Dan Franzen (dfranzen70) A curio from the late 1960s, Mr. Freedom is about a costumed super patriot who is sent to France in order to ensure that the Commies don't take it over and therefore the world. (Yes, it's an analogue to the Vietnam War.) The catch is that Mr. Freedom is more than willing to maim, rape, and murder anyone who doesn't agree with his particular brand of bringing true democracy to the masses, which makes him a bit more sociopathic than heroic. But them's the breaks, I suppose.Mr. Freedom (John Abbey) is in the employ of some faceless secret organization headed by, of course, Dr. Freedom (Donald Pleasance). The doctor sends the mister overseas to help the resistance, as if WW II were ongoing. The idea is that if the Reds capture France, then by the domino effect the rest of Europe will fall to the Iron Curtain - which here includes China. So how does Mr. Freedom hope to accomplish this? With guns, fists, and good ol' American know-how. His French contact Marie-Madeline (Delphine Seyrig) introduces him to the ragtag crew who hopes to forestall Communism - but could there be a spy among their midst? His costume looks like a combination of NFL player and Robocop. Soon all of the freedom fighters are similarly attired, which makes the whole outfit look like rejects from American Gladiators. Mr. Freedom has no time for nuance; he punches, shoots, kicks, and kills anything that seems anti-American. Seems legit. He's surrounded by stereotypes masquerading as symbols - China is represented by a giant dragon costume, of course. The movie, like its purported protagonist, ain't subtle. Mr. Freedom is sort of like the inbred half-cousin to Captain America; all machismo, no smarts, no figurative vision, and too damn angry.This was directed by one William Klein, whose IMDb page informs me directed quite a few documentaries - and not too many features. His fiction films were typically subversive, meant to satirize known conventions, whether they were the American stance on the war in Vietnam or the fashion industry. I'm not sure how well it was received in 1969, but Klein was so fearful about getting it shown anywhere that he opened it at the Avignon Festival. He was probably wise to do so. The movie is overbearing, crass, and pretty repulsive, even as satire. Phillipe Noiret, Yves Montand, and Simone Signoret each show up in brief roles or cameos, but I'd be willing to wager none was proud of it. Even worse, Abbey gives about as one dimensional a performance as possible; he plays Mr. Freedom as if he were the ROTC guy from Animal House, only not for laughs. Even the sexual scenes are drab. This is a colossal bomb.The overarching trouble with Mr. Freedom the movie is that the character's schtick runs thin about five minutes in and yet intensifies as the plot progresses. It's not long before he's fighting not just Commies but the French who aren't actively fighting with the freedom fighters, and later all of the French. I'm not sure if that's a commentary on how Americans overall view the French, but there you go. And, of course, since this is during the Cold War, there's a threat of using The Bomb to solve problems. You can probably guess Mr. Freedom's stance on that topic.

MartinHafer "So, the French are the white man's burden!" "Anti-Freedomism is at a new high." The above quotes are some of the funny lines from this strange piece of political satire. While I am an American and am reasonably conservative, this overtly anti-American film didn't offend me. After all, dissent is good and I could respect both William Klein's concept of a very flawed superhero as well as some of his points about American foreign policy circa 1969. This idea COULD have worked--even though it was bound to offend many viewers. And, while it DID start well, the entire film turned out to be a mess simply because the satire falls flat again and again--mostly due to very poor writing, acting and horrible production values. To put bluntly, many of Ed Wood's films looked better! Too bad, as this piece of commentary might have had a lot more impact if the film simply didn't look so craptastic. This film is one of the best examples of a movie that was a great idea and had great moments--but had absolutely nothing else going for it.The film is not as relevant as it used to be and I assume it would mostly be a welcome film for people who were alive during the 1960s as well as fervent America-haters--who love the idea of any film that works this hard to make fun of the United States. And, quite frankly, some of the points the film made WERE pretty clever and on--it's just too bad the film had nothing--absolutely NOTHING else going for it. Cheap and wildly uneven--this film is one that actually would probably be best viewed while under the influence.

c_imdb-144 Wow!! To my taste this is far funnier and less campy than Dr Strangelove. Talk about the arid intellectual- Dr. Strangelove pulls his punches and spoons-out his laughs. Mr. Freedom has the bold "logo-rhhea" power to come out and blame The Reds *AND* The Blacks for all his troubles- Not fun or funny? Maybe Kubrick makes better 'cinema'- or maybe he's just lingering over mild material. Klein is committed, overt; profoundly radical. I've seen nothing like this script, but overall- especially the direction, invention & conviction- it reminds me of "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: Across the 8th Dimension". Except where Americans describe Buckaroo as "agreeably insane", Mr. Freedom comes from some different country. OTOH- None of these films depend on any nuance. It is probable that the first 40 minutes are the most astounding of Mr. Freedom's bizarrely breathless life. After that we're asked to buy into the TV-Batman premise; then we proceed along an escalating series of staged confrontations- offering no development 'per se', but plentiful poignant wordplay. Whole pages of the script are totally "quotable", but possibly poisoned. So if one isn't angered by our corporate-imperialist history in Europe (i.e., the Cold War ('Red Chinaman', 'Mr. Moujik' ('peasant' in Russian)), the 1960's Marseilles underground (represented as Mafia lowlife "Mr. Drugstore" (Turk Sweet, anyone?))) & some very similar Euro-Colonialist history - then yeah, it'll all sound 'stupid'. Well the fun here is part surreal/comics- but it's *All* satirical- i.e., depends on deeper connections. And "literate" is Problem #1 for USA-educated, Depression-Generation video-gamers. A grounding in international politics just won't match the power-fantasies of Fox-TV Gulf-war coverage for jingoistic thrill-kills/per-minute. But anyone who reads to stay awake should appreciate Director William Klein's ambitious coup. Anyone ready for 'System of a Down' or 'Rage Against the Machine' etc. should score (& another historic value IS the scrappy score by Serge Gainsborough (also seen at the piano)). Vive the French Anti-Freedom League! Vive Paris 1968!

CelluloidRehab A satirical look at US social and political policy during the 1960's and 70's in the context of a superhero genre. Mr. Freedom works for Freedom INC. and protects freedom around the world by blowing things up, looting, and killing. Freedom Inc. seems to be on the top floor of an office building that has other blue chip American corporations and is run by Dr. Freedom (aka - Donald Pleasence). This is not a far stretch for Donald who had problems handling Michael Meyers and was the leader of a criminal organization trying to take over the world, with only the Puma Man (pronounced Pueooma) to stop him. The movie is rather obscure and hard to follow, however, it does contain numerous hilarious scenes. The Freedom suit is by far the funniest aspect of the movie. John Abbey does a great job of portraying a John Wayne/Teddy Roosevelt stereotypical pushy American character who acts first and does not worry about the consequences. My favorite scenes are as such : Mr. Freedom's visit to the U.S Embassy in Paris (aka - Walmart) and the party crash by Red China Man of the meeting between Mr. Freedom & Moujik Man (I think its suppose to be the Soviets). Most people will get bored very quickly with this movie and could be considered an artsy movie. Even though I do not think it is a great or even a good movie it has some redeeming qualities and makes some relevant points (even for today).