Am I the only one...


That thought this movie really sucked. Sure some of the shootout scenes were good, but that's about it. The characters weren't really convincing, the dialogue sucked, and I just thought they were trying to tell us what they were rather than showing us what they were. I really found this to be one boring ass movie.

reply

Yes,

You're the only one.

reply

I just saw it tonight for the first time, and I'm wondering how the hell I've missed this gem all these years.

I'm obviously a bit more up to par on movies since this came out, but daaaaaaamn... I would have LOVED this back in the day. Still had a great time.

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm2339870/

reply

If you need to watch a film that relies on shoot-outs for entertainment, I suggest never watching a film again. This is an excellent film, and my only criticism is some of the scenes are quite slow-moving.

reply

I was quite disappointed too. Some things were plain laughable :

1) The shoot-out with the asian gang for instance. The entire gang is just standing around in the street, waiting to be shot ? That whole scene just looked so amateurish.

2) The lawyer character, some twentysomething floozy who spends her days (and nights) following a crime boss around like a lovesick puppy is supposed to be a top attorney ?

3) Laurence Fishburnes character shooting up the whole neighbourhood during the car chase, yet failing to hit even the windshield of the pursuing car.

4) Laurence Fishburnes death scene, literally kicking and screaming, talk about overacting...


Smiling is for the weak.

reply

I noticed those points the second time I watched it too. I agree they are evident. The street scene with the asian gangs was pathetic. It should have been shot differently. It came out of nowhere. Come to think of it, I dont think it was a real street. It seemed more like a studio. It was all the more funny when Walken too joined in with the piece of the action with his oozy 9 millimetre.

However maybe the Walken had something for the attorney. I don't blame him. She was hot.

reply

[deleted]

That is a real street,not a set. If you ever go to New York's Chinatown,you'll see for yourself.

reply

If that is actually a real street in NYC Chinatown, then that's got to be the fakest-looking street in any movie I've seen. Maybe it was the lighting, but it looked like such a fake street, almost cartoonish in a way.

reply

Yes, it's a real street: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doyers_Street

reply

I walk on that street every day to go to work, Doyers st in chinatown, its one of the very few streets in manhattan that does a 90° curve and its called "bloody angle" because of the numerous murders between gangs back in the day. There also actually is a tunnel that the people would use to escape.

reply

I lost interest towards the beginning when you have these bangers surrounding a telephone booth to shoot the Columbian....If they were dumb enough to be shooting across from each other....Then there'd most likely be more then one person shot up....If not dead.

I too don't know what gem this sleeper was supposed to be. The acting from these experienced actors were like an half hearted affair at best......



reply

"Laurence Fishburnes character shooting up the whole neighbourhood during the car chase, yet failing to hit even the windshield of the pursuing car."

I think he does hit the windshield several times, but it's bulletproof.

reply

No, I agree. This film greatly disappointed me. Based upon user ratings/actors in the movie, I was expecting at least a good 6/10. However, it was poorly written, directed, and acted. Christopher Walken and Larry Fishbourne, who I usually like, were given laughable dialogue, causing this film to fail on every level for me. The tone of the film would also constantly change in strange ways, especially with Walken's character; something I attribute to poor direction. This ended up being a 2/10 movie for me.

reply

I felt the direction was to standard. Christopher Walken acted well too. Check out the converstion he has with the cop in his apartment. I do have to agree however, Fishburne was terrible in the movie. But when you refer to the change in tone in the movie, are you talking about the screen time given to the cops ?.

reply

I mean how part of the time Christopher Walken is supposed to be this dark character (e.g. looking through window at the beginning) and sometimes too silly (dancing with his partners after coming back from jail). The way the acting/writing was done just didn't match well.

reply

Yes I can understand your thoughts. They are justified. But I can only assume that he must of experianced a change in mood for a short amout of time.
One thing I could not understand is how the cop knew Walken went to the subway when he left out the building very quickly.

reply

The Asian gang shoot-up was poorly done, but not a studio. That's what the streets in Chinatown in Lower Manhattan look like. But both gangs' broads having guns in the battle was a bit of a stretch...

Watch the movie again, and this time just think about badass Frank White is. He's the greatest. He doesnt care about money, he'll bury you with yours, or give you all of his if you have enough gumption. And he wants to build a gee dee hospital.

Oh, and as for the commenter who wasn't impressed with Larry Fishburne's kicking and screaming into death? He was high as *beep* on cocaine, his heart didn't know how to stop and he had been shot a very fatal 4-6 times or so. Yes, that made sense to me.

reply

Great cast but a terribly boring film

reply

The OP is a cantaloupe. He seems to have a fever...and the only prescription...is more COWBELL!

reply

I like Christopher Walken but this movie was seedy, violent and unwatchable.

Out of morbidy curoisity I must ask, as I actually fell asleep watching this shoot 'em up fest, how did this movie end?

reply

everybody died

reply

Thanks, I guess that includes Walken.

Crime does not Pay!

reply

It was ok.

It just kind of seemed like typical unrealistic, over-the-top, 1980s type stuff.

But it was entertaining, even it it was ridiculous at times.

reply

The stunts were so bad they were comical......Horrible

reply

Thin plot, poorly developed stereotypical characters, plot hole galore, ludicrous script, scenery chewing performances. No, you're not the only one. This one really sucked.

reply

this movie needs more than one viewing. I saw it first a couple years back and didnt really care for it. When I watched again recently I thought it was a lot like what a lot of the posters here who did not enjoy the film thought, but I was drawn back to watching it again and again, it's actually a great film, it just requires a deep look . I thought Fishburne's role and character was one his best, especially considering the roles he played not too long before & after this film (Nightmare on Elm Street 3, Boyz in the Hood) .

Someone mentioned here "how is Christopher Walken supposed to be dark when he does a funny dance" .. Well he just got out of a long stint in prison and was at first playing a mind game like all top guys do when they are observing or may you say "computing" their group. Also the thought that part where he shoots Arty Clay was pretty intense, no humor there.

I think this isn't the movie everyone was expecting when they read a cast list with other stars like Snipes and Buscemi, you just have to take it for what it is

reply

Watch this again?! Ugh. What a bore. Even the whores were boring.

reply

It took me three goes to watch all of it and I'm glad I did, it's first class. I stopped ordering room service though. 

Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.

reply