They Call Me Mister Tibbs! (1970)

Years later

When I first saw this movie years ago, I did not like it. Since then I saw it again and absolutely fell in love with Sidney. What happened to these type of actors today? Hardly any of them them except Paul Newman, and several others, have that type of quality that Sidney has. Maybe it is called 'paying their dues or practicing their craft'. Not sure what it is but this movie, was great. October 7, 2008

Sidney Poitier an unbelievable actor in our time

A great rendition of a man in what he stood for. His principles could not be changed no matter what his character goes through. July 3, 2008

You Missed It, Mister Tibbs

This alleged follow-up to In The Heat Of The Night, has nothing to do with original film except for Sidney Poitier playing a boring character who happens to have the same name.

None of his biographical data even matches--in the original he was a single detective from Philadelphia; here he's a married father who's been on the San Francisco force for years. A real disappointment for fans of the first film; almost looks like producers simply took a script from a bad TV cop show, changed the hero's name, then added enough nudity, violence and profanity to flesh it out to feature length.

Lots of late Sixties TV guest star actors (Anthony Zerbe, Martin Landau, Ed Asner), cheesey production values and predictable pacing that allows you to figure out exactly where the commercial breaks will go when it plays on television only underline cheapie nature of whole project. And, not surprisingly, a tired Poitier looks like he can't wait for the whole thing to be over. We're with ya, Mister. July 27, 2007

They Call Me Mr Tibbs

Excellent transaction - recommend this seller to my friends. Thank you again. November 10, 2006

A bit edgy and raunchy showing a harder performance.

This is a sequel to the oscar winning film "In The Heat Of The Night". 3 years does make a difference. Where Poiter is more subdued in the first movie he's brought more on a personal level in this sequel. It shows Tibbs as a family man, and how he attempts to straddle his personal life from his work. However, when the twain meet and crash into one another this is where you get to see a performance. Tibbs friend played by Martin Landau is a minister with a social conscience, and wants to see the inner city of San Francisco change for the better through social projects, and groups. Unfortunately the minister wasn't able to straddle his private, and work either as a prostitute is found murdered, and he becomes the prime suspect. I found this movie to be somewhat hardcore, and way too blunt. I found Poiter's performance especially with the scenes of where it's Tibbs and his son at odds. Tibbs is attempting I think to be a modern father, or as modern as he could get for that time. However, people today would look at the yelling at his son for watching way too much t.v., introducing his son to smoking cigars, and drinking liquor, and finally the ultimate confrontation where Tibbs slaps his son across the face for not cleaning up his room, and just blanche in horror. These 2 scenes often bothered me as I'm not certain if Tibbs is attempting reverse psychology hoping his son will hate the cigar smoke, and liquor, and about the slapping across the face. Some may find this common, but it's hard to tell when the modern way, and the old-fashioned separate. It leaves me anyway with the sense that I agree that sometimes to get a person to break a habit, or a behavior is to make them do more of the things you hate to see, and hope that it will make them stop because they don't have the control anymore, but at the same time I find slapping of the face to be rather embarrassing. The hands, or behind is one thing, but the face leaves a red mark, and is humiliating. I mean you want to discipline a little more, and not humiliate. It shows you the aftermath of what 1967 was where parents were starting to lose more, and more of thier influence on their children, and this shows an attempt to bridge the gap, and the growing pains that go along with it. I gave it 3 stars as while I found it holding my interest I don't feel I want to see it ever again. Once was enough. August 14, 2004

More reviews at Amazon.com ...