IMDb > The Guy from Harlem (1977) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Guy from Harlem
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
The Guy from Harlem More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 24 reviews in total 

24 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

Surprised to see it listed!

Author: rfanning from United States
30 June 2006

I saw this movie almost 30 years ago, shortly after I participated in the filming of it. I don't remember much, but I remember thinking it was pretty good considering it was done with amateurs and almost no budget! But everything is relative, and given the choice today, I would have to say that the only reason I would watch it again is because my name is in the credits. The real life scenes that occurred during the filming of it were definitely more interesting than the movie itself. I did enjoy some of the soundtrack which was written and performed by professionals, a local Miami band called "Brand New". PS The leading lady may not win an Oscar, but she could definitely win an award for her voice!

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

Badly made kidnap story would have been better as a porn film

Author: dbborroughs from Glen Cove, New York
19 April 2006

Watching this tale of a detective from Harlem, who now works in Florida (hence the title) I was struck by how much better this film would be if there was some hardcore sex in it. The idea may make me seem like an absolute pig but if you watch this movie for more than five minutes you too will be struck by two thoughts:

First - when is the sex going to start because this movie looks and feels like a bad 1970's porn film. Second - when is the sex going to start since this movie is so awful that its probably the only thing the film makers could do to make this movie even remotely interesting.

This movie is a turkey. Its cheap, badly filmed, badly acted with awful action and a stupid plot (its got something to do with the kidnapping of an African Ambassador's wife or daughter or something). Its on that fine line between so bad its good and so bad its bad and it wobbles back and forth across it minute by minute.

If you're a true bad movie lover see it. If you're any other type of movie lover stay away because there is no sex to spice things up.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 26 people found the following review useful:


Author: ross harrison from Ottawa, Canada
28 March 1999

Not counting, Nazi propaganda films, pornography and student art films the "Guy From Harlem" is THE WORST MOVIE EVER MADE, and I've seen garbage. Just to legitimize my claim let me make it clear I've seen plenty of bad films. I go out of my way to rent them. I'm a connoisseur of stupid cinema. I've seen "Secret Agent Double O Soul", "Drive in Massacre", "Spookies", "Beastmaster 3: The Eye of Barakus", "Highlander 2: The Quickening", "Psycho Cop", "Go-bots Meet the Rock Lords", "Blood Cult", "Mitchell", "Sleep Away Camp", "The Howling 2: Your Sister's a Werewolf" and "The Mines of Kilmanjaro" just to name a few. And all of them are Oscar winning material in comparison to this sorry joke of a movie. The back of the video pack claims the film is set in the crime infested underbelly of Harlem... the entire film takes place in Miami!! Not the fault of the film makers you say? Well try this on for size mister big shot! Halfway through the film they get tired of the story line and out of the blue decide to switch to the plot from "Shaft". It has the worst song ever, the worst acting, the worst fight scenes and the worst editing (they play a scene twice). At one point when asked to describe a gang leader named Big Daddy a character says the following. "The thing is nobody knows what Big Daddy looks like, very few people have ever seen him. All we do know is he's a white guy who is six foot two, with blond curly hair. And man, you talk about muscles... he got the biggest muscles! And he wears bands around his arms. But nobody knows what he looks like. Nobody's ever seen him." Outside the WWF this describes no more than 3 to 5 living people and only one of them lives in Miami. And this film isn't a comedy. This write up doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of what's wrong with this movie. It's so incredibly unpopular it will never make the 100 worst movies list, which is a real shame. The only movie that comes close to sucking as much is The Guy From Harlem's unofficial sequel "Super Soul Brother". At any rate I highly recommend this movie because it will make you appreciate every film you see after it a lot more.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Low-rent blaxploitation / private eye tale

Author: gridoon
28 May 2007

The blaxploitation fad was already in decline in the late 70's, and films like "The Guy From Harlem" were made. "Shaft" or "Black Belt Jones" this is not. It does have a funky score ("that cat is a baaaaad dude"), some beautiful black women and occasionally amusing dialogue. But the production is completely amateurish - there are quite a few cases of fumbled lines that remained in the final cut, probably because the producers couldn't afford second takes. It's billed as an action film, but it's mostly talk: virtually all of the action is fight scenes, and virtually all of the fight scenes are comically bad, playground-level. The fighting in this movie is even worse than the fighting in "T.N.T Jackson" - and that really should tell you something. (*1/2)

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

Stop It! I Give! Uncle! Uncle!

Author: Scott_Mercer from North Hollyweird
17 March 2006

WARNING: The following review contains abuse of exclamation points.



Let me repeat this to make sure you get it.


Wait. I don't think I got it quite right yet.


Worse than anything made by Ed Wood (including his "adult" movies)! Worse than anything by Bill Rebane, or Coleman Francis, or Richard Cunha, or Jerry Warren! Worse than MANOS! Worse than THE CREEPING TERROR! Worse than MONSTER-A-GO-GO (okay, maybe not)! Worse than BATTLEFIELD EARTH! Worse than FREDDY GOT FINGERED! Worse than PACIFIC HEIGHTS! Worse than Eddie Murphy's BOOMERANG! Worse than BABY GENIUSES 2! Wow! Stunning! Bad film-making at its worst! An all time low! Almost impossible for it to fail more than it did! Hilarious!

Teeth-grindingly awful! Everything about this movie is substandard! The lowest possible budget! Must have been written by a 12-year-old! Worse than amateurish acting! Everyone in this movie is a terrible actor! Leaden pacing! Abysmal shot composition! Poor staging! Terrible sound! (You can hear the camera rolling throughout the movie...)

The worst stunts I've ever seen! Most fake fight scene ever filmed! Awful dialog! The least amount of romantic chemistry ever seen between a male and female lead! Lousy music! (Actually the music is the least horrible thing about this movie, but it's still pretty bad.)

Ridiculously unlikely plot! Stilted exposition! A woman supposedly from Africa with an American accent! I still have not used enough exclamation points to convince you just HOW BAD this movie truly is!!!!

All budding MST3K trainees, attention: this is boot camp for the cynical movie critic. You will be LITERALLY BLOWN AWAY (hyperbole there: you will only be METAPHORICALLY blown away, not literally) by how truly awful, laughably bad and bargain basement this movie really is. Your jaw will hit the floor, your hair will curl, and your eyes will not believe what they are seeing.

If you read this comment and all the others regarding this movie, and still take a chance, don't come running back to any of us. You will either be rolling on the floor laughing the uncontrollable laughter of the truly insane or clawing your eyes out if you stick with this bloated cinematic pustule till the end.


Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 12 people found the following review useful:


Author: hengir from London, England
19 March 2007

Either this is one of the worst films ever made, even giving 70s blaxploitation an even badder name, or it is a wonderfully constructed parody of the whole genre. It could be the first satirical post-modernist film; pre-post-modernism in fact. On watching it you could think to yourself, are they being serious or is it a pastiche? Have they reduced the genre to its basic elements then re-constructed them into a profound meditation on the plight of the outsider engaged in a "left handed form of human endeavor." Are the pauses in dialogue due to the incompetence of the actors or is an attempt to cross-pollinate the gangster film with a Harold Pinter-ish sensibility? Is the crude photography a pioneering Dogme film long before its time? Is this indeed a lost masterpiece, worthy of Bergman, Dreyer or Welles? No. This is one of the worst films ever made.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Dear God!

Author: magdav19 from Olympia, WA
26 May 2000

How bad can a movie get? Watch this and find out. The actors stutter their lines in almost every scene and the shots look like they were filmed by an old blind man. This 'film' also has the worst dialogue I've ever heard.

Invite your friends over and watch this for a laugh.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Very cheap blaxploitation but good for a laugh

Author: migspit from United Kingdom
12 November 2007

First off.despite some comments,this is not the worst movie ever made.There is no doubting the facts that it contains awful acting,amateur direction and production values,however its not the snooze fest some truly "bad" movies are.I quite enjoyed the ludicrous hero who seduces every woman he meets(within mins) and beats people up employing no fighting skills whatsoever.I like the fact the same interiors are used for different locations and the dialogue is corny as hell and delivered terribly.There's plenty of laughs to be had so its never truly boring.If you want bad movies try Curse of the Headless Horseman,Cannibal Terror,The Killing Edge or Black Devil Doll from Hell! The Guy From Harlem is far more entertaining than those stinkers. Now where can I find the sequel?

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:


Author: Shibboleth from Oklahoma
16 June 2003

This movie left me in awe. No, not because it was good. This is the perfect example of a bad movie. I had never seen a movie as bad as this before. Ever. The cinematography was non-existent. The lighting was terrible. I have seen better acting from first grade children in a school play. There were somes scenes when it looked like the actors were reading from cue cards. The editing was awful. Some scenes seemed interlaced with others. This movie could only be watched for two reasons. Those reasons are to see what a truly bad movie is, and to appreciate the B movies. This movie could be called an F movie. My vote is ½ out of **** (or perhaps ¼ out of ****)

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A truly bizarre movie, but fun to watch

Author: nzibari-42-383922 from United States
10 December 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First things first, I have to acknowledge that this movie was a very modest production, even in comparison to other blaxploitation movies. Watching this movie might make you appreciate how much effort goes into shooting and editing them into a watchable movie since so much goes wrong in this one. Really bad sets, lighting problems, audio going between too loud and too soft, and much more are all over this movie. One thing working in its favor is that unlike some other low-budget blaxploitation movies, you don't see the boom mic slip into shots as much. Though that may be because that the crew didn't use one for many shots.

Anyways, the story is pretty straight forward. Al Connors/The Guy (played by Loye Hawkins) is a private detective in Miami whose only distinguishing feature is being from Harlem. In the movie we really don't see anything extraordinary he does, and even the fights he gets into aren't anything to show his prowess.

There are two different cases The Guy handles in the movie. The cases don't seem to relate to each other and it almost appears as if we got two different plots merged into one.

The movie starts with a woman being harassed by a mook or something. Then it abruptly cuts to The Guy driving around town with a really funky intro as he drives to his office. Unfortunately the rest of the movie doesn't hold up to the intro's funk.

The first case has The Guy get requested by some G-Men to run protection for a visiting African princess, which I suppose is to establish that The Guy is so badass that even the government goes to him for help. Anyways, he foils a kidnapping attempt (or was it assassination?) while she was getting a massage, and scores with the princess. Unfortunately it's no where near as exciting as that may sound and their intimate scene comes off as bizarre more than anything.

The second case has The Guy receive a crime boss who informs The Guy that his daughter has been kidnapped (the one who was shown at the beginning), and he needs The Guy to rescue her. So I guess half-way through the movie they decided to go full Shaft here. Also, the crime boss actor is yelling his lines the whole time which adds some unintentional humor.

Anyways, without getting too bogged down on details The Guy uses his sleuth powers in a gym to find out some hick gang is holding the mob boss's daughter in a cabin. There are some sequences leading up to this involving The Guy using his martial arts skills to defeat the mooks as he gets to the cabin. The fights are done so poorly but I can't do it justice with words, it's something you need to see.

After some more nonsense after rescuing the crime boss's daughter (who like the princess he manages to seduce as well), The Guy has a meeting with the mook gang, which includes the man he met in the gym. After their ambush on The Guy goes bad thanks to help from the crime boss's men, The Guy and Gym guy have a lame duel which the crime boss's men and the one of the remaining hicks watch. The Guy demonstrates his martial arts prowess again by knocking the Gym Guy down and then choking him to death. The remaining hick tries to make a run for it then and kicks one of the crime boss's men, and he's rewarded by being shot down in the back as he runs away. So I guess all's well that ends well for The Guy.

Some honorary mentions... -The Guy's secretary, who somehow managed to have more character than The Guy with her sass when getting hit on by the crime boss's mooks -The Guy's (former?) girlfriend whose apartment he crashes in to seduce the princess and the crime boss's daughter

I've rated this movie low but don't think that there's nothing worth watching here. This is one of those that's great to watch with friends to make fun of and just go with the flow of crappiness here. There are some dull stretches in the movie but not enough to completely ruin things.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history