Foxy Brown (1974) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski) and Tuna

Two thumbs up as far as you'd expect from an exploitation film. Scoop's comments in white, Tuna's in yellow.

The good news: unlike most of these Pam Grier films, the plot is not just an excuse to get Pam naked. It may actually hold your interest.

The bad news: Pam doesn't get naked nearly enough, and when she gets in her customary clear-the-room catfight, she doesn't rip off the other girls' clothing. She does do some kickass bottle-fu, airplane propellor-fu, gasoline-fu, and shows complete mastery of the mysterious and ancient Oriental technique of barstool-fu. "I got MY black belt in barstool".

Foxy Brown (1974) is one of the early blacksploitation films staring Pam Grier in the title role. Written and directed by Jack Hill, it is one of the first action films to star a strong black woman. This is the film that put Pam Grier on the map. It is strictly low budget, and much of the fighting is badly choreographed, but it is a very fast watch. Pam's boyfriend, a federal narcotics agent, is given plastic surgery and a new identity after a failed attempt to put a drug family in jail. Pam's baby brother, who is selling drugs, recognizes the boyfriend, and turns him in to the mob. When the mob kills her man, her brother and her brother's lady, Foxy doesn't get mad, she gets even.

The acting was very uneven, with the woman who played the head of the drug syndicate being the worst of the bunch, but Grier is strong enough to carry the film by herself. Maltin dismisses it as violent crap, but makes a mistake in his plot description that leads me to believe he didn't even watch it.


Exposure from Grier, Sally Ann Straud as her brother's lady, Juanita Brown as a hooker, and several unknown hookers.
I agree with Tuna's assessment of Pam's performance. Pam has never impressed me as the next Lady Macbeth. She's been unnatural in some of these films, but she really did a good job in this one and Friday Foster.

DVD info from Amazon.

  • Widescreen anamorphic, 1.85:1, enhanced for 16:9 screens. The print looks great for a 1974 movie.

  • Full-length director commentary

How often can you get a 1974 exploitation movie with full-length director commentary.

And how can you not love any movie that co-stars my main man, Huggy Bear? Someday I'm going to organize a Huggy Bear Film Festival.

Here's an excellent external review from the Austin Chronicle

The Critics Vote

  • Maltin 1.5/4

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 6.0
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, this film is a C+. Not a crossover hit, but great for its genre.

Return to the Movie House home page