Sudden Fury (1975 film)

Critical response[edit]

Writing for Cinema Canada, Piers Handling wrote that "I started out by saying that Sudden Fury was somewhat of a formula film. It is very much an action film and it becomes more and more so throughout its length, as the visual passages begin to replace dialogue. One of its weaknesses, however, is its occasional wordiness. One of the signs of a true master is sensing when an image can be used to replace dialogue, or when dialogue is superfluous to the visuals. Damude has yet to learn this." He concluded that "there is a raw sense of cinema about Sudden Fury, so even with its lapses it manages to convey its ideas strongly though crudely."^[2]


Martin Knelman of The Globe and Mail reviewed the film negatively, writing that "On its own terms, the picture works, but what terms! Sudden Fury is efficient in the naive manner of drugstore mystery-book trash, so the fact that it sells doesn't exactly swell one's heart with pride at the accomplishments of the Canadian film industry." He further opined that "Damude isn't coasting, like the fallen great man Orson Welles, or trying to stretch himself, like the restless Louis Malle. Sudden Fury represents the limit of his aspirations. The fact that something like this could be regarded in some quarters as a breakthrough makes Sudden Fury the most depressing film of the lot."^[4]


In his 2003 book A Century of Canadian Cinema, Gerald Pratley called it an "effectively told and cleverly filmed low-budget picture", and a "straightforward but ingenious tale".^[1]