on modern life, a great coda to Karloff's career, and a vital interface between B movies and independent cinema.

Pretty much like his semi-autobiographical character Byron Orlok, Boris Karloff should have retired in beauty and style. "Targets" would have been the ideal swan song to Karloff's long and masterful career, but unfortunately there were still a handful of other and extremely inferior horror movies added to his resume, like the abysmal "Isle of the Snake People" and "Cauldron of Blood". "Targets" is his last great film and also the final film in which he noticeably feels comfortable and motivated to act. In practically all of this other post-1965 appearances, Boris Karloff already looked more dead than alive, but here you can tell he clearly wanted to play this role. Many, many thanks to writer/director Peter Bogdanovich who – under the protective supervision of Roger Corman – cast Boris Karloff in a role that couldn't have been played by anyone else, except maybe Vincent Price (like Bogdanovich own supportive character even funnily mentions at one point during the film).

Byron Orlock is an aging and stubborn who's convinced there isn't any interest anymore in the grotesque Gothic villain monsters he portrays. After the test screening of his latest film, Byron suddenly announces his retirement much against the will of his producers, personal assistant and a young aspiring director who just finished writing a screenplay especially for Byron. They all urge him to reconsider his decision, and at least make it to his planned public appearance at a drive-in theater. Meanwhile, in the same city, young and confused weapon-freak Bobby Thomson is about to snap mentally. He bought a trunk full of artillery and wrote a letter warning people that many will die before they catch him. After randomly having shot people in cars from the top of an oil reservoir, Bobby flees from the police and hides out in the drive-in theater.

"Targets" is loosely based on the tragedy caused by Charles Whitman, who killed and wounded over forty people in Texas on August 1st, 1966. Perhaps the US was still too much in a state of shock to realize, so shortly after these ream events, but "Targets" makes a powerful statement regarding the alienation of youth and the largely uncontrolled weapon legislation. I encountered some criticism stating that the two stories are largely unconnected and that particularly Karloff's story is random and irrelevant. I heavily object, since Byron Orlock physically represents the old-fashioned definition of horror, creepy old madmen safely entrenched in their Gothic castles, whereas Bobby Thomson embodies the new and grueling type of horror which we sadly are confronted with on a near daily basis. "Targets" basically builds a symbolic bridge between vintage horror and modern terror, and it's truly fantastic that Boris Karloff helped building it. The sniper sequences are immensely disturbing, especially opposed to the cheesy borrowed footage of Corman's "The Terror" playing at the drive-in, and the film bathes in a genuine ominous atmosphere whenever the character of Bobby Thomson walks into the screen. The interactions between him and his wife are saddening, uncomfortable and unsettling all at the same time. Personally, I always thought "The Last Picture Show" was Bogdanovich's only true masterpiece, but that was before I laid my hands on "Targets". This film is even better.

Todays audiences are often over-fed on the shocking tragedies which typically explodes directly from the newspapers. That is pretty much what one gets from life and then having to compare it with real life misery. In this combined effort, called " Targets ", Director Peter Bagdonovich and writer Polly Platt team with a legend of horror, Boris Karloff who plays Byron Orlok an aging film actor who up and decides to retire from movies. While he is shocking his entourage who depend on him for continued employment, Bobby Thompson (Tim O'Kelly) an insecure mentally troubled, young man explodes by killing his family and then goes on a shooting rampage. The movie is vastly underrated as Karloff gives a surprising performance. With the Classic Jack Nickelson horror film, 'The Terror' playing at the Drive-In background, Thompson imitates real life horror with a murderous killing spree. The film and the director's tale interact well and with the addition of the several cast members including Nancy Hsueh as Jenny, James Brown, Arthur Peterson and even Bogdanovich as Sammy Michaels, they allow audiences a final offering of a bygone actor. ****

This small in budget, huge in talent picture had the terrible timing of being completed before, but released after Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy Sr. were assassinated. The toll those two events had in 1968 almost guaranteed "Targets" would never be seen by audiences that could watch Tim O'Kelly and keep his character in mind as a Charles Whitman figure rather than a politically motivated gunman. Bogdanovich's first directing turn also marked the swan song of Boris Karloff. The two of them together were a dynamite pairing and it's a shame we didn't get more from this movie loving duo.

Clips from Roger Corman's "The Terror" (with Karloff and a really young Jack Nicholson) are strategically inserted, as Boris plays an actor who's synonymous with big screen terror. And as his career is winding down, the changes frightening him in society are not costumes, on the lot sets and ghoulish cosmetics, but real human monsters who destroy any remaining sense of safety in the world with high powered rifles and other firearms. His Byron Orlok is an old man who knows his time is short and makes the most of each day he continues to live. Bogdanovich's Sammy is in awe of the legend, while most of the industry hustlers Byron has to deal with are only interested in the hype and money.

Enter Tim O'Kelly and his family. The parents are salt of the earth types and Tim's wife is his rock. Then why does this clean cut young man in his twenties during the era of the love generation look and feel so out of step with modern life? We'll never really know. Those mass murderers in the making only reveal certain key clues when it's too late to stop their plans.

Sam Fuller provided help, whipping the script into shape, as the director acknowledges in his commentary. It's better that those wanting to see this smaller, quiet film not know all of it's plot. Calling a story with much gunfire "quiet" is peculiar, but the sound editing of Verna Fields is the unsung hero of "Targets", where the bursts of lethal noise alternate with a serene soundtrack stripped down to not too much era music (Bogdanovich had a handful of obscure 60's tunes to sparingly use) and, thankfully, none of the din cluttering most 21st century movies, letting us hear the full tones of each person's voice sans cranked up score and effects.

"Targets" is a terrific and overlooked time capsule from an era before school shootings were an almost weekly event in the news and when there seemed to be a solution for ending violence in our future. It's an almost quaint trip back inside a cautious sense of optimism we'll not share again.

Peter Bogdanovich scored his first critical success with Targets that starred an elderly Boris Karloff playing an elderly star of Gothic horror films hardly a stretch for the man's talents. In fact a whole lot like William Henry Pratt in real life.

Karloff is telling the producer of his next film that this is it, despite verbal commitments he wants to retire. He's not reaching the newer generation he fears and his films are called camp. Time to just quit.

Peter Bogdanovich who also plays the writer of that project that he's turning his back on urges Karloff to reconsider as does Nancy Hsueh Karloff's girl Friday and Bogdanovich's girl friend. He does however have a personal appearance at a drive-in showing one of his films.

But while Karloff is musing about retiring, a very disturbed young man has built himself quite an arsenal. One fine day Tim O'Kelly a veteran of Vietnam who has built himself quite an arsenal decides just matter of factly to go on a human shooting spree. He kills his wife and then mows down a few more on the Freeway and then sets himself up at the drive-in to await the night's events.

O'Kelly is a frightening young man and this film sadly set a trend for making Vietnam veterans psychotic villains on screen. It lasted for over a decade. No doubt O'Kelly learned his weapon skill for combat, but lots more veterans came home without going psychotic. In any event O'Kelly's baby face and All American looks are what makes his performance all the more frightening.

As for Karloff this was ironically his last film away from the horror genre. When he died the following year he had about four posthumous films awaiting release. Talk about dying with your boots on. In real life the farthest thing from his mind was retiring.

The film is set up for the inevitable meeting between the old master of the horror film genre and a purveyor of some true life horror.

It's worth the wait to see what happens.

This is an interesting curio. Bogdonavich's first effort is a glorified student film distinguished by Karloff's presence. The love for cinematic history is ubiquitous. Some captivating cinema verite sidebars give hints of potential greatness. But limited budget and lack of cohesion ultimately render the viewing a so-so experience.

Where to begin singing the praises of this little gem that I just saw for the first time recently?

It establishes itself permanently in my good graces as a viewer because, by default, it provides a near documentary look, what with its plentiful use of location shooting, of Southern California circa 1967. It captures, more strikingly than any film I know, the texture of a particular time. The cars, the clothes, the signs, the drive in, the suburban houses speak subliminal volumes; it is nothing short of a neural map of a time.

This is Bogdanovich's first full directorial effort. (He had shot part of Wild Angels for Corman a while before, and Corman was impressed enough with his work there to offer him his own feature. These details and more are related in the excellent Bogdanovich commentary track that, amazingly, is included on the new "budget" DVD.) To secure the assignment, he had to agree to incorporate 20 minutes of footage from the Corman cheapie The Terror (or that was the plan at the outset) and shoot an additional new 20 minutes, or two days, with Boris Karloff. Throw in 40 minutes of your own storyline invention, and voila, instant New Drive In Movie, Roger Corman style. The project eventually grew beyond that. (The final tally: $125,000 by Bogdanovich's recollection, with $25,000 of that going to Karloff for 5 days shooting. Bogdanovich's first script killed off Karloff half way through to accommodate the budget and schedule. Sam Fuller, it was, who advised him strongly to ignore all that stuff if the story demanded more than 2 days with Karloff.)

Targets feels like a European film of its time. This says to me, above all, that Bogdanovich wanted to make certain he was making a modern film, his own film, and not an easy pastiche/homage to the American directors he had enshrined in writing before becoming a director himself-- Ford, Hawks, Hitchcock, Welles et al. I would almost call the narrative voice he assumes here passive. The absence of a film score adds to this feeling. But it is not semi-documentary; there is nothing even remotely Dragnet about Targets. It is spare, clean, modern, lacking in embellishment or decoration, but the people speak naturally, move fluidly and seem real. And there is a stillness, again a feeling enhanced by the lack of music, that creates verisimilitude, but also a general sense of unease.

The story of Targets is based on the case of Charles Whitman, the young man who climbed a tower in Texas in 1966 and staged a sniping siege on pedestrians and motorists below. An editor at Esquire had suggested this as a great film topic to Bogdanovich when he was writing some film criticism for them. Bogdanovich and his wife at the time, Polly Platt, based their first scenario on this news story, and got a major script doctor assist from director Samuel Fuller (The Big Red One; Shock Corridor, Pickup on South Street).

One of the most interesting things the new DVD commentary track points out is the number of times Bogdanovich achieved remarkable long take tracking shots. I missed them on first viewing; they are so discreetly handled that even a die-hard film fan and geek may be unaware of them. Too often, this is the sort of shot that calls a lot of attention to itself, as a flamboyant statement of the director's mastery for its own sake. It would have been easy for a first-time director to get snared in flashy games-playing. But instead, these takes are slipped seamlessly into the weave of the story, enhancing the everyday feel, the naturalism of Targets. (The best long take scene-- and one of the most telling scenes in the movie-- begins with a couple of minutes of the family sitting in the darkened living room watching The Joey Bishop Show on TV; Mom and Dad beg early work tomorrow and head off to bed; the young couple go down the hall to the bedroom, where the wife dresses for work; then we go back to the living room where Bobby sits alone for a bit watching TV. All without a cut. It is a charged, still few minutes in which Bobby makes his one and only sad little bid to talk out his inner turmoil with the person to whom he is closest.)

This doesn't even get into the touching and amusing Karloff subplot, about an old horror star resignedly coming to terms with his obsolescence. He says his type of horror can't match the horror of the modern world, and as proof he holds out a newspaper with a headline about a teenager shooting six people in a local grocery.

Small budget films do not get any better than this. --Neither do most large budget, these days. 10 stars. See it.

One of the best low budget films I have ever seen. Film within a film revolves around Karloff as the aging horror film star and Peter Bogdanovich as the young director who must convince him to be in his next movie -- or there may be no movie. Add one psychotic sniper and it's all good fun and really pretty scary (thinking about it now, it seems pretty topical, sadly). The sniper never really offers an explanation or speechifies -- it's way more naturalistic and scary that way. A first rate thriller..... 10 out of 10. Should please Karloff fans and those just looking for a good thrill ride.

I got a kick out of seeing Boris Karloff in this, still with great screen presence and released a little less than six months before he died at 81 (his career started 50 years earlier in 1918). He plays an aging, disillusioned horror film actor who is tired of making bad films and appearing before fans. It's not clear exactly how his character is going to intersect with that of a gunman who randomly goes on a shooting rampage, but eventually of course it does.

Peter Bogdanovich juxtaposes the fictitious horror of old movie monsters with the real horror of gun violence in America, and that seems to be the main thrust of a lean, straightforward plot. It was certainly topical at the time following the University of Texas tower shooting and political assassinations of 1968, and it's grown in relevance, since America has done nothing but take steps backward to control what should be considered a national emergency. The film does not preach in the slightest (as I'm in danger of here, apologies to anyone who reads this), but it comes across as a plea for gun control when we see this guy saunter into a shop and purchase guns and ammunition with ease.

I liked the film's directness, how it shows the suffering of the victims, and how it gives a little glimpse into all those 60's retro aspects - the home décor, slang, street scenes, and drive-in movies. It was nice to see Nancy Hsueh in a good supporting role, and clips from a pretty good old film (The Criminal Code (1930)), as well as a dog (The Terror (1963), which also starred Jack Nicholson). The film isn't majestic by any means, but there is enough here to make me recommend it. Oh, and loved this little tale Karloff tells in that wonderfully eerie voice of his:

"Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, I'd like to leave you with a little story to think about as you drive home through the darkness. Once upon a time, many, many years ago, a rich merchant in Baghdad sent his servant to the marketplace to buy provisions. And after a while the servant came back, white-faced and trembling, and said, 'Master, when I was in the marketplace, I was jostled by a woman in the crowd, and I turned to look, and I saw that it was Death that jostled me. And she looked at me and made a threatening gesture. Oh, master, please, lend me your horse, that I may ride away from this city and escape my fate. I will ride to Samarra and Death will not find me there.' So the merchant loaned him the horse and the servant mounted it, and dug his spurs into its flank, and as fast as the horse could gallop he rode towards Samarra. Then the merchant went to the marketplace and he saw Death standing in the crowd and he said to her, 'Why did you make a threatening gesture to my servant when you saw him this morning?' And Death said, 'I made no threatening gesture - that was only a start of surprise. I was astonished to see him here in Baghdad, for I have an appointment with him tonight in Samarra.'"

Early effort from writer-director Peter Bogdanovich who, at this stage, was just another raw, hungry new talent in need of both self-control and focus. Bogdanovich (who also appears in a small role) attempts to correlate the stories of two disparate characters: an ex-soldier turned sniper and a retiring horror movie actor (Boris Karloff) about to make his final publicity appearance at a drive-in theater. Why these two men should ever cross paths is apparently the key ingredient to what intrigued Bogdanovich to this type of material (the irony of it and so forth); however, he fails to make clear what the violent journey has meant in the end, or exactly how Karloff can bring clarity to the mind of this mad-dog killer. The director seems to be struggling to make a point about the effects of movie fantasy versus human alienation, but since this hasn't been much of an issue for two-thirds of the picture's length, the climactic events are muddled and not all that satisfying. Surely there are some coldly shrewd observations made here (most often visually, without dialogue), displaying Bogdanovich's wildly imaginative eye and a skill for storytelling through imagery (he also gets a world of help from his gifted cinematographer, Laszlo Kovacs). Unfortunately, the rudimentary aspects of the reedy plot are clumsily presented, and the movie gets off to such a heavy-handed start that one is never sure whether the tone is meant to be satirical or suspenseful. As a low-budget, early effort, the film definitely shows promise; seen today, we are able to gauge just how much growth was necessary on Bogdanovich's part--and how much ground he did indeed cover in just a few short years. **1/2 from ****

Coming at the tail end of the sixties, when the American dream ideal was hugely doubted, Peter Bogdanovich's debut film is pretty much like no other around at that time. It tells the dual stories of two individuals and how fate and circumstance bring them together.

Boris Karloff plays aged Bryan Orlok, in a role that mirrors his own personal life, as he decides to quit the movie business due to his own increasing apathy with the changing world around him. At the same time Bobby Thompson, a young man who is paranoid and disconnected from society, goes over the edge and decides to make his mark by killing.

The style and tone of the film makes this a refreshing and alternative take on how people interact, with more than its fair share of social commentaries. Filmed with a slow, methodical approach, and bereft of soundtrack, its cold objective view of the two lead characters, especially with the killer, makes for unsettling viewing. The acting is also top notch and if you were ever in doubt of the talents of Karloff then this will surely convince. He effortlessly handles the often lengthy takes with great skill and at one point recounts a scary tale that will please his fans. The scene near the end where Karloff turns and marches towards the assailant is outstanding.

Echoing the real life killings carried out by Charles Whitman two years previous which shook America, this is a short sharp shock into a particular heart of darkness.

I had been reading about this movie for thirty years and after renting it from the incomparable MOVIE MADNESS I can only say I wish I had seen it sooner. It really stands out as an exceptional example of low-budget exploitation cinema. Peter Bogdanavich shows an amazing sense of pace and control in his first film. I will be buying this excellent DVD with the hilarious and fascinating commentary by the director; he is an amusingly droll fellow and if any of his other films contain commentaries as lively and enjoyable as TARGETS then i am going to be the first in line to rent DAISY MILLER. Just kidding. But that doesn't make me any less impressed with TARGETS. It truly is a first rate thriller that still has a remarkable power. This is one of the very first "modern" psycho films. Bravo to Bogdanovich and company for this one. Very well done.

Byron Orlok (Boris Karloff) is an old horror film actor. He feels that the world has passed him by. His style of horror is too tame compared to the horror of everyday life. His director Sammy Michaels (Peter Bogdanovich) is a fan. He persuades Byron to do one more promotion at a drive-thru theater. Meanwhile, clean cut all-American Bobby Thompson buys a gun and starts to act in increasingly disturbing ways.

This is an early movie from filmmaker Peter Bogdanovich. Some of the acting can be a little stiff although it has the great Boris Karloff. Bogdanovich isn't much as an actor and Bobby's side of the movie is rather amateurish. Some scenes need sharper editing although the general filmmaking is good for a newcomer. Karloff probably comes off the best and is given a great ending.

My three favourite Peter Bogdanovich movies are The Last Picture Show, What's Up Doc and Paper Moon. But Targets is my fourth favourite film of his. While a tad too short, it is an excellent film, genuinely disturbing and immaculately crafted. It especially is graced by superb cinematography, great direction from Bogdanovich and a truly marvellous performance from Boris Karloff. The script is very good and the story has many admirable themes that to me are still relevant today. The ending is also very memorable, very involving emotionally and structurally. All in all, this is an excellent crime drama that clearly shows Bogdanovich's talents and for fans of Karloff they will like him very much here. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Boris Karloff was eighty when he was cast as himself with only his name being changed to Byron Orlock, a fading horror movie star.

The main character, Tim O'Kelly reminded me of Michael C. Hall of Dexter fame. He is a man with disturbing thoughts who goes on a gun buying spree.

Like the real life killer, Charles Whitman, who only two years earlier climbed up to the top of the University of Texas, the villain here does his target practice on a water tower and later behind the screen of a drive-in movie theater.

I am old enough to remember those venues here in New York. The classic cars of 1967-1968 brought back some good childhood memories.

Karloff is very good playing himself and look out for a young Jack Nicholson in clips from The Terror. Targets is a nostalgic trip down memory lane.

Maybe in 1968 this was good but I doubt it. What it's got going for it, a young man, for no apparent reason, goes on a killing spree, which is in and of itself an unusual topic (this is mentioned on the poster for the movie so not a spoiler)

We're never given any idea why. It just happens very matter-of-fact like.

I suppose it is shocking but there's nothing else here. It's like watching a "Faces of Death" movie which has a rating of around 4. This is no better than any of those but at least those don't drag out one thing into 89 minutes. Sure it's shocking. Since when does "shocking" raise a movie's rating?

It's also poorly written. I'd expect more of a panic but the people leave fairly calmly. I'd expect people running over / crashing through the fences knowing a sniper is killing people.

The Karloff parts of mostly superfluous. They don't add anything whatsoever really. You could have removed them and nothing about the movie or it's impact/message would change one iota. They're entirely irrelevant.

Very disappointing