bregund This movie-length after school special with swear words beeped out was probably groundbreaking in 1982, but the expected moment of high courtroom drama and its "message" is delivered with all the ham-fisted finesse that must have seemed impressive to rural folks during a time when television consisted of three stations (four if you count PBS). As if to drive the point home that this is the 1980s, there is a montage set to rock music, ending in fake blood and a hospital stay. Watch the drunk driving scene closely, the driver is obviously a middle-aged stunt driver. In contrast to some of the superlatives thrown in Sheen's direction by other reviewers, I thought his performance in general was forced, such as when he went nuts over the spilled milk or started shouting in the courthouse; it is possible for Sheen to overact, and for low TV production values to be confined to only a few takes instead of the multiple ones that might have guaranteed a better portrayal of a struggling blue-collar worker who has been out of work for six months. So back to the "message", it's clear that incarceration exacerbates the issues that cause a man to be imprisoned in the first place, but it was a few weeks in the slammer, not a multi-year stretch in a federal prison. He could have read books or drew pictures to kill the time, so I'm calling BS on the message as it was portrayed. One last thing, that Ed Lauter was a solid character actor who nicely filled out any film he appeared in.

tigerandcamille We came across this on Netflix and finally watched it. It's worth a watch for the laughs. Martin Sheen is over the top with his acting, of course. Emilio tried to be a tough guy but this was no Mighty Ducks. In the drunken driving scene (with the hood up), he amazingly drives on the sidewalk and makes it back to the street until he hits a police car at a donut shop. Warden Caruso has a humorous soft spot for Danny. He just wants this kid out of his jail and there is nothing he can do. That is except carry him out of solitary confinement when the guards refuse to call him at home at Danny's request. Danny Boy is losing his mind after weeks in his own cell. If only he hadn't talked to the man hitting on him in his own holding cell through the bars. Now his life has turned into a month long nightmare.

Joseph P. Ulibas In the Custody of Strangers (1982) was another made-for-t.v. movie to star the father and son team of Martin Sheen and Emilio Estevez. As usual, the films that star Mr. Sheen as always thought provoking and they raise certain issues that effect people in general. A sort of a social message movie for the mainstream folks.The story is about a father and his wild son. He's a loud mouth fool who's always getting into his father's hair. One night he's out having a few pops whilst driving. Being a real careless teen, he's driving will under the influence. After being pulled over by the cops and booked for D.U.I., his father refuses to bail the young punk out. Dad feels that his ungrateful soon needs a reality check. But the police have no place for a minor (they probably didn't think a parent was dumb enough to leave a minor overnight in an adult jail).Well, you can imagine what happens to poor Emilio. Still wet behind the ears, a fellow drunk drunk tries to molest him. Not taking any smack from nobody, Emilio severely hurts the dude. The keystone cops have nothing else to do but lock-up Emilio for a longer stint in the gaol house. What's a young hot headed juvenile going to do? Meanwhile, Martin's feeling a little guilty tries to get his kid out but then he hears about Emilio's extracurricular activities. Will he ever see the light of day? A kid inside a man's gaol.Like I said, the movie raises a lot of questions about how juvenile perpetrators are treated by law enforcement. Another entertaining made-for-t.v.-movie starring the ever reliable Martin Sheen.Recommended.

Pepper Anne Without reading the synopsis on the video box, this may, at first glance, look like a movie about a rough kid who gets into trouble one too many times, and is likely to indulge more than he ought to and really find himself in trouble. This movie is less about the problems of a misguided youth and more about the problems of a cumbersome, inadequate legal system.Young Emilio Esteves plays a small town teen who's father has been laid off and can't find work. His mother (Jane Alexander) works in order to provide for the family of five. Esteves, frustrated with the town, tries to get work or leave the town to find a decent job, but often butts heads with his father (played well by real-life dad, Martin Sheen), who's staunch perception that allowing his son to go to work is a threat to his masculinity. In other words, a father should provide for the family, not his wife, and certainly not the boy. So, the teen and his father are at odds a lot, and as a result, the teen indulges in a lot of trouble, particularly a night of joyriding drunk and hitting a police car, which is what lands him in trouble. The dad supposes that maybe a night in jail is just what the kid needs to straighten up, but who would've thought that it would turn out to be six weeks? Every time the parents turn around to try and get their son released from prison (he was held in an adult prison, but under law had to remain confined to his own cell and out of contact with other adult prisoners), it's one thing or another preventing their efforts. Delayed court dates, delayed psychological examinations, holidays, weekends, switched judges due to illnesses, you name it. And eventually, it starts to wear down on the teen. And it's done in a way where you feel just as confined in a little eight by eight cell as the movie rolls along. For the teen, the isolation and minute confinement proves too much and is more punishment than he deserves (he was being held for assault and battery of two inmates). And it looks like everyone is helpless for the teen, leading to quite detrimental physical and psychological results. The point is best expressed at the end: they had the kid for six weeks, and no one could help him in that time. He just sat in this cell and in the end, became suicidal and real high-strung, and in all that time, not one person could help him out since they obviously couldn't manage to expedite his release. These are the effects of a cumbersome and inefficient "justice" system. According to the movie, these are fictional characters, but the movie is based on real results. Though, I think it makes a statement about the juvenille detention system at large, not just some kid confined to a cell after a lot of bureacratic tug-of-rope. It is that a system this overcrowded and inefficient cannot possibly be expected to effectively help anyone. No wonder recidivism rates are so high. It also comments on the inability of working class parents to b expected by the state to be effective parents to these kids while trying to earn a living at the same time. That's not to say that the teen's parents weren't effective, but they were both trying to get work, and were met with much difficulty in a period of immense economic difficulty (i.e. The Regan Years). This was a family dependent on the longevity of the steel mills and such. When one parent was out of state looking for a job to provide his family, and a mother was requesting that her son be released into her custody, they told the mother it wasn't likely that she could be an effective guardian to the teen simply because she had to work and couldn't be there to watch him ALL the time. That's a reinforcement to central concern about, if the people that these kids know can't help him, how is the system going to do any better.