Great Film overall

For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

NIght Moves falls into that category of movies that was not so loved when it came it but since time has passed, people have come around to it. It also benefits from being from that new golden era of cinema, the 70s, where the films showcase a gritty side to characters, often played by some of the best anti-hero actors of all time -- Hackman, in this case. Night Moves is a good movie and a lot of fun but it has some limitations which keep it from being more than that.First of which, the story really doesn't make sense. It's clear when the case is more or less solved about an hour in that the movie is really going to be about something else. In this case, it's more about Hackman's character, a guy who despite his love of things like chess, can't seem to really figure stuff out. So we are taken through his marriage, his wife's infidelity. an attempted reconciliation, etc. All that stuff is great for a great actor like Hackman who makes you feel how lost he is. The problem is that the ties that connect that to the real story, that of the art smuggling, which is the real mystery, are very thin. Also, the ties that connect the plot points of the smuggling story are very week. Too much coincidence, too many people happen to be exactly where they need to be. Too much crossing the country - - LA to Florida in the blink of an eye. One second Gene Hackman is chasing James Woods around LA on a motorcycle. The next scene, he finds him in Florida. I read that the film was shot in 1973 and then shelved until 1975, meaning that there must have been issues with it then. There must have also been a lot scenes cut, because a lot is in there, it's just hidden very deeply with no way to get at it. I think this is a film to check out and enjoy for some very good elements. I just don't think we can put our blinders on and make it a 70s classic. Good film. Worth a watch.

One of the great American films of the 70s and would be generally recognized as such if it weren't so confusing. Hackman as a private detective with problems of his own (naturally) and a simple new case (find the runaway girl). He finds the girl easily but complications ensue. If you watch this film pay very close attention to everything. One of its charms --and frustrations-- is that nothing is as it seems. Everyone in it is 'acting' in their perceived self-interest but their perceptions about that are mostly wrong. Hackman is terrific. The film has a zillion things going for it but might be as flawed as its subject matter. Set in LA and the Florida Keys it's a sunny but blindingly bleak view of the mid-70s. Stunning work by Arthur Penn.

Much Admired Neo-Noir from Director Arthur Penn and Starring Gene Hackman and a Very Young and Very Nude Melanie Griffith in Her First Credited Performance. It is a Murky Looking Film with a Murky Plot. Almost All of the Movies from the Early Seventies Look Murky Even when there is No Attempt at Such a Style.But Here it is Murked Up On Purpose with Shots within Shots Behind Curtains and Dirty Glass and Anything Else On Hand that can be Put In Front of the Camera to Symbolize, well, Murkiness. Because in a Noir Things are Never Very Clear and in This One it Never Really Is.Hackman's Private Eye isn't the Most Observant or the Best Private Eye, He is Average at Best and Seems to be Struggling Most of the Time with Character's Motivations and Behavior. He Looks Perpetually Puzzled as the Film Unreels to Reveal the Intricacies of the Plot, and Intricate it is.The Movie is Off Center and Uses its Locations of Hollywood and Florida for Background Contrast where Nasty Stuff is Happening and Nasty People, Who Appear on the Surface to be Friendly, but Are They? Harry Never Seems to Know Who is Who and Which is Which and What is What.There are a Number of Side Characters and Side Plots as this Dense and Deliberately Dower Drama Unfolds. It is a Fascinating Film at Times, Well Written and Acted, the Set Designs are Realistic, Cluttered, and Frumpled. Arthur Penn's Direction is Busy and Ballsy. A Shortcoming May Be the Awful Underscoring. The Ending is Pure Noir.

Night Moves is not a bad film. It's actually quite good. It is also off-beat and a just a little bit odd but not quirky. It is not hard to figure out why a young girl has run away from home when we see her mother, a washed up, alcoholic living in the Hollywood Hills. What is odd is trying to figure out the relationship between her, her stepfather and his girlfriend in the Florida Keys where she has gone to live. It is hinted that the stepfather is not just a stepfather. Even stranger is Jennifer Warren's odd, abrupt, salty behavior in the film and the the strange dialog written for her. At one point, Gene Hackman even tells her he is tired of her "ping-pong talk". Was that written for the benefit of the audience or did he improvise? I felt puzzled by much of her performance.It is also painful, really painful to watch Gene Hackman's wife struggle with their relationship and her learning new things about her husband. Yes, a strange, strange little film. The acting is almost too revealing. I can't quite wrap my brain around the whole thing. I think it will be appreciated by fans of films from the 70's.