the audience applauded

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Take two excellent comedic actors-Richard Pryor and Gene Wilder-and a brilliantly simple premise-a blind man and a deaf man are wrongly suspected of a murder- and what you have is See No Evil, Hear No Evil, a side-splitting farce in which the disabled pair, Wally (Pryor) and Dave (Wilder), have to try and prove their innocence by tracking down the real villains (played by sexy Joan Severance and Kevin Spacey).With Wally unable to see and Dave having to lip read, the scene is set for some incredibly funny knockabout comedy and hilarious verbal interchanges, ably handled by veteran director Arthur Hiller (who also worked with Pryor and Wilder on Silver Streak in 1976).There are way too many funny moments to list, but my favourites are when Dave misunderstand's bad-tempered cop Braddock (Alan North), thinking he has said 'Fuzzy Wuzzy was a woman', and Wally, posing as a Swedish gynecologist, giving a talk on multiple orgasms in geriatric women!Also worth a mention: Severance's shower scene (the actress going topless) and Kevin Spacey's facial cyst (the actor had it removed soon after, but here it is so big that it deserves a screen credit all of its own).7.5 out of 10, rounded up to 8 for IMDb.

While a box office success at the time, 'See No Evil, Hear No Evil' was very negatively received critically and, while it has its defenders, many still consider it a lesser Gene Wilder/Richard Pryor effort.From personal opinion, 'See No Evil, Hear No Evil' doesn't see Wilder and Pryor at their best. Of their four double act collaborations, my personal favourite is 'Silver Streak' while also really enjoying 'Stir Crazy' mostly (where the partnership between the two is more equal and even more inspired) if not as even (with a second half that doesn't fare as well as the first half). At the same time, 'See No Evil, Hear No Evil' doesn't disgrace either Wilder or Pryor and doesn't hurt what made their chemistry so enjoyable in the first place. It's not a great film, but to me it is nowhere near as bad as reputed and a better film than their last collaboration 'Another You'.'See No Evil, Hear No Evil' has its good things. It's hardly a cheap-looking film, it's nicely shot and cohesively edited mostly. The music is a good, sometimes quirky, never over-bearing and rarely mismatched, fit.Not everything works here material-wise but some lines are funny, Pryor especially has some gems, and there are a few amusing gags. The concept of the story is a quite unique one, and despite some worries as to how it would turn out, the film treats the concept nowhere near as distastefully as feared. Not everything comes cleverly and there is a lack of taste and subtlety at times but there really has been far more offensive content.Like with their previous two collaborations, Wilder and Pryor are a well-matched double act and both enjoy themselves and give good performances as well as being convincing in their characters' handicaps. Although with a less understated and louder character, meaning that he could easily have fallen into the trap of being annoying, Pryor does provide some very nice moments, but Wilder's gentler in comparison performance is no less inferior and doesn't resort to mugging.Quite a lot is lacking however, or at least from personal view, in 'See No Evil, Hear No Evil'. While Wilder and Pryor are good, the supporting cast are less so. Alan North fares least badly. Joan Severance has sex appeal and allure going for her but exudes little threat or much personality for that matter, and to say that Kevin Spacey in a very early role went on to much better things later on than his too-silly-to-be-taken-seriously is being very kind.Scripting has its moments, as said, but too many of the jokes (even for the kind of the comedy it was going for and the film's concept) were far too juvenile and some so idiotic it nearly insults the intelligence. The story has an interesting idea but it became confused and contrived the more it went on (especially the caper element that was nearly completely lost amongst the humour).Erratic pacing (sometimes too hectic, at other times suffering from a lack of urgency) and the chaotic, and like it belonged more in a cartoon, action does no favours either.In conclusion, okay film if not great. Not that bad, while not with enough to passionately defend it either. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Richard Pryor plays a blind man, Gene Wilder plays a deaf man. That's the films concept. And on the strength of Silver Streak, and Stir Crazy, the studio took a gamble on offending a lot of people.Somewhere in the film there is a story about a murder and the two witnessing it, but then they become suspects in the murder, and the cops are after them, and a pre fame Keving Spacey is after them too (you can tell he's pre fame, because he has his unsightly growth).Throw in a beauty of an eighties soundtrack, and a joke about being blind or deaf every five minutes, then serve with a huge slice of cheese.....From what you've just read, you'd expect me to despise the film, but it was released when I was twelve, and it was silly and profane enough to demand repeat viewings, so its a bit of a guilty pleasure for me.What is unique is that the film could never be remade, because Hollywood is way to PC to even chance a film like this, look at Mr. Magoo, the risible Nielsen film, and read the disclaimer that film carried. 16 years ago, they were worrying about upsetting people with a kids movie.Pryor and Wilder still have that wonderful chemistry together, and every scene they share is comedy gold, but it's the rest of the film that really lets it down. It's just too perfunctory and bland to keep up with the leads, so come the end, it's as if everyone else has given up and just let the two take over.The comedy is stupid and very derogatory, but at the end of the day, it's the cinematic equivalent of watching an old lady fall over. You know you shouldn't laugh, but you do anyway.

How has this film only got an overall rating of 6.7? I think this film is brilliant, i never fails to make me laugh, it was very enjoyable watching it years ago and i still enjoy watching it now. Terrific actors, they play their roles perfectly.I think it is brilliant, i can't see why people wouldn't like this film. If you are looking for a good comedy, with great actors and guaranteed to make you laugh then this is the film for you. A great family film.In fact this film is AMAZING to say it is an old-ish film (i am not usually into the old-ish films).Deserves an 8 / 10 at least.