To be sure, "Death Wish" is dated; many of its more sheltered detractors accuse it of being an exaggerated portrayal of NYC crime in the '70s. These criticisms are as precious as they are confused. While it's certainly a sensationalist and exploitive film, the crimes featured in it were quite commonplace, as were their depicted frequency.

While always capable, Charles Bronson was never a terribly nuanced actor. His straightforward, understated performance here is as powerful as it is reserved, relying on his talent for subtle expression and his considerable screen presence. His Paul Kersey is a mild-mannered architect of trendy sensibilities: his heart bleeds ever so sweetly for the underprivileged, regardless of the criminal element so prominent among them. But when his wife is murdered and his daughter is beaten and raped by a gang of "underprivileged" thugs, Kersey experiences a dramatic change of opinion. His gradual transformation from a gentle professional to a hardened, vicious vigilante is realistically portrayed - an impressive aspect of the film that owes as much to Michael Winner's tense, blunt direction as Bronson's striking performance.

Although it's frequently brutal and a bit clumsy in spots, "Death Wish" provides a perceptive and even compelling perspective of its subject matter. I've read and heard this film referred to as "pro-gun propaganda" more than a few times, and while that description is over the top, there's no doubt that screenwriter Wendell Mayes was catering to the victimized everyman when he adapted Brian Garfield's novel of the same name to the screen. Ultimately, the core issue of this movie is not the subject of guns but instead the cost of so-called civility. When a society makes self-defense practically impossible for the average individual and law enforcement establishments are unable or unwilling to fulfill their tasks, what reasonable course of action can that everyman engage in? While Kersey's choice of action is extreme and probably misguided, it isn't impossible to relate to.

I've read several times that this movie's infamous rape scene has been trimmed for video release. I can't say that I mind this particular instance of omission; rape scenes aren't exactly to my liking, this one is effective enough in its truncated form and any possibility that I might have had to see more of a young Jeff Goldblum's pale posterior is sufficient reason to trim a few offending bits. Regardless, I do find this a bit troubling. If Paramount cut something that I didn't care for, how can I expect the company not to treat something that I do like similarly in the future? This hint of censorious inclinations is hardly encouraging.

It's nice to see that "Death Wish" has been remembered and appreciated so many years after it first became a smash hit. It may well be the first American film about urban vigilantism, and it deserves its modest legacy. The absurd, frequently hilarious Golan-Globus sequels are a hoot, but this first entry is a film that you can take at face value.

It only took he wife being murdered and his daughter being brually gang rape and left mentally unstable to make one knee jerk liberal to go hard core conservative. Too bad he hadn't gon esooner maybe the ladies would have shot the creeps dead instead.

What is the price of freedom? Did someone say --- eternal vigilance? Having lived in a Great Toilet for many years, and been robbed and burgled more times than I can remember, I'd like to be free to walk the streets without looking over my shoulder. And now I do. Imagine leaving the door unlocked. Michael Winner is an excellent, no-nonsense, unpretentious director. There's nothing fancy, preening or self-regarding about his movies. I'd been told he wasn't much good, so I never went to see any of his productions. But now that I'm viewing them on dvd, I find the best ones much, much better than I'd expected. They're not looking for Oscars, and perhaps that's why they stay with you. Winner tells a linear story, and he tells it well. This film is a lot better than Dirty Harry. Many of these tales by Winner seem simple and straightforward, but there's much more to them, eg Lawman, Chato's Land. Forget The Wicked Lady --- it was terrible. The slow build-up here was not what I was expecting, but I thought it well done, and admired it. Charles Bronson was not so much an actor, as a unique physical presence, carved in hardwood. He was great. The street scum were somewhat corny. So what? The film wasn't about them, and they were nothing to weep over. The poor dears. What I really liked was that touch of British humour that Winner brought along with him. It added an extra dimension of wit and humanity to the usual over-earnest Hollywood fare. Excuse me now, I'm just going to check my hat-pin rack; and exchange a twenty quid note for some handy rolls of coin. I'll be gone by sundown.

Standard Chuck Bronson shoot 'em up. Better then the sequels. Wouldn't bother with them, but this one is timeless.

Plenty of people here have summarized what the film is about, so I won't. I'll try to add something original to the mix, so forgive me if I don't confine myself to describing the film's plot. The popularity of this film cannot be explained without a wider understanding of cultural conditions and sentiments at the time of its release. Death Wish was a bombshell, as it gave voice to how hundreds of thousands of people were feeling, sentiments people felt and may not have publicly expressed for fear of backlash from the PC movement. In a few sentences, the cultural circumstance referred to was a growing discontent with what was growingly considered to be misguided attempts to solve society's "problems." In the sixties the government gave itself the responsibility to "fix" many problems, from teenage pregnancy to poverty to drug use to discrimination to crime, with social "programs," judicial activism and new legislation. Ironically, ALL of these problems were already rapidly decreasing in the early sixties. Crime was HALF what it was in 1930, even if you don't control for the increase in the population!! Poverty was lessening each and every year. What happened after the social programs of the late sixties and the generation of the welfare state? Well, the crime rate literally exploded. So did teenage pregnancy. Poverty quadrupled. Another thing that happened was the rewriting of law to lessen the punishment of criminals to the result that even the criminals that were arrested and successfully prosecuted often ended right back out on the street in a matter of months to commit even more crimes. People were sick and tired of this crap. Some filmmakers new it, and tapped into this sentiment with wildly popular films like Death Wish, The Stone Killer, and Dirty Harry. An entire genre of "vendetta/revenge/let's take out the human garbage" films was born, and Charles Bronson, after Death Wish, was for a decade the most popular actor in the world. Cinematically Death Wish is an amazing, spellbinding film. Bronson's presence is undeniable, and Herbie Hancock's soundtrack unforgettable. The seventies threw up some wonderfully gritty films drenched in utter realism, and this is one of the greatest of all time. This film would simply not get made today. No way.

... or were certain scenes edited from this DVD version just like Paramount did with "Thief Of Hearts"? I could have sworn the rape scene was originally longer and more graphic.

The rape scene at the beginning is very graphic but is essential to the story about Charles Bronson's character becoming a vigilante. We have to know why he is so frustrated into taking matters in his own hands. It is interesting to see how the police chief breaks the case and how he handles it in the end.

Liked it 20 years ago and like it now. I lost my original(loaned it out one too many times). This is a replacement.

A lot has been said,HERE,in various reviews,about how this film reflects the time in which it was made..while true on many levels,few have ventured to guess why such a film may have mirrored its time so well..Paul Kersey,the Bronson charecter,the vigilante,was portrayed as a fortyish fellow which,in 1974,would have given him a birthdate before the second world war..Now while world history may have been in turmoil during the '30s,the '40s,and even into the '50s,local history,the history of american neighborhoods and communities,lumbered along pretty much as it always had...most people more or less trusted most of thier neighbors,doors were not always double-bolted,violence was from gangsters or as a result of some flare-up between friends or relatives...it was not random,it was not gratious..
The perpetrators in"Death Wish",dope addicts,muggers,random sadists,belong to a later generation,twenty or so years younger than Kersey..thier world is a world fueled by drugs,by freedoms without responsibility,and they inhabit a world that was rapidly turning to manure..laws had no teeth...communities were fragmented,over race,over the viet-nam conflict,over politics..Kennedy and King were not even a decade in thier graves...The court system,along with the lawyers,had begun taking a generation-long run at the laws necessary to hold the world in check..Victims were secondary to thier victimisers in terms of the legal community and the court system,and the police were restrained from both protecting the innocent or doing any real damage to the guilty...
This is the world in which this film operates...Kersey,a product of that other,older world,expected some protection for himself and his family,expected that the law would function as it should,and was horribly surprised to find that it did not..His world was shattered,and nothing whatever was done to rectify it...
Becoming a vigilante,while a step,was not one that was without precedent..at about this same time,in New York where this film was set,the real world had just encountered Bernard Goetz,the so-called"subway shooter"..a meek nebbish,Goetz had claimed that he was subject to threats and harrassment,on a subway car,from several youths,some of which Goetz had then shot...Given the criminal records some of his victims had,Goetz became something of a hero to the same sort of people as our mister Kersey,although,as in the film,law-enforcement took a very dim view of Goetz or his solution to this sort of problem...Indeed,despite the ample evidence that Goetz was indeed threatened by at least some of the youths involved,he,and not they,was the focus of police activity...
So then,do we have here a film that saw a real event and then re-wrote it to adapt better as a screen thriller,or do we have a film that absorbed much of what was going on in real life at that time and regurgitated it back as a harrowing vision?
This first film was the best of the lot..All of the others that came afterward had less and less to say about why such a fellow as Kersey might be able to operate as he did,opting instead to raise the blood and body-count levels.ironicly playing to the same sense and senibilities in the audience as Kersey the killer was gunning down on the cinematic streets...For as the death wish films repeated themselves endlessly thier core audience seemed more interested in violence and less interested in motivation,or consequences...and the Kersey charecter became a mere killing machine,piling up the bodies,but offering no solutions other than becoming the same sort of offender as those he turned his guns upon...
For Bronson,"Death Wish"was something of a turning point..In many of his films before he had cultivated a neat sort of personna,a half bad good guy,seen in"The Mechanic",
"The Magnificent Seven"and a number of other similiar vehicles..This film allowed Bronson to act,rather than to re-act,and it showed that he was more able to do so than was perhaps generally thought at that time...Alas,after"Death Wish"Bronson more or less gave in to the urge to become a"star"rather than remaining an actor..much of what he pumped out afterwards,with few exceptions,played to a core audience that went to see gunfire,blood and lots of violent activity,with little plotline and even less acting...
Is"Death Wish"a good movie?Yes,in it's way..It says a lot about the way we were,and even more about why we are the way we are now..

Although, I was only exactly four years old on July 24, 1974, the date in which this movie was released but from all the accounts I have read from that time,and even from some of the reviews written here already, New York City`s crime rate was rather high. This movie tapped into what people`s feeelings were as far as the crime issue goes during that time.
Unless you lived in that era, it is hard to see how a film like this could be so controversial at the time. But the very thought of an ordinary citizen taking the law into his own hands was unheard of. After many years of insipid sequels and countless imitators, Death Wish still shines like a gem.
This is one of Bronson`s best performances. He is the peaceable middle aged, longish haired,liberal architect Paul kersey until his world is shattered. Scenes that are noteworthy of Bronson`s acting are;
a)When kersey is waiting at the hospital withis son in law, Jack about news relating to his wife and daughter.
b) When he receives news that his wife has died, he starts to break down.
c) Before plugging his first victm, kersey is overcome with fear. Does he shoot or hand over the money. The former option wins out and after shooting his would be mugger, Kersey is just watching his victim writhe in pain . He is in a state of hesitancy and shock before he hightails it back to his apartment.
d)Whe he arrives at his apartment, Kersey feels nauseous and weak from what he has just done. The liberal architect turned vigilante races for the toilet and vomits.
The fim explores kersey`s transformation into a vigilante who becomes more cocksure of himself . He rides on a subway train carrying a bag full of groceries and in a diner, he counts out large amount of bills openly in order to lure muggers into his trap.
And another favorite scene of mine is when kersey and some of his associates are sitting at a resturaunt, there is a televised press conference in which the NYPD commissioner is urging the vigilante to desist from his one man crusade and turn himself into the police. The patrons are all attentive to the Tv set, unaware the vigilante is amongst them. Our hero simply smirks at the commissioners suggestion to turn himself in while he`s downing his dinner, almost as in a taunt; `No, let`s see if you can try and get me.'
Eventually, the police do get their man after Kersey is injured by muggers during his vigilante quest. Inspector Ochoa orders Kersey at his hospital bed to leave NYC, but it doesnt mean that Kersey won`t stop his his crusade. Once he arrives at the main Chicago train sation, he sees a bunch of skells harassing a young woman. Kersey goes over to help her gather her luggage which was strewn all over the place by the skells. The skells see this and start mocking him. Our vigilante smiles and points an imaginary gun in their direction.
This is a great movie and a provactive one at that. Many critics were split in their opinions with no middle ground. They either loved it or hated it. And the public flocked to this movie in droves. It was one of the top ten movies in `74.
Unfortunatley, the lameness of the sequels and countless imitators have diluted the impact of this classic somewhat. But it still remains a gripping, intriguing movie.
This is one of Charles Bronson`s best performances and he is very convincing and believable as the conscientious objector turned vigilante. His later performances in the subsequent sequels were as emotional amd involved as a wet dish rag. Steven Keats is excellent as the beleagured son in law, Jack, and Vincent Gardenia shines as the police inspector Frank Ochoa who is determined to apprehend the vigilante.

The 70's really was the true golden age of "Hollywood", not the 30's. During the 70's film makers were allowed to put things on the screen that previous years would have forbidden. A slew of gritty no-nonsense movies found their way onto celluloid that simply wouldn't have got a green light the decade before.

"Death Wish" was one of those films.

Its story is simple enough, mans wife (Hope Lange) and daughter (Kathleen Tolan) suffers horrific attack and man abandons his previous policy of pacifism and engages in a one-man killing spree of New York's ubiquitous scum. Other reviewers have detailed the story on Amazon, so I'll refrain from any more detail.

"Death Wish" has been very much derided in its life-time and somewhat unfairly too. The low opinion some people have of the film is undoubtedly influenced by the absolutely awful sequels (from Death Wish III onwards. Death Wish II isn't that bad). The film is actually a very good attempt to tell the story of an ordinary man faced with an extraordinary situation and his reaction to it.

Paul Kersey (Charles Bronson) doesn't strap on an M16 or Magnum, doesn't dress up in cool combat gear and doesn't destroy half of Manhattan is his pursuit of muggers. He quietly endures his pain for the first half of the film and the only instrument for enacting his revenge comes from a contracting client (Stuart Margolin) in Arizona. A relatively "uncool" .32 revolver.

With this he goes about his business, but not with glee. He spills he guts after the first shooting and clearly it takes him some getting used to. There's no glory in Kersey's murders, but there is a sense of satisfaction available to the viewer. There's no glossy feeling to his actions. It's dirty work.

It's also a dirty movie too. Gritty and with a nasty feeling throughout, it shows 70's New York as a filthy, grimy and horrifically dangerous place...as it was.

Some of the direction is inevitably a bit off, as Michael Winner is not that good a director and some lines are delivered in a bad way. It has obvious budget constraints too, but the film itself doesn't suffer too badly from these drawbacks.

All in all, "Death Wish" is a fine film, with a charismatic star and an entertaining story. It's a film of its period though and will certainly not appeal to everyone. But if you like gritty, serious, drama and have missed out on the film, then "Death Wish" will be to your liking.

Everthing worked out fine, I was well pleased with all transactions.
Thanks,Willie Lewis

Michael Winner's provocative film is slightly more intelligent and much more insidious than Richard Fleisher's 'Mr.Majestyk.'

Charles Bronson is a Manhattan middle-aged architect who was at work's one day, when three brutal punks invade his Riverside Drive apartment and attack his loving wife and happily wed daughter... The wife was beating to death and the daughter savagely sexually assaulted, and sent traumatized into a near-vegetable state...

To escape the oppressive urban environment, Bronson goes to Tucson, Arizona on business, and gets the gun code of the Old West imprinted on his mind... He was given a .32 pistol as a going away present by a gun-loving millionaire...

Back in New York, Bronson carries one night his gift, and kills the first mugger who was molesting him... The first one was the hardest!

Then he discovers he likes it... He begins deliberately to tempt muggers, whether in an alley, on a subway train, or in a park... and that he mechanically guns them down...

The police couldn't identify him... This made him the 'avenging angel,' a true phantom 'one-man crusade.' In the eyes of the public, Bronson became a national figure--the vigilante...

The authorities were worried sick about the example he was setting... His actions seemed to be giving others new attitudes toward crime in the streets...

When Inspector Ochoa (Vincent Gardenia) identifies the mysterious vigilante, he was immediately ordered to scare him off...

The police commissioner asks him to quit, to desist, to go away, to stop!

If you have never seen Bronson in action by sundown, 'Death Wish' is the one to see...

Final comment: Rarely have I found myself so caught between my own gut reactions and intellectual reservations... I wish (with many here) to touch an exposed nerve in fearful Mexico, particularly of its muggers, thugs, kidnappers, and rapists, who (as in this film) could be easily eliminated if every upright, middle-class, middle-aged citizen got himself a weapon and used it at least one time a week... We are tired of being frightened, endangered and ripped-off daily... If the law is fighting a losing battle against the criminal element and can't protect innocent people, then maybe someone else should... It is very important that we know how to protect ourselves within the law...

This movie is one of our favorites. I was skeptical at first but after seeing it, I became a fan of the series. I think most people fantasize about taking the law into our own hands from time to time. Its easy to side with Bronson's character.

Give this movie a chance. Its worth watching.

This a great movie and it completes the whole series of the deathwish series Charles did.

this isn't the light hearted sequels that were put out after this one went threw the roof,this is very serious and was ground breaking in it's day!
bleeding heart bronson has a change of heart after his wife is killed and daughter is raped and left in a coma bronson is sent to texas to help a project his firm (he's an architect) and finds one of his clients is a gun lover. on the return trip the client gives him a gift(another sign of age as he puts it in his bag and bronson is able to get on the plane with it) and suddenly he has a gun and now a cause,to get rid of the scum who have taken over his city. and get rid of them he does,setting out on night patrols to find and kill these slime. while he goes about his job the police try to stop him.
this is a very serious movie and not an action movie like the others in the series. the violence is excessive for the early 70's but that was the point and the whole vigilante theme wounld soon be made real in the country. this is one of bronson's best and he really pulls this acting job with great style. a must see and one of the best of the 70's

Classic movie my white behind! More like possible camp classic, but in actuality not quite incompetant enough for that. This is simply a stinky movie that has aged worse than limburger (which I happen to quite like, if it's fresh and very thinly sliced - which my local deli does acceptably well). Charles Bronson, may he rest in peace, was indeed a screen legend but his acting abilities were limited... to one facial expression. The dubbing on this movie makes it seem almost like a foreign flick, albeit without any kickbutt kung-fu action! The "villians" (among them young Jeff Goldbum) are laughable and very nearly something out of a Troma movie. I will not examine the "feminist" or "neo-femme" implications of this movie, because it was made in a (thankfully) bygone era when such concerns did not generally surface in Hollywood productions. But it is safe to say this film is a relic best approached as a mild comedy.

Charles Bronson reminds me of John Wayne, as their facial expressions don't really change no matter what the situation they're faced with is. This movie made Charles Bronson a star. Could someone tell me what part Jeff Goldblum played in this movie. Was he the tall, bald, thug? I don't recall him in this movie.

"Death Wish" depicts its hero as a modern pioneer in an urban setting, who decides to take the law into his hands to protect his life and uphold the honor of his family. Bronson's character, a law-abiding man of liberal leanings, changes his outlook during a trip to Arizona, a "new State", where the values of the pioneer have been vividly preserved. In Arizona he comes to understand that the average American citizen has "unlearned" to use a gun in self-defense. He comes back to New York determined to purge the city of lowlife mugs, whose unchecked brigandage has largely turned it into a new no man's land. As should be expected, the police is all too wary of such a display of independence and tries to curb the mysterious killer. Bronson's enemies turn out to be nearly all non-whites, which once again reminds one of the pioneers' days.
It's easy to understand why the movie was, and still remains, so controversial. It invites to the uneasy reflexion that the majority of us city dwellers may have become too "civilized", and thus an easy prey to savages allowed to live among us.

When Hollywood needed an actor who could portray a character without overshadowing the story line, they always called on Charles Bronson. His long career was a continuous portrayal of characters, not story lines. In this first installment, Paul Kersey is a man who is the average everyman. He has a family, job and future which is abruptly wrenched from him by society's dregs. Although he still tries to go on with his life, police incompetence and political cowardness only encourages the predators until Kersey feels compelled to act in a manner contraty to his own personal ideals. A man trapped by events, he is nevertheless a formidable foe against those who would act wantonly and even the police don't want the general public to know how well he is doing their job. How effective is Bronson? On the screen he was Paul Kersey, or Jack Murphy, or Albert Johnson. He was never Paul Kersey being Jack Murphy, etc. He was one of a kind, and they broke the mold.

Along with the Dirty Harry series, the Death Wish series helped convince America that we had gotten too soft on crime and criminals. In the early 70's, wheh these series started, these films were not just entertainment but important social commentary. Both series had 5 installments and were immensely popular with the public.
The original Death Wish is a masterpiece. Bronson plays his most famous role here, the liberal Paul Kersey. He becomes a reluctant vigilante and hero after his wife is murdered by thugs.The transformation from liberal to vigilante is not overnight and Bronson excels is showing the gradual changes. The entire cast is great and special mention goes to the Star Charles Bronson in his signature role, Stuart Margolin as a Arizona gun enthusiast, and Vincent Gardenia, who is absolutely perfect as the NY cop in charge of the vigilante investigation.
The fact that neither Bronson, Gardenia, or Margolin received Oscar nominations is a disgrace. The message of this film is a "get tough on crime" conservative message and it is well documented that Hollywood favors the liberal movies. The public, however voted with their wallets and made this a smash at the box office that warranted 4 sequels.

Hi..
Well, i must say that Death wish is one great classic movie with the one and only Bronson.
I watched it a few days back, and thought it was amazing with a good plot and good action sequences.
The DVD transfer is great, and although its a 70s movie, it is entertaining today im sure as it was back then.
So Bronson is not an Oscar type actor, but he delivers the goods here.
In summary, this movie is totally worthy of being owned in any DVD library, don't miss it and don't miss Bronson at his best.

If you liked this movie I suggest you read Brian Garfield's novel to see how badly the story was butchered in translation from book to film. The movie was heavily politicized and sanitized. For example the whole "bleeding heart liberal vs conservative" nonsense was never in the book. Nobody convinced him to get a gun, he bought it because he wanted to protect himself from the thugs in the streets. Also the three young men who attacked his wife and daughter were black and hispanic, not white. This was changed in the film. The police investigation in the film was also fairly absurd since in the original storyline he didn't kill only muggers. He also killed car thieves, a burglar, and even teenage vandals.
That said the movie itself focused too much on the acts of revenge rather than on the process that transformed him into a vigilante. His transformation from ordinary citizen to vigilante is not very believeable in the movie. He simply picks up a gun and goes out to battle the evildoers. That's not how it happened in the book. The movie delights in showing street criminals being killed but that's not what Death Wish was all about. It wasn't about a sadistic thrill of watching bad guys bite the dust, it was about watching one man lose his sanity and turn his private revenge fantasy into reality for reasons that were not entirely clear even to him. In the end the original story was against vigilantism. This theme is completely lost in the film.
Overall the movie is by no means bad but because of all the changes in the storyline it's inferior to the novel that inspired it.

'Death Wish' (1974) is made in the 70s, and still conveys the air of the time when they produced such films as 'Dirty Harry' (1971), 'French Connection' (1971) and 'The Taxi Driver' (1976). They are all related to the issues like violence and justice, or how the society and individuals should respond to them.

Not that 'Death Wish' reachs the height of the other three (all of which are unmistakable masterpieces), though the film remains a gripping watch thoughout. 'Death Wish' stars Charles Bronson as ordinary businessman (meaning Mr. Everyman) living in New York City named Paul Kerbey, and shows how this guy, after his wife and daughter are brutally assaulted in his own home, changes to 'The Vigilante,' sort of his own answer to the city crimes rife in that city. In short, he takes up a gun, strolls in the street, and kills every mugger who comes to rob him.

Though some people say this is a revenge drama, the fact is, it is not exactly. The film poses a thought-provoking questions as to the solutions of the crimes, and the story is more complex than you suppose, especially in the second chapter.

Probably, you notice the film's manipulative tone. You see how Kerbey and his wife enjoying holidays on the seaside, and taking pictures. Then you see the graphic violence (of the muggers and then Kerbey). The locations where Kerbey guns down the guys -- in the park, alley, and subway, all of which were (are?) notorious for crimes in New York. You alos see Kerbey takes a business trip to Tuscon, where he watches a Western show. And it is the old rules of Western films that Kerbey takes up in New York City.

The film is still powerful, and the subject matter is not as simple as the four unnecessary sequels might suggest. As to Bronson himself, I find his acting is good, but his acting style is what we call 'old-fashioned' type, not that of method actors. But that works for me.

Then unknown Jeff Goldblum appears in the early part (well, his face is unmistakable, you know). Also you can see Christopher Guest, too (but you have to wait long). And try to spot one Oscar-winner Olympia Dukakis.

Sin in its Greek meaning: to fail the target. Nowadays power exploits and effectively exerts an oppression state not only by the use of direct action, but by ignoring, by taking refuge behind complex procedures, by obstruct direct access of determined files, by failing to intervene, by refusing to take action, by neglecting the just claim of the most insignificant citizen in the whole social pyramid, by supposing beforehand there' s nothing to do, by ignoring cynically what's going on with the surrounding environment, by naïve clumsiness in the enrooted attitude well known as other's aid.
When you whistle for aid and nothing happens, it' s time for you to act. This was the Op. 1 in that decade that knew about corruption, and affairs of all proportions and natures. When you feel the violence as something real, that hurts and beats you making you to loose your family members, when the violence is something tangible and not a mere academic exercise to present it in conferences about sociological exploration of the urban stress is when you react but maybe it's too late.
This film repulsed Bronson again in the screen. The following sequels were not at its level.

I KNOW WHAT I'D DO. AND IT'D BE THE SAME THING THAT MADE THIS FILM CONTROVERSIAL. IN THIS CLASSIC TALE, A NEW YORKER [CHARLES BRONSON AT HIS UNDENIABLE BEST] FINDS OUT HIS WIFE IS KILLED AND RAPED AND HIS DAUGHTER IS RAPED BY MUGGERS. OUT OF OUTRAGE, HE DECIDES TO GO ON A ONE MAN VIGILANTE RAMPAGE. THIS VIOLENT ACTIONER IS ONE OF THE GREATEST ACTION FILMS OF ALL TIME. IT HAS EVERYTHING: GREAT ACTION, A GOOD STORY, GOOD ACTING, AND AN ANTICIPATED ENDING. IF YOU'RE INTO ACTION FILMS OR IF YOU JUST LIKE CHARLES BRONSON, YOU'LL BE IMMEDIATELY SATISFIED ONCE YOU SEE THIS CLASSIC FILM. FOLLOWED BY FOUR NEEDLESS AND INFERIOR SEQUELS.

Charles Bronson is realistically nervous taking on NYC's muggers, robbers and assailants after the murder of his wife, but what was once a shocking expose of big city crime and ruthlessness now merely looks ugly and sad, with only detective Vincent Gardenia's pungent asides to give the film a little humanity. Bronson can't seem to go for a walk without a vicious thug picking him out, and while the film isn't very dated, it is over-the-top in its cheap nastiness. The brackish color and dawdling pace are other handicaps that make the whole queasy enterprise slightly stultifying.

Here are the "goods" and "bads":

Good:
* A man cleaning up New York by killing thiefs and gangters in the night. (simple concept but cool!).
* The main character (Bronson) looks SOOOO COOL dressed all in black!
* Great actors.
* Cool action scenes.

Bad:
* The action scenes ended up so fast and without cool positions by Bronson.
* The storyline is very slow.
* Bronson has only one small revolver to do the killing and NO FLAMETHROWER!!!

This movie is maybe worth buying it BUT only if you want to have the best "vigilante" movie ever!! this movie could be perfect if Bronson use the flamethrower instead of a small revolver but I guess that's another movie.

P.S: I know that there are sequels of this movie but Im not interested because those movies are from the 80's and there is also no flamethrower!! but at least Bronson use other guns instead of the small revolver.

ADIOS

Charles Bronson is my favorite actor of all time and the death wish series is no exception.its facinating to see how he fights the bad guys and takes matter into his own hands!all bronson movies are action pack with suspense and the death wish series are the best!charles bronson is no longer with us but he left an extraordinary legacy of movies for all to enjoy!hopefully in death he can reunite with Jill Ireland his beloved wife!!

That's for sure. This film has a lot of storyline, more so than Death Wish 2. I like Hope Lange so its a pity her role`as Kersey's wife couldn't have been larger. I really don't feel this film is 100% true to life in 1970's New York City. It is exagerrated in it's depiction of how much crime NYC used to have. But hey it's only a movie.

A discussion of Charles Bronson that fails to mention the "Death Wish" series isn't really a discussion at all. The first entry in this seminal series arrived on the scene in 1974 during a period in American history when all types of crimes skyrocketed. We can thank the moral laxity inflicted on the rest of us by the Counterculture for the increased numbers of murders, arsons, burglaries, robberies, rapes, and countless other forms of physical and mental assaults that soon became common occurrences on every street in the country. A large percentage of the population, referred to by Nixon as "The Silent Majority," ached to find a way to fight back against the vermin committing these atrocities. Since our embrace of vigilante justice faded away due to the abuses of lynching in the South, and our legal system began letting the scum back out on the streets, only Hollywood seemed to offer refuge to the growing number of victims. Enter the revenge and vigilante genre, the most notable entries of which consisted of the Clint Eastwood "Dirty Harry" pictures. In these films, a cop or outraged citizen would hunt down criminals outside the law, meting out a savage brand of justice we could all cheer about.

"Death Wish" soon became a popular alternative to Eastwood's blow 'em away motion pictures. Set in the cesspool that is New York City in the 1970s, we first meet architect Paul Kersey (Bronson) as he exhibits the comfortable liberalism of a man never victimized by criminals. He believes in the efficacy of the legal system, thinks even criminals deserve a fair chance, and supports gun control. Then the unthinkable happens, a crime so monstrous in its random brutality that Kersey's world changes forever. While he is away drawing up plans for his latest project, a gang of punks follows his wife Joanna (Hope Lange) from the market back to the apartment. Once inside, these animals kill Kersey's wife and savagely violate his only daughter Carol (Kathleen Tolan) in a way best left unelaborated upon here. It's truly a terrible series of scenes, but no more terrible than the total ambivalence and ineffectiveness exhibited by the hospital personnel, the police, and Carol's husband in the aftermath of the attack. Only Kersey feels like he should do something, but his personal beliefs (he was a conscientious objector during the Korean War) leave him struggling over what course of action he should take.

Fortunately, a working trip to Tucson settles the issue for our hero. It is here that he meets Ames Jainchill (Stuart Margolin), a real estate developer and self-defense advocate who indirectly helps Kersey decide what to do upon his return to the Big Apple. He also gives the architect a package containing a handgun and ammunition after learning that Kersey, despite his peaceful beliefs, learned about firearms as a child. Our man returns to the city and sets about settling some scores. Sadly, he will never find the men responsible for the despicable atrocities committed against his family, but there is no shortage of criminals in New York to take revenge on in the meantime. Kersey often heads out to the streets posing as a likely victim, virtually ensuring that some mugger or other miscreant will take notice and move in for the kill. Sure enough, they do. And when they do, Kersey pulls out the pistol and guns them down. The sudden surge in deceased criminals brings in the cops, headed up by the always sniffling and blustering Inspector Frank Ochoa (Vincent Gardenia). New York City authorities quickly discover that a vigilante stalks the streets, and they want to catch the guy fast before he influences other outraged citizens to do the same. Too late. Construction workers start beating muggers to a pulp, and little old ladies fight back, too. Will the cops find Kersey? What will they do to him? Watch and see.

"Death Wish" works as well as it does because the script takes vigilantism very seriously. You won't see Bronson running through the streets mowing down hundreds of bad guys without breaking a sweat--that will come later, in the increasingly ridiculous yet massively entertaining sequels. Here, Paul Kersey agonizes over his decision. After one of his assaults on a criminal, he arrives home so shaken that he becomes physically ill over his actions. Too, our vigilante isn't impervious to damage like so many action heroes, which we learn when a thug manages to stick a knife into him during an attack. The best element of the film is Bronson; he falls prey to the law of diminishing returns in the later sequels and other Cannon schlock with ham handed performances so wooden as to defy description, but not here. "Death Wish" gives the actor better material, material that allows him greater range to practice his talents. I also enjoyed seeing Stuart Margolin--an actor I learned to appreciate during his stint as the hilarious ex-con Angel Martin in "The Rockford Files"--in the role of the perceptive Ames Jainchill. Be sure and look for Jeff Goldblum as "Freak #1." Freak #1! I love it!

It is quite unfortunate the only extra on the disc is a trailer. I think I ought to warn viewers interested in the "Death Wish" films right from the start that MGM did a lousy job transferring these gems to disc. The first film doesn't look too bad, but subsequent entries sadly receive a full screen format. Worse, they actually put edited versions of a couple of the films on the discs. Edited! Can you believe it? Who does that nowadays? Oh, I forgot--MGM, Paramount, and several other big studios who simply don't understand how DVD should work. Still, I highly recommend the first film considering its classic stature.

Some of the best movies made came from the 70's and this is one of them. Charles Bronson gets the combination of straight acting and action man just right in this his most successfully movie of his long career. A hard edged thriller with excellent character development on Bronson's part and tight uncompromising direction by Michael Winner. Highly recommended even to non Bronson fans.

This is one of the best of it's era. Very well done. Holds up well to multiple viewings and it's far better than you might expect if you haven't seen it. Director Michael Winner really delivers and Bronson is in top form. It has a highly effective musical score too.

the original novel (author, Brian Garfield), but mine most decidedly DIDN'T end with Kersey going to another city. In fact, it was, in a wierd way, even "colder" than the end of the film. That being said, this is, as you know, one of the original vigilante, one-man-gets 'em all films, a sort of Nevada Smith goes to Manhattan, with several really brutal scenes. Easily one of Bronson's better roles, and yes, you do find yourself alternately cheering and being a little horrified. Interestingly, a person couldn't do a Paul Kersey today, because most of the muggers are carrying guns as well... how's that for irony?

As late as the 1990s, a midnight walk through Central Park or Prospect Park or Riverside Drive or just about any secluded area in New York City was tantamount to asking to be victimized. So to those skeptics who can't believe New York was that bad in the 1970s, I say "Believe it!"

Anyway...

Years before Peter Finch, as Howard Beale in NETWORK, chanted, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!", Charles Bronson's Paul Kersey was well beyond that point. DEATH WISH, among other things is a gritty, unflinching look at the violence urban dwellers all over America faced in the 1970s. Paul Kersey, an Upper West Sider, discovers that his wife has been murdered, and his daughter raped and beaten by intruders. In an interesting twist on movie convention, Kersey doesn't seek revenge by going after the men who destroyed his family: he goes after any and all criminals. Bronson's portrayal of an average guy who, in stages, progresses from amateur to super-vigilante, is very credible. The psychological complexities are intriguing. On one level, he can't let go of the past, so he continues his rampage. However, at the same time, he redecorates his apartment and berates his son-in-law for living in the past. But it makes sense. His daytime self wants to be normal, his night-time--darker--side is bloodthirsty.

There is also an ethical complexity to this film. We all know, somewhere in our moral calculus, that vigilantism only promotes chaos and anarchy. We know we need a police department to enforce our laws. But what happens when that law enforcement is too bogged down by red tape, overwork, and apathy? Paul Kersey did seek justice through proper channels, harrassing the police to move more quickly on the case. It was when that failed, and after a trip out west (where cowboy justice once thrived), that he took the law into his own hands. Again, a very logical reason for his becoming a vigilante. And the viewer cannot help but root for him, no matter how wrong we should think it is.

DEATH WISH is not just a bloodbath thriller film (although the violence was pretty graphic for its time). It is a disturbing and complex movie, and an accurate look back at a time when urban life was so bad, that even Jim Morrison had to shout, "Save our cities!"