Brightlyme i know i wasted 90 mins of my life.

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Bea Swanson This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Spikeopath Can't you hear that's what I say.John McVicar is a tough uncompromising armed robber, after being sent to a maximum security prison for 23 years he dreams of escaping every day. As his reputation grows and friendships are formed, it would appear that his friend Wally Probyn may have figured a way out of this tough rigid prison.In 1979 America had The Warriors and The Wanderers, at pretty much the same time us British had Quadrophenia and McVicar to hold dear to our hearts, both films produced out of The Who Films Ltd, both films eminently quotable to a certain age group that were of the teenage persuasion. I love McVicar, I really do, based on the true life story of McVicar, well from his own accounts written in his book, "McVicar by Himself", the film boasts a Who soundtrack and a script that positively sparkles with wit and anger speak. Yes the charges of the film making hardened criminals seem likable characters is a fair one, but not only does the film show the disgust {and rightly outright hatred} for sex offenders, it also showcases just what a hard job the prison officers have, this is something that many of the user comment writers here have failed to acknowledge.Roger Daltrey takes on the role of McVicar and dons a career best, gruff, perfectly in shape and a wide boy arrogance that comes off as gold dust in this particular piece. Backing him up is wonderful turns from Brian Hall {comic gold}, Steven Berkoff {clearly enjoying himself}, Matthew Scurfield {frighteningly unnerving} and Peter Jonfield. Once the escape happens the film switches in tone as McVicar tries to make some sense of his life, it's an emotional switch that tones the film down but never the less takes us successfully to the highly accomplished finale. We are then left with a wonderful quote from John McVicar himself and we are told just what this tough as nails armed robber actually did with himself from that point on.Perhaps it's because I was a teenager when the film came out, that I love it so much? Or maybe the script just appeals to me on a very primal level? Either way I'm always going to be a fan of it, and McVicar remains to me, along with Quadrophenia and Scum, British standards to revisit every single year.I don't care how late it is I'm not going home 8/10

tohu OK. Decent enough film. 'Rock star tries his hand at acting' is so often a recipe for disaster, but Roger Daltrey is convincing here. And he has good support from the rest of the cast and the director. It is a low budget effort, and as such deserves credit for ending up as a very watchable piece of cinema.I have one major problem with it though. And that is the way most of the convicts are seen as basically decent salt-of-the-earth blokes, while all figures of authority are seen as the harsh, unsympathetic enemy. This is especially so in the first half of the film, when we are expected to sympathise automatically with the prisoners (most of whom are seen as extremely likable chirpy cockneys doing their best against the unfair adversity of being in the nick) against the guards (all very unsympathetically played as tyrants or halfwits).I'm not a strict moralist. And I don't believe that all people in prison are monsters. But if you watch the film you will see what I mean. There is a subtle balance required in presenting the human side of an armed robber, or even a petty thief, in a film. It can be done, and done well. But here all we get is a lazy 'it's us lovable villains versus them lot' mentality. And what is annoying is that this is 'beneath' the makers of the film. I think they were talented enough to be able to write and play more rounded characters and get a similar message across in a more authentic way.Anyway: that's my main problem with McVicar. Watch it and see if you agree. It is not a bad film - I've given it a 6, which seems to accord with the IMDb opinion. If anything, it is worth seeing for the curiosity value of Daltrey's decent performance.

Alonso0440 McVicar is the kind of movie that founds in criminal lifestyle a way to communicate its moral intend. The plot is quite typical because the intention is to show that, no matter how exciting or bizarre been an outlaw is, the criminal never succeeds. Based on a true story, the most interesting parts of the movie are the escape of McVicar from High Security Prison while a rock piece sounds on the back, and the assault of the bank, brief but consistent. The soundtrack is good, with a certain Who sound in big part of it and Daltrey's performance is really surprising, considering that he doesn't overact at all. But the whole movie doesn't look like a superb production, it's pretty much the same in this type of movie: a crime life that traps the leading character till the end, waiting always for a possible redemption that-at least not in this case-never comes. Although the movie is not boring either, is a well told story, nothing less, nothing more.

wbr204-2 This one ranks up there with "Get Carter" (1971) and "the Long Good Friday" (1980) as one of the greatest UK gangster flix of all time. Roger Daltry is excellent in the title role, kind of like an English Papillon, except he's not innocent! The soundtrack's average but it does contain one truly funky, synthesizer-heavy instrumental ("Escape (part one)") that helps the action flow along better. Plus Daltry wears quite possibly the coolest pair of on-screen Adidas since Bruce Lee's in "Game of Death" (1978) The only thing missing is Keith Moon as a maniac convict but you don't have to like the Who to dig this one. I mean as McVicar himself says, "Being a thief is a terrific life. But the trouble is they put you in jail for it." Nuff said.