SnoopyStyle Dr. Peter Carey (James Coburn) is the new pathologist at a Boston hospital. He falls for Georgia Hightower (Jennifer O'Neill). Dr. David Tao (James Hong) calls him from prison when Karen Randall dies in emergency. Karen is the Chief of Staff J.D. Randall's daughter and she bled to death after an illegal abortion. However Tao claims he only treated her in emergency and didn't do the abortion even though he's done them in the past. Carey investigates which puts Randall and the police against him.The investigation is meandering and stalls several time. I like the setup but the follow through is deficient. The pathologist investigator genre has come a long way since then. Any number of TV show is better than this. However it moves just well enough despite some rather slow patches.

lazarillo James Coburn plays a pathologist who is investigating the death of the fifteen-year-old daughter of the chief of medicine, who has died of a botched abortion that has been blamed on his colleague (James Hong), who is an illegal abortionist on the side. A lot of people today would be horrified of a movie where the hero is actually trying to help out an abortion doctor. But this was 1972 and people tend to forget that everything wasn't all bright and wonderful back when abortion was still illegal either (I don't personally take a side on the abortion debate, but I have a problem with people on either side who think the issue is in any way morally clear-cut and unambiguous--it's not now and never was). But before anyone goes bemoaning "liberal Hollywood", there's also a real "Dirty Harry" element to this movie, like a scene where Coburn essentially tortures information out of a drug-addicted suspect by denying her treatment. This particular scene should offend liberals everywhere (as well as anyone else who's ever heard of the Hyppocratic Oath).But the fact that this movie might offend both conservatives AND liberals is exactly what I liked about it. The real world is morally messy and no one person is ever 100 percent morally righteous, and the many, many Hollywood movies that try to make things morally simplistic and their protagonists morally pure actually do a great disservice in many ways. Of course, the moral complications in this particular movie seem to be more the result of a confused production than anyone's clever intentions. Still I always find an interesting failure like this much more enjoyable than a boring success (like whatever old TV show they're making into a major motion picture this week). And in 1970's Hollywood there was a whole string of these kind of interesting failures, which is why I find that whole period so fascinating.This movie definitely has some problems as other have said. Jennifer O'Neil is completely wasted, and the basic plot is riddled with holes (i.e. noboby but the protagonist notices that the botched operation was very obviously not the work of a trained doctor). Coburn isn't bad though, and this movie does kind of anticipate both "Coma" and the popular TV series "Quincy MD". Not good, but interesting, and certainly worth seeing.

moonspinner55 Curiously mediocre, middle-of-the-road film from director Blake Edwards, adapted from Michael Crichton's novel "A Case of Need," has James Coburn (cocky as ever, and enjoyably so) playing the new pathologist at a Boston hospital, sorting out the mystery of a young murder victim. Light drama keeps tongue-in-cheek yet has aspirations to be a whodunit and doesn't quite make the grade. Coburn's general panache is effortless, but he's just coasting through, and the role doesn't challenge him (or us) in any way. Jennifer O'Neill is attractive but (once again) underused as a romantic interest. Screenwriter Harriet Frank used the pseudonym James P. Bonner for the credits--just as original writer Crichton did (as Jeffrey Hudson) for his book! **1/2 from ****

gridoon James Coburn makes an (initially) likable hero, Jennifer O'Neill is radiantly pretty and Blake Edwards proves to be surprisingly adept at handling the "serious" material, quite a change-of-pace for him after all the "Pink Panther" entries. But the film becomes bloody and unpleasant in the last 20 minutes, and near the climax it features a particularly distasteful, almost repulsive torture scene. (**1/2)