bad bad bad


I seldom rate movies but this one is so bad I couldn't help myself! I gave it a 2! The only reason I didn't give it a 1 was because of Daniel Baldwin, he deserves better. The boy's mother who looks like she could be very foxy looked younger than the sons. She appeared embarrassed with her role in this terrible movie. They should have killed off the sons earlier and featured her. The mafia chief fit his role about as good as Jerry Seinfeld would have. I thought I detected a change in his dialect from scene to scene. And the oufits he wore were actually comical. The two state detectives were just awful. Enough! I'm out the rental fee but don't you be.

reply



HannahbananalovesMartinShort



All i can say is don't speak of things you don't understand. I would pay alot to see what kind of crappy film you would produce with an unbelievably tight budget. As far as you assanein comment about the detectives roles, which regardless of the movie were stellar performances, please just refer to the top of the paragraph.

reply

Too bad the acting was not up to par with the script. It looked like this film was made to show how well Daniel Baldwin looks in a leather jacket. He did not give a bad performance, it's just that it was rather uninspired and kind of stiff. Alberta Watson, whom I find to be a treat to watch was wasted. Of course the major problem is she was cast to be the mother of men in their forties and it does not look like there was any thought given to makeup, in order to make her appear old enough. There were 2 decent performances.The actor who played Daniel Baldwin's right-hand man (I forget his name, Freddie or something) in the Irish gang and the role of Brodrick Dooley (played by Curtis Armstrong).

reply

Just wanted to say thanks- I was Baldwin's right-hand man, Frankie Scalli. It was a blast.
Dion Derizzo

reply

[deleted]