Majorthebys Charming and brutal

SteinMo What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Usamah Harvey The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Carlos Kasprzykowski There is absolutely nothing wrong with this movie and it is an excellent rental option when you are undecided on what to get in your favorite movie rental service/place. Very good plot, the dialogs are great and the ending is definitely not predictable. Rourke was in his downhill after a flash rise to fame due to 9 1/2 weeks (if you are an 80s guy like me, you know what I mean), but he still gives a good performance and one of his lines was just the best of the whole movie. Samuel Jackson was solid and Dafoe balanced as always. As a bonus the sexiest performance of Mastrantonio in her career. The movie has ups and downs and does not keep you nailed to your chair, but that is the story telling style of the director and I am cool with it.

Boba_Fett1138 Roger Donaldson always distinct itself by making mediocre films. Just think of movies like "Cocktail", "Species", "Dante's Peak" and the remakes of "No Way Out" and "The Getaway". Now most of this movies showed some great potential but yet somehow Donaldson manages to not let this movie pass the mark of average. I really liked his movie "Thirteen Days" though, which was just great but this mostly was due to its compelling historic tense story. Even that movie shows great flaws in the directing. Even though he doesn't make that great movies he still makes well known wells, which also really is an accomplishment, I must admit.I'm afraid that this movie is also a typical example of a Roger Donaldson movie. The concept of the movie sounds just great and shows more than enough potential to create a tense and original thriller with, with perhaps even noir elements in it. And also just look at the cast, how could you go wrong with this? The movie is still a decent one but it leaves lots of potential unused. The movie is not really ever tense or mysterious, mostly because of the reason that the story always stays way too vague and overcomplicated with twists that don't always seem to make credible sense. In the end you just simply stop caring about the story and its characters.It's an amazing cast if you look at it. It features stars such as Willem Dafoe, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Mickey Rourke, M. Emmet Walsh, Miguel Sandoval, James Rebhorn and also actors who weren't big stars yet at the time such as Samuel L. Jackson and Maura Tierney. The actors all do their very best but at times they're obviously struggling with the confusing script and formulaic dialog. See it or don't. It's not a bad movie but it ain't a recommendable one either.6/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

ssbuk I had no intention of watching this film,I just had nothing better to do.However,it's worth a watch.There are faults,as there are with most films,but the film is worthy of praise.Willem Dafoe as the small time cop caught up in the mess is a great choice for such a versatile actor.With strong support from the ever-reliable Samuel L.Jackson and the controversial Mickey Rourke.The film works well,it just tries too hard to captivate the audience.Still,I am only one person,I still say this should be watched Enjoy The Film Sean

vincentywang The plot is extremely lame even for a suspense movie. Viewers' high expectation easily turns into disappointment.Here is also one of Defoe's worst performances. Maybe he shouldn't have tried to smile and grin "a la Rourke"; or maybe the poor guy is just embarassed silly by the implausible and contrived story. Samuel Jackson, in his pre-Pulp-Fiction existence, suffers from a sad lack of screen presence. On the other hand, Rourke's "charisma", if you choose to call his oily self that, proves to be indestructable. But why bother?4 out of 10.