a5c7b9f00b An all-night diner. A cop walks in on a robbery in progress. But what happens next - and what happened just before - will change everything you think you know. The building is now surrounded. There are restless fingers on every trigger. And one very intense hostage situation is about to take some extremely shocking twists. Nick Davenport is released from prison for robbing a car and his wife Amanda waits for Nick to bring him home. She tells that she is pregnant and leaves him at the Be Brite diner since Nick has scheduled an encounter with his brother Patrick Davenport. When the police officer Will comes to the dinner, he notes that something is wrong and he goes to the toilet. He contacts Lieutenant Barnes and tells that a heist is taking place before the scheduled hour. Then he sees Nick hidden in the room and he tells that he has called the police, and Will gives his name to Barnes. Out of the blue, Will is shot in the head and Nick is brought to the diner where there is a hostage situation. The British criminal Derrick and the gangsters Billy and Aaron have stolen clients and a safe and Derrick has taken an HD from the safe. When the negotiator Jeff Porter arrives, Lieutenant Barnes tells him that Nick is responsible for the heist. Nick becomes a pawn in a deadly game where the award is an HD. What is the secret of the wanted HD? Truly…<br/><br/>All I can figure is that there MUST be some reason or agenda to take a perfectly good, well made, gripping, and most of all FUN Crime Thriller like this and then for some unknown cosmic reason, just P*$$ the hell all over it. And what really gets me about THESE particular reviews concerning this film is the unmitigated arrogance of the comments…<br/><br/>Anyway, that's not why you called… : )<br/><br/>Clearly, at least *I* thought it was a great and very entertaining film. I frigg'n LOVED the main bad guy (Chiklis - who also was one of the producers) He was VERY Guy Ritchie, which is ALWAYS fun! Seriously, right from the clever way the film opened and then the way the film makers kind of bent your mind around by sort of rewinding it and replaying it differently (I STILL honestly don't quite get the specific logic of why they did that) it honestly REALLY grabs you by the nuts and does NOT let you go until the end.<br/><br/>Now, *IF* this were indeed the cheeeeezy, poorly done, quickie Crime film that others here are bloody SAYING that it is, there is NO frigg'n way that it would have been this sharply put together. Everything truly was done very well. In a film like this, you would think that maybe the writing, dialog, and acting might suffer; that maybe the characters or what they say would not come across as believable. But actually, it was all quite well done. Even though ALL of the primary elements that make up this film were executed extremely well, I feel that the editing was particularly good. The one scene where Ray Liota is telling the story about the clock makers was an outstanding example of this. <br/><br/>Crap movies don't do that. Pure and simple…<br/><br/>Soooooo, I have NO bloody idea WHAT these knuckle-dragging Cretans are talking about with all these negative comments, but if you like Guy Ritchie's films (this one is not QUITE up there with his though) and you just enjoy REALLY fun Crime films with lots of twists and turns, then there is absolutely NO reason why you shouldn't completely enjoy this movie. It does PRECISELY what it sets out to do, and it does so splendidly. And that is a solid '8' in my book… When a botched heist on a local bar takes a gruesome twist, three armed robbers led by Derrick (Michael Chiklis) are forced into a hostage situation. Amongst those locked inside are police officer Will (Forest Whitaker) and recently released ex-con Nick (Sean Faris). The robbery however has much more at stake than just money, leaving both corrupted cops and mobsters on the outside feeling jittery. While a mysterious man in a suit (Ray Liotta) tries to sort out stuff from the outside, negotiator Jeff Porter (Common) attempts to diffuse the tense situation.<br/><br/>Featuring a multitude of flashbacks and other even less welcome film tricks (including a gratuitous blood-splashing sequence, where one of the hostages thinks out in his head, what would happen if he acted 'the hero'), muddles the movie way beyond what the actual plot requires. Making simples actions and situations seem more intricate initially works, but as the story unravels, so does that paper-thin ploy. Featuring some disinterested performances by several people in the cast (most notably Ray Liotta) and one above average outing by Chiklis, this adrenaline-driven ride makes for a passable watch, rife with some action and hints of tension, but never truly make it worth your while. None of the dialogue exceeds general actioneer banter, while the story itself is simplistic, despite the attempts to obscure it. On the positive side David A. Armstrong never flinches, when its necessary to dispose of the character of any of his more recognisable cast members.
Socharcamatt Admin replied
294 weeks ago