This remake didn't win me over or convince me. When I first watched the 1946 film starring Bogart and Bacall, I appreciated its technical and artistic merits, along with the excellent performances from a strong cast. However, I was disappointed by the script; I found the story convoluted and hard to understand, and it would have been more enjoyable if it had been simpler, clearer, and easier to follow while still retaining some mystery. This film is essentially a remake made thirty years later, which makes comparisons unavoidable. I’ll try to set those aside as much as possible and evaluate this film on its own terms. For this production, director Michael Winner assembled a cast led by Robert Mitchum, an experienced actor who seemed somewhat older than the character in the original story, which portrays him as half his age. Philip Marlowe is a seasoned private detective with extensive knowledge of both the criminal underworld and law enforcement, and it makes sense to cast a middle-aged actor with charm and charisma in that role. I also thought James Stewart’s performance was excellent; I was struck by how frail and aged he appeared, and even more surprised to learn he lived for another twenty years after the film's release. He was well-suited for the part and demonstrated his dedication to his craft. Candy Clark embodies a provocative and alluring quality, portraying her character as a true nymphet. I found that somewhat excessive, but it’s understandable given the 1970s era when sexuality was heavily marketed. Sara Miles is a welcome addition to the cast, while Oliver Reed seemed rather unremarkable to me. Richard Boone does what's required and does it well. Technically, I have some reservations: While this neo-noir style might justify color cinematography over traditional black and white, I believe the latter would be more effective in building dramatic tension and suspense. This is especially true considering the muted colors and less than ideal lighting, possibly due to lens choices or film stock. I did enjoy the filming locations; relocating the story to the United Kingdom allowed for the use of grand estates and good street scenes in quiet London neighborhoods. However, this change of setting ultimately does more harm than good: much of the narrative loses credibility outside the U.S., where gun control is less restrictive and crime operates differently. The action sequences also feel out of place, which may explain why they seem so lackluster. I wasn't particularly fond of the nude scenes, though they align with the film’s plot involving illegal pornography—a common theme during that time. To be honest, there isn’t much to say about the script itself. The story remains largely unchanged from the original film, although some subtle variations and nuances have been introduced. It continues to be a complicated narrative, packed with events, dialogue, characters, and plot twists in what feels like a short amount of time. They had an opportunity to present a streamlined version of the original story, but they chose not to.

Source on TMDB