IMDb user comments for
Billy Jack Goes to Washington (1977) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Index

8 comments in total

---

12 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
AMAZING PREDICTION OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, 10 June 2000

Author: Kelly Perkins (tkperkins@webtv.net) from TYLER, TX

Tom Laughlin has an uncanny ability to predict future events. His movie BILLY JACK foretold the way action movies would go (ie. RAMBO, STEVEN SEIGAL, CHUCK NORRIS, etc.) In this particular installment of the Billy Jack Saga,the emphasis is on Washington and the way the special interest groups and power brokers have corrupted our government. It's really a prophetic film, in light of the present day situation on Capitol Hill. There is an eerie fortelling of the Vince Foster espisode.

BILLY JACK GOES TO WASHINGTON is a re-make of the Jimmy Stewart classic MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON, except using nuclear reactors as the hub of the plot. Tom Laughlin, as the character Billy Jack, really has a chance to prove his acting skills in this one; there is more depth of character in his performance of the lead role. The sets were very intricate and the production values a lot higher than the previous espisodes. Plus, there is an excellent supporting cast: Delores Taylor (Laughlin's real life wife), E G Marsall, Sam Wanamaker, Luci Arnez, and Peter Donat. This is a definat must see!

---

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Remake of the 1939 Mr. Smith Goes to Washington., 15 February 2001

Author: Marlin Simmons

The only differences between this film and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington are to update it from 1939 to 1977 and to fit it into the context of the Billy Jack character. Even some of the names are the same. Jimmy Stewart's portrayal of Mr. Smith is a classic. This remake doesn't come close to living up to the original. If you're a Billy Jack fan it's worth a watch. If you're not a Billy Jack fan watch Jimmy Stewart in the original instead.

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Interesting turn of events, 15 June 2005
Author: rpniew from chicago, Illinois

I saw this film in the late '70s at a preview in Oak Brook, Illinois. The movie was pretty well-received and even I was surprised that Billy Jack was a better fit in the old Jimmy Stewart role than I had expected. It wasn't great, but serviceable, and certainly better than THE TRIAL OF BILLY JACK. The film, as mentioned here, was never released, but has come out on DVD. Interested in seeing it again after all these years, I picked it up and was shocked. Normally DVDs have Director's Cut-type things -- more footage, deleted scenes, etc.. In this case Laughlin had cut the crap out of the film. Long scenes that helped the flow of the film and made it less --well, "Billy Jack-ish" had been cut. If Laughlin had used the cut I saw nearly thirty years ago, the film would still have worked. Instead it has become a mess. Come on, Tom, give us the original print.

---

5 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
An interesting period piece, 30 September 2005

Author: DrHypersonic from United States

As a Washington, D.C. native who saw this film when it was first released (and, contrary to some other comments, it WAS released in DC, playing in several area theaters), I was interested to see how Laughlin would portray the city and its political institutions. Surprisingly, he did so very well. The debt to Jimmy Stewart is obvious throughout but, having said this, his film reflected the political temper of the city in the late 1960's-early 1970's very well indeed. The dialog was not brilliant or sparkling, but there were some good lines: "Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered," is one I remember, referring to bribes and corruption. No matter what one's political views are, this is a film that can be viewed as escapist entertainment and, now from a vantage of several decades, with some nostalgia as well. Worth a rental, definitely, and better if seen with someone who lived through the era.

---

4 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
You Can't Keep A Good Story Down, 20 April 2005
Author: Zen Bones from USA

I rented this thinking it was going to be another fun Billy Jack movie (i.e. strong on social message but inarticulate enough and just enough over the top to be a good camp experience). Shortly into watching this I realized I was watching a remake of Mr. Smith Goes To Washington and I immediately fell in line with the story's passion. Thankfully, this film knows where its passion lies, because it stayed clear of the romantic angle between Mr. Smith and his aide. It does throw in a scene for those who want to see BJ literally kick ass but that could have and should have been left on the cutting room floor. Obviously fans of kick ass movies are going to feel cheated that they rented a talky, socially conscious movie with only one fight scene. And fans of movies with a social conscience are going to cringe at a scene that looks like it was lifted from Mannix (BJ looks cool doing his fight stuff on the reservation, but against big city thugs? Uh…). The film does still work as camp for all of its 70s appeal. But it has another appeal that is sadly still relevant today. The media IS almost entirely owned by conglomerates, campaigns cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and there is now a brand of corruption that even BJ could never have foreseen: voting machines with no record of accountability. Democracy is definitely in its last vestiges. We do have CSPAN to record filibusters today, but we have no Mr. Smiths or Mr. Jacks with the ability to make it to the senate in the first place. One can however feel rejuvenated by the "We The People" message the film conveys and be glad that there are films like this and 'Mr. Smith' that have recorded these sentiments for posterity. The film is pretty hokey in its genre modus operandi, but its values make it an American classic.

---

Not The Best Of The Billy Jack Films, 15 February 2007
Author: Gary Dibert (garyldibert@msn.com) from Pittsburgh Pa.

This was fourth and last of the Billy Jack Era however, this picture never made it to the theaters for any length of time. This picture was shown in Los Angeles as a sneak preview on April 16 1977. The next night the picture was again a sneak peak at the Admiral Theatre in Omaha Nebraska. Tom Laughlin resumes his role as Billy Jack and Delores Taylor resumes her role as Jean Roberts. While sitting in prison from the third film a Senator suddenly dies which leaves an open spot in the Senate. After the Senator death, it's revealed that he was conducting an investigation into the nuclear power industry, the remaining senator and the state governor must decide on a person who will play along with their shady deals and not cause any problems. Therefore, they decide to get Billy out of prison and give him the vacant sit. They figure by giving Billy the seat he won't give them enough trouble because he won't no anything. Billy is pardoned, released and nominated, after which he begins his duties. He soon notices that things aren't right, and starts trying to find out just what are going on. I didn't know this until I saw it in a magazine. Tom Laughlin and Delores Taylor were married. At the end of the movie, the couple kept the mailbags that were use in the Senate part of the shooting. The couple uses them on ski trips for there skis and equipment. The bags were confiscated by airport officials when they protested that the bags were property of the U.S. Mail. When this film was being shot, the Senate Scene had to be recreated because the film crew was denied asset to the real Senate Chamber. As filming progressed, Laughlin found it increasingly difficult to film in Washington, D.C. They were wrongly accused of desecrating gravesites in Arlington Cemetery. Even though it was the last of the four films, it wasn't the best. I will give this film 7 weasel stars an also will say the second and the third films were the best.

---

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Not good, but nearly as terrible as I'd assumed., 14 January 2009

Author: planktonrules from Bradenton, Florida

Did I just wake up on some bizarro world?! How else could you explain anyone giving this film a 10 or even scores of 9 and 8? Other than to provide unintended laughs, I just can't see the Billy Jack films as capable of earning anything close to these very respectable scores--even this one, which is probably the best in the series.

This film starts on a very, very poor note. Instead of storytelling, there is a long exposition by Pat O'Brien as he explains much of the setting for the film--and it's way too much! This long diatribe about the evils of nuclear weapons and nuclear power just seemed like sloppy film making-- like a political speech instead of a proper prologue. In addition, why not have the characters talk about this in the film itself? Having this prologue just seemed like they forgot to film these scenes and instead chose to sum it all up this way!

As for the rest of the film, it sure showed a lot of hubris for director/actor Tom Laughlin to consider remaking the Jimmy Stewart-Frank Capra classic film (currently #101 on IMDb's top 250). In this version, however, instead of appointing Jefferson Smith to the Senate (a beloved icon of children across America), the powers that be decide to appoint a man with a long history of manslaughter and possibly justifiable homicides!! I certainly remember Mr. Jack dispensing a lot of mayhem in his previous films THE BORN LOSERS, BILLY JACK and THE TRIAL OF BILLY JACK! Apparently the grafters do not remember nor do they read the newspapers, and so they decided to appoint an ex-con who is famous for fighting "the man". That sure makes sense!! What's next--appointing a member of the Manson family or a rabid dog or a tomato?!

What was likable about this silly film? Well, it was finally nice to see Delores Taylor (Laughlin's wife and co-star in the Jack films) stop being the perennial victim. Finally, after three films, Billy apparently finally taught her martial arts and she, as well as Billy, deliver some well-earned butt-kickings in one scene! This actually was well done and helped the film tremendously. Also, while the film stuck VERY close to the original material (too close if you ask me), the basic story, no matter how bastardized, is still very good--so good that Laughlin couldn't help produce a reasonably entertaining film--provided you turn off your brain and don't think too much about putting Billy Jack in this locale. Plus you gotta admit that Laughlin sure seemed sincere--and infused the film with some nice energy late in the film--and not in the form of butt-kickings (I half expected him to do this on the Senate floor)! This section of the film was, at times, too intense, but at least it was NOT an exact copy of Jimmy Stewart.

However, despite some good intentions, the premise of Billy Jack taking on and winning against the evil special interest groups is silly--and also way too idealistic--and probably will result in a few laughs. While not a terrible film, it pales in comparison to the Capra film and occasionally sinks into ridiculousness. Apparently audiences felt pretty much the way I did, as this film never even made it past preview audiences and so it never received a normal theatrical release--though the film was definitely better than THE TRIAL OF BILLY JACK (which made "The Fifty Worst Movies of All Time" book). Luckily for lovers of the bizarre and bad films (like me), BILLY JACK GOES TO WASHINGTON was finally released on DVD some time back.

By the way, because the film was never released until recently, this might explain the poorly executed edits and choppy transitions. Too often, scenes VERY abruptly change and the cuts just aren't made well. In addition, the sound track was too loud and too often dominated the film. Otherwise, Laughlin's direction actually was a bit better than usual...which still isn't saying all that much.

---

2 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Too much pontificating and political signifying ruin the last film in the series., 17 June 2004

Author: Captain_Couth (sirjosephu@aol.com) from Sacramento, CA

Billy Jack Goes to Washington (1977) was the last film in the Billy Jack

series. Unlike the other films where the political posturing was kept in check, Tom Laughlin goes full tilt boogie into the subject. In this virtual remake of the classic Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Billy Jack is

appointed the vacant senatorial seat after receiving a full pardon from the

Governor. Why did they give this man a political platform I'll never know. But they did and he tries to do his best to let the whole nation know that

he's the last and only honest man in Washington D.C.

Why do we watch Billy Jack movies. Most of you will answer because he

kicks butt and takes names. But the latter films focus more on his "acting" and the metaphysical being of one's self. If you watch Billy Jack for these

reasons raise your hand. That's what I thought.

For die-hard Billy Jack fans, others beware!

Recommended.

---

---

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
Newsgroup reviews	External reviews	Official site
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user comments
Your vote history