I actually expected something of a gangster flick, but what I got was a very misleading story from the title. I was so excited for it- but I was let down.
There was a baby crying.
There was no killer.
What gives?
Doesn't kill anyone? Doesn't he shoot a guy in a brawl?
shareAfter viewing the film I have to agree with you wjplaud. It was lame, lame, lame. If I'm watching a movie in which two people get shot I expect to see it happen...and the aftermath. No one can say it didn't happen in those days, for action-packed shows such as Gunsmoke were all over the TV back then. By having both guys live through the shooting, it took the real sting out of what happened afterwards, made Jimmy's anquish less plausible. Afterall, he did what he did in self defense! It's a total waste of time, even if the acting wasn't bad.
shareYou guys sound just like the Bruno ve Soto character in the movie. You were just waiting around the whole time for someone to be killed. You do realize that was the point of the movie, right?
Did I not love him, Cooch? MY OWN FLESH I DIDN'T LOVE BETTER!!! But he had to say 'Nooooooooo'
Jack shot two gangsters, doesn't that make him a killer? It surprised us in the end and I loved it. It was such a relief from "Little Caesar" and dozens of films like it where bullets rain down on the bad guy.
shareNo, it does not make him a killer, since neither one died. That's my point. They were both bullies who deserved whatever happened to them, and he shot both men under duress. The whole thing was pointless. What possible point did he have in terrorizing a woman and her baby? N-O-N-E! He was a crybaby. I'll give him that, but not a killer.
shareAlso, this had nothing to do with the John Waters movie!
share[deleted]