Charles Band stated in an interview with Dave Jay that working on this movie provided him with the first cheque "I've ever received in my entire life!" (some five dollars after deductions). After that moment he began making his own movies and generating his own income, or lack of income. See more »
Another Viet Nam era veteran has commented about first seeing "Little Cigars" on a navy ship; I saw it in our base theatre. Playing to young captive male audiences in 1973 was pretty much the perfect venue for this movie. It played especially well to an audience that was drunk and/or stoned. Actually it's typical of the B-movie junk they showed the troops in those days-movies that did poorly on the domestic market and were quickly shipped to the military. It is not nearly as funny now as it was in 1973.
The premise is a troupe of midgets who travel around the country, performing as a kind of sideshow attraction and using their free time to steal from various places. The idea is to show various clever ways their size works to their advantage when breaking into a building. The writer quickly runs out of clever ideas and the capers get totally moronic. Even in 1973 we realized that the gang's advantage was also a major disadvantage because if they were seen they would be easily identified.
Angel Tompkins is the sexploitation factor, she had recently been featured in Playboy and that probably explained the above average attendance at our theatre. There is a MAJOR credibility problem with her hooking up with the lead midget (played by Billy Curtis). Not because he was a midget but because he looked about 80 years old. Good grief the guy played a munchkin in 1938. But even that was funny in 1973.
Tompkins was the Megan Fox of the 1970's, in that she had a negative charisma and a mean looking face that made her much more suited to bad girl roles.
Bottom line: My rating would have been a two but the movie is unique and Tompkins looks great. It's about as unprofessional looking as anything Hollywood put out in the early 1970's.
3 of 4 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?