Hanky Panky is one of those films that feels like it was built almost entirely around the personality of its star. Released in 1982 and directed by Sidney Poitier, it pairs Gene Wilder with Gilda Radner in a comic thriller that mixes mistaken identity, espionage, and romantic comedy. It is not usually listed among Wilder’s greatest achievements, yet it has a curious charm that makes it worth revisiting, especially for anyone interested in his screen persona during the early eighties.
The story centers on Michael Jordon, played by Wilder, an architect in New York who lives a tidy and unremarkable life. His routine is upended when a mysterious woman asks him to deliver a package and then disappears under violent circumstances. Before he can process what has happened, he is mistaken for someone else and pulled into a conspiracy involving stolen government documents. Wilder’s character is perpetually confused, exasperated, and frightened, which of course is where much of the comedy comes from.
Wilder had a gift for playing intelligent men who are constantly on the brink of hysteria. From The Producers to Young Frankenstein, his characters often teeter between calm civility and explosive panic. In Hanky Panky, that quality is front and center. Michael Jordon is not a heroic action figure. He is a man who wants to return to his drafting table and avoid danger at all costs. Watching Wilder navigate gunfire and car chases with a mixture of indignation and disbelief is where the film finds its best laughs.
Gilda Radner enters the story as Kate Hellman, a sharp and determined woman who may or may not be trustworthy. The chemistry between Radner and Wilder carries an added layer of interest, given their real life relationship at the time. Radner brings an appealing mix of vulnerability and wit to the role. She is not just a damsel in distress, nor is she a slick action heroine. Instead, she feels like a person caught in over her head who refuses to give up. Their banter has an easy rhythm that feels natural rather than forced, and it provides the emotional anchor the plot sometimes lacks.
The film tries to balance comedy and suspense, and that balance is not always steady. There are stretches where the thriller elements take over, complete with shadowy villains and secret documents. At other times, the film leans heavily into absurd humor, particularly in scenes that showcase Wilder’s escalating frustration. The tonal shifts can be jarring, yet they also give the movie a certain unpredictability. You never quite know whether the next scene will involve a shootout or a verbal sparring match.
Sidney Poitier’s direction is straightforward and efficient. He does not indulge in flashy visual tricks. Instead, he allows the actors to carry the film. The pacing is brisk, which helps prevent the convoluted plot from becoming too burdensome. The screenplay, however, occasionally ties itself in knots. The conspiracy at the heart of the story is less interesting than the reactions of the characters caught up in it. By the final act, the mechanics of the espionage feel secondary to the romantic tension between Michael and Kate.
One of the film’s pleasures lies in watching Wilder play against type just enough to keep things fresh. While he is still the anxious everyman, there are moments where Michael shows surprising courage. These flashes of bravery are understated, which makes them more believable. He never transforms into an action hero. Instead, he remains a reluctant participant who rises to the occasion because he has no other choice. That quality gives the film a relatable core.
The supporting cast does solid work, though few characters are deeply developed. The antagonists are mostly functional figures who exist to keep the plot moving. This lack of complexity among the villains contributes to the sense that Hanky Panky is more interested in character comedy than in crafting a gripping spy narrative. The stakes feel personal rather than political, which suits Wilder’s style.
It is also worth noting the film’s place in the broader landscape of early eighties cinema. This was a period when thrillers often embraced a slick and cynical tone. Hanky Panky, by contrast, feels lighter and more playful. Even during its most suspenseful moments, there is an undercurrent of whimsy. The New York setting adds texture, grounding the absurdity in a recognizable urban environment. The city streets, apartments, and offices feel lived in, which helps the outlandish plot seem slightly more plausible.
The romantic aspect of the film develops gradually. What begins as mutual suspicion evolves into genuine affection. Wilder and Radner avoid melodrama, opting instead for small gestures and quiet conversations. Their relationship gives the film heart. Without it, the twists and turns of the conspiracy would likely feel hollow.
Hanky Panky is not a flawless film. Its narrative can be messy, and its tonal shifts may frustrate viewers expecting a pure comedy or a tightly constructed thriller. Yet it has an undeniable warmth. Much of that warmth comes from Wilder himself, whose expressive face and precise comic timing elevate even the weaker scenes. He had a way of making panic seem poetic, and that talent is on full display here.
Hanky Panky works best as a showcase for two performers whose connection feels genuine. It may not reach the heights of Wilder’s collaborations with Mel Brooks, but it offers a different kind of pleasure. It is a modest, sometimes uneven, yet often delightful film that captures a specific moment in the careers of its stars. For fans of Gene Wilder, it remains a curious and engaging chapter worth exploring.
Hanky Panky will be available to own on Blu-ray on 2/10!
Comments