This is How Movies Should Be Made

Sorry, this movie sucks

Purely Joyful Movie!

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

We see two ex-criminals coming to terms with the past after one of them has been released from prison, leading to a final stand against another criminal. The two male main characters are somewhat one-dimensional and only bearable because they are enacted by experienced and charismatic actors. All other characters are as complex as the teletubbies- lots of beautiful women, but don't mind their names, they are just decoration for Pacino and Walken- not to mention the most ridiculous plot twists: A woman, after having been violated by a horde of criminals and kept in the trunk of a car, enjoys a happy breakfast among our friendly criminals before getting back on the perps-- in perfect style, of course. The young female owner of a brothel is talked into sex with a senior who dies the same night from senile decay, and has of course the time of her live. Another women just learns that her father is dead and agrees smiling to an unofficial and spontaneous funeral. Walken's grandchild needs exactly 30 minutes to relate to her granddaddy and build the deepest possible relationship. The list goes own, you get the idea. This flick is just a waste of time.

As his acting career is reaching its final stages (not yet but soon) Al Pacino can still find many ways of reinventing himself in areas he's never been in before. Though his leading man days are behind him, Pacino feels there's still some fuel left in the tank that no one could tell him otherwise even by starring films below his talents like "Stand Up Guys" a character driven vehicle which would have been the type of film he would have dismissed about a decade ago. I feel he should performed in more of these character dramas by the end of the 1990's that way we wouldn't watch a legendary performer like Pacino slowly fade out his status a top box office draw. Still, there's no one who has the nerve to arbitrarily say it to his face.Pacino stars as Val, a petty crook who's been incarcerated for over 28 years and has now been released. The only person who greets him is his old partner Doc (Christopher Walken), only not with open arms, but with the task of taking his life assigned by their old accomplice Claphands (Mark Margolis). Claphands has revenge on his mind for Val was responsible for the death of his who aligned with Val while Val served nearly three decades behind bars and has vowed that on the day of his release, he will be whacked. Doc is now in precarious situation that if he doesn't do the task, he'll be killed never meeting his estranged granddaughter (Addison Timlin).For a script to work, it needs to be in good hands of a trustworthy scriptwriter who can where these characters are coming from and to refrain from focusing too much on the plot, especially since the three leads are in the 70+ club. Sadly, the script was written by the much younger, fresher playwright Noah Haildle who's making his feature length screen debut. Not to say the guy's got no future, but the film feels more theatrical than it does cinematic, plus there's no motives into what makes these characters tick. It's just saturated with too much talk and it feels very random and frequent and they say a lot without holding anything that sparks interest. Which makes this 95 minute film feel like a two film. The momentum is at a snail's pace.The story circles around the long hours of events prior to Val's demise as Val and Doc getting into some mischief as a ploy to stall the execution. Such activities include entering a whorehouse just to steal some Viagra, steal a muscle car, gathering another old comrade in crime Hirsch (Alan Arkin), saving a rape victim (Vanessa Ferlito) while leaving her to take revenge on them and to operate a bulldozer to bury Hirsch who died from natural causes. Sounds like a lot in one night! Right? With a full table like this had the makings of a great comedy caper along with the pathos and the sad scenes combined. Sadly, Haidle only merely scratches the surface of these scenarios.Sure knowing that the film stars three screen legends like Pacino, Walken and Arkin in the leads is truly worth a viewing, but that would be the only legitimate reason to watch this film at all. Arkin is the one who stands out the most here, such a shame he has the thinnest role. Sure the acting is great though it doesn't stick out and the finale has moments of intrigue, sadly the script and the snail pacing of this film made this long night all the more longer.

I am really confused as to how anybody could have liked this film at all. Seriously. 15 minutes of it was all me and my girlfriend could take.There is so much wrong with this movie it's hard to know where to begin.First off, the dialog between characters is unbelievably boring and slow. To see this kind of work out of veteran actors was embarrassing. I'd swear Pachino was either doing it on purpose or he's had a stroke. Really awful.Christopher Walken was equally dumbed-down and wooden. We didn't even watch long enough to get to Arkin.Many times when watching a bad movie, the poorness of the story usually has unintended comedic quality for that reason alone. This picture can't even provide that.It's just random, confusing and completely void of any kind of rhythm or personality.Thank God I only paid 2$ for it the bargain store, because now my copy is going to the fine folks at GoodWill.No, scratch that. It will be thrown away. I can't in good conscious let some other sucker plunk down hard earned money for it.That wouldn't be right.

I will start by saying that the reason for any of the bad reviews on IMDb, and I've read quite a few, is that they didn't understand the movie. They have no idea what this movie was trying to do, or what it's trying to be - a comedy about two broken down gangsters in their twilight years, catching up on lost years and trying to forget what has to be done... way too soon.The whole idea is basically a movie that will try something that would, in most cases, fail. If it wasn't for the character development, the perfect cast for the job, and the right amount of dark humor, the movie sure would have followed down that road. Fortunately for us, it doesn't, and it is a joyride for us who understands - the emotions in the street.I watched the movie twice now, and I must say that the first time you watch it, given you enjoy this kind of humor, you will be laughing throughout the movie. I mean, you must enjoy old crooks who catch up in their own way. The second time though, I was getting a little bit annoyed with some of the movie's choices. I didn't fully enjoy the acting like the first time when I watched it, neither the choice of words given to the characters. unfortunately I didn't fully feel the story because of that. Maybe this has something to do with my life being changed completely, I don't know. What I do know though is that if you don't know at all what's coming. If you enjoy to see these actors do what they do best. If you can laugh at pain and suffering (it being lighthearted, and not seriously mentally disturbing). Then you will be in for a ride - not a fast one, not a slow one, but a drifting one with lots of U-turns.I could write a list as to why the movie was bothering the second time, but I won't. I'm afraid I will ruin it for someone, and it's just such a great movie. My advice to you when watching it: Don't take it too serious. It never means to take itself serious, so why would you?The first time I watched it, it was near perfect to me: a 9.8 The second time I watched it, it was a 7.5Therefore I will rate this movie an 8.6 - giving it a 9 on IMDb's score for it being underrated IMO.