YouHeart I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

Murphy Howard I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Ortiz Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Poseidon-3 Made on a shoestring budget, by Hollywood standards, this slice-of-life, coming-of-age drama depicts the lives of four Brooklyn youths (whose gang name provides the film's title.) King is the handsome lothario who uses one girl (Paris) for quickie sex while pursuing another, more refined one (Blakely) who is new to their school. Stallone is a working class lug who is faced with new responsibilities when his girlfriend Smith informs him that she's pregnant. Winkler is the introspective one who considers life beyond their fish bowl existence. Mace is a bit of a misfit, who strives to be friends with the others. Though there is a progression of sorts, from the start of the film in a classroom to the finale at a wedding, the film doesn't contain a considerable amount of plot. It's more a series of vignettes from the era, coming along episodically, augmented with songs intended to evoke the time and shot with a camera and film which are intended to capture the verisimilitude of 1950's Brooklyn. King does a very fine job with his role and is, as ever, charming and attractive to watch. Stallone does very well, also, and has what has become one of the film's most praised scenes in which he grapples with the purchase of an engagement ring for his karat-conscious fiancé. Much of his dialogue (some of it written/improvised by himself) is rather unintelligible thanks to both the sound quality and to Stallone's legendary mumbling. Winkler, of course, went on to play the iconic Fonzie on "Happy Days", but that character is actually more like King's or Stallone's than the one he portrays here. Mace is not given the amount of focus that the others get, though he does partake in a memorable game of pool. Blakely, like most of the actors, is not believable as a high school student, but succeeds in bringing most of the qualities of one to the role. Her dramatically changing hair length is an indication of some re-shoots that took place after filming had wrapped in order to improve some scenes. Smith and Paris provide authentic and frequently amusing spins on their somewhat tacky characters. Fans of "Gimme a Break" will enjoy seeing Sweet as Stallone's father. Only an archaeologist could effectively dig up Assante in his alleged appearance as a wedding guest. The movie starts with a vivid and discomfiting scene in Neuman's homeroom, effectively showcasing the juvenile delinquency that began to take hold in the 50's when disrespect for authority started to blossom. Though several sequences after that are memorable and engaging, not a whole lot really happens before the film meanders to its conclusion. (The ending was re-cut in order to be more upbeat than whatever was originally intended.) This is less a dramatic story than a character study focusing on a specific time, place and type of neighborhood. Stallone apparently got to know and appreciate several of the actors from this film because he used them in his later vehicle "Paradise Alley."

vitaleralphlouis When LORDS OF FLATBUSH was made Columbia Pictures was still a free corporate entity, still a smaller Hollywood studio, and still the all time champion at winning Best Picture of the Year Oscars. But it had just endured a couple of years of dreadful mismanagement, making awful and expensive re-makes of their classics and other expensive duds. They were hundreds of millions in debt and on the verge of bankruptcy.Into this scene comes David Begelman, one of the most harshly criticized studio heads in history (for forging a $2000 check, of all things). Begelman made Lords of Flatbush and several other low-to-medium budget pictures, all of which were cleverly marketed and well received by the public. Within a few years, Columbia Pictures repaid its debt and soared into profitability. Shares went from under $2 to the $78 per share --- at which time Coca Cola swallowed up Columbia and the independent, scrappy spirit fell away, as did their quality. Now swallowed again, this time by Sony, they'd never again have real spirit (unless you think Spiderman is a good movie.) FLATBUSH brought us Sly Stallone, Henry Winkler, Susan Blakely; and in the long-run was the turning point for Columbia.

outoftheblu This is Grease without the pop music, the glitz of commercialism or the poor costumes. One thing that makes any stage or movie production is the ability of the watcher to believe that the characters are actually not acting, but living the part they portray. Lords of the Flatbush fulfils this criteria as the audience is taken back to the 1950's. Strangely enough, the 1950's wasn't all about driving around in pink Cadillacs and wall to wall Elvis Presley. Lives had to be led life had to be faced, complete with it's problems and struggles. This wonderfully understated film shows all that and more. If you liked the idea of Grease, but found that it's presentation was about as believable as rocking horse droppings, then this film will satisfy your need much more than it's more celebrated counterpart can ever do.

ewarn-1 The Fifties nostalgia craze started about 1971, and lasted all through the 70s, right into the early eighties, a whole decade of nostalgia devoted to half of a decade one decade previous! I thought it was insane at the time and still do, even though the nostalgic image reduced one of the most interesting decades in American history to irritating clichéd images of leather jackets. It hasn't really ended either, which is just as well, because no sane person could stand nostalgia for the 70s."Lords of Flatbush" might seem like just a cheap cash in on a fad, but it's actually very well written. It features minimalist dialogue and slice of life vignettes with very honest performances by King and Stallone. It looks cheaply produced but to me that added to the attraction, it seems to be done in an almost documentary style. AS such, its not really a film about the "Fifties"---besides the leather jackets and hairstyles, it has little to say about a specific era, but a lot to say about the human condition.This tale of four friends could have been set at any period in history, and the dialogue for once is a true indicator of the mental states of 17 and 18 year olds, there's no breathless philosophizing here. The characters seem to struggle with what they want to say, unable to express their feelings with limited vocabulary and intellect. Watching it is sometimes painful. The best scenes involve Chico's relationship with Jane Bradshaw. (This guy deserves a medal for his taste in females) Chico tries to express his emotions, but hes too young and impatient. He thinks he knows what to say and do, but his words and actions just don't match up.In the end, his efforts at a relationship are too clumsy. I still feel bad for him.I was never a fan of Stallone, but I like his performance here. The main problem with this film is that it's too short. The honest performances make me want to know more about these guys, and it ends abruptly while everything is still going on. Still, taking a look at this movie is worth the time, especially nowadays when finding an honest film made with integrity is very rare. Its kind of---nostalgia for nostalgia! Besides, even if you hate it, you still get to look at Susan Blakely.