Linkshoch Wonderful Movie

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

SanEat A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

Griff Lees Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

muons The basic storyline is about a murderer who likes to play cat and mouse with an FBI agent. McCaleb is an aged agent retired after having a heart transplant but still dragged into action. Though scenario has almost no rationality the movie is entertaining enough for Dirty Harry fans (although McCaleb character doesn't have much common with Harry). McCaleb and Graciella characters are well developed but the two policemen who hate McCaleb (a worn-out cliche) are almost caricatured. Wanda De Jesus looks like a miscast for a woman who'd be interested in an old ailing man. The plot for solving the mystery about the identity of the murderer is laughable. The incentives of the murderer are even less clear except maybe that he's a nutcase. With the way things develop, the twist could sort of be guessed towards the end of story. The movie is a reminiscent of 70's police series on TV. An unambitious and ordinary work with no brainy edge but good for a couple of hours of diversion.

Pjtaylor-96-138044 One of Eastwood's best and most underrated directorial efforts sees him as an ageing detective fitted with a new heart and haunted by his past. 'Blood Work (2002)' is sort of Eastwood's reflection on the genre that 'Dirty Harry (1972)' helped solidify, in the same way 'Unforgiven (1992)' was an interesting counterbalance to the 'Man With No Name' trilogy so seminal to the western. The picture is generally unglamorously gritty but occasionally slips into silliness and convention. The obvious yet nonsensical villainous reveal is ham-fisted and forced at best, being a wholly unnecessary addition to the book that comes across quite cheap. The flick withstands its few flaws thanks to how entertaining it is, with the fact that its hero feels as though he could keel over from a simple heart-attack any minute making it all the more exciting. 7/10

Filipe Neto I never knew the work of Clint Eastwood very well, neither as an actor nor as a director. I've seen some movies directed or starred by him, but he's usually one of those actors/directors that I've never paid attention to. It's a mistake, I know, and I am willing to correct that. He's one of those people who know cinema with an intimacy and proximity reserved for very few and it was with great pleasure that I watched him in this film, where he accumulates the functions of director and protagonist.The story is simple, but it works quite well: a retired police officer, who received the heart of a murdered donor, is invited by the donor's sister to investigate the crime. However, he quickly realizes that her death is linked to a serial killer he was trying to arrest when he fell ill. Of course, there are some details that I found unrealistic, such as the simple fact that a family member of an organ donor is able to identify, by chance, one of the patients who received those organs. I cannot imagine this happening in real life. But if you decide to ignore these details, the plot works and creates an effective and elegant thriller. There are good action scenes, but they are punctual and may not satisfy the appetite of those who seek it.Clint Eastwood showed remarkable agility, given his age and even anticipating, as is often the case, the use of stunts. And besides, he adapted perfectly to the character and to what he asked of him as an actor. Jeff Daniels also deserves congratulations. He has a character that begins by looking totally insignificant, but ultimately proving to be important. I don't want to say what's going to happen, I'll just recommend you to keep an eye out for the way he talks and behaves. Wanda de Jesus fulfilled what was asked of her, and gave the film a romantic and feminine touch.Ultimately, this movie is worth for the good performance of the actors and the good plot. It is not the best movie of any of those involved, but it has value for what it is, allowing us an hour and a half of good entertainment.

sveos The novel is OK, even though a little far-fetched. In the movies, a whole lot has been changed. Names are different, who does what is different and they must have paid Connelly quite a lot to have him accept it. Or maybe he didn't get to read the script until after he sold the rights. It has none of (the little) depth the novel has and it's even more far-fetched. The movie also suffers from quite lousy acting.Since I finished the novel just two days ago, it was all very fresh to me. If the movie is any better to someone who hasn't read the book, I don't know, but I doubt it.Skip the movie and read the book instead.