Jump to content

Dirty Tricks (film)

From Alfawiki
Adapted from the English Wikipedia article Dirty Tricks (film), available under CC BY-SA 4.0Updated 10 August 2025
Dirty Tricks
Company typeFilm
IndustryFilm industry
Founded1981; 45 years ago (1981)
Key people
Alvin Rakoff (director), William W. Norton, Eleanor E. Norton, Thomas Gifford, Camille Gifford (screenwriters)
ProductsComedy film

Dirty Tricks is a 1981 American comedy film directed by Alvin Rakoff, with a screenplay crafted by William W. Norton, Eleanor E. Norton, Thomas Gifford, and Camille Gifford. The movie features performances by Elliott Gould, Kate Jackson, Rich Little, Arthur Hill, John Juliani, and Alberta Watson.

Plot

The story follows a Harvard student (Nicholas Campbell) who seeks out Professor Chandler (Elliott Gould) to verify the authenticity of a letter purportedly signed by George Washington. After the student is killed and the letter vanishes, Chandler finds himself pursued by both a mafia assassin and television journalist Karen Polly Bishop (Kate Jackson).

Cast


Production

Filming commenced on August 13, 1979, primarily in Montreal, spanning roughly nine weeks, with additional scenes shot on location in Boston, the film’s setting. The project was supported by the Canadian Film Development Corporation (Telefilm Canada).

Release

The movie was distributed by AVCO Embassy Pictures, initially screening in a limited engagement in Chicago on March 20, 1981, before expanding to a broader release on May 1 of the same year.

Home media

In the United States, the film became available on VHS through Embassy Home Entertainment.

Reception

Larry Kart of the Chicago Tribune assigned the film zero stars, condemning its substandard production values and acting. Variety observed that despite having a talented ensemble, Dirty Tricks suffered from inadequate writing and direction. Kevin Thomas from the Los Angeles Times found Elliott Gould’s portrayal entertaining but felt it was squandered on an uninspired and predictable storyline. Gary Arnold of The Washington Post described the movie as "so shabby" that it made similar films appear superior by comparison. David Macfarlane of Maclean's harshly criticized it for being crude and lacking wit, citing poor performances, a dreadful script, and ineffective direction, emphasizing that its dependence on Gould’s casual acting style underscored its fundamental flaws.

External links