lrc-11 amateurish dribble from beginning to end. drewsky pouts her way through a shameless parody of cissy spacek. calling martin sheen. the duologue could have been written by a high school wannabe and the story line is nothing short of embarrassing. snakes in the church.. you can only hope it was done for laughs though i doubt it. the most gratifying moment in the film was watching those two teenage excuses for actors getting blown away. a little more cringing might have helped. probably the most ridiculous scenes of the tortuous ninety three minutes. i'm embarrassed for the serious reviewers who have actually praised this mess. the only correct decision concerning this so-called film was burying it on Showtime.

Cristi_Ciopron For me,'92-'93 were the best years of Drew's career.In her tumultuous and infamously scandalous adolescence, Mrs. Barrymore was already a very funny and nice actress, and impressively attractive. So,she had several leading roles—and sometimes only supporting parts—in a series of very humble movies from the beginnings of the '90s. Some of these movies I enjoyed very much. They were made in a period that coincided with the rather brief revival of the American B movies in the early '90s—revival and flourishing that benefited from the screen abilities of persons like Drew, Tweed, E. Roberts, etc.. For a brief period, the B cinema in America seemed to set itself up for something. Needless to say that Drew looked very well—a fleshy girl with big jugs and more to show. Extremely sexy and arousing in a unpretentious way. On the other hand, it was easily, immediately noticeable that Drew was, as a young actress, very competent. She was always more than a body on display. The films she made offered her charms fully, used her judiciously, and this was a fine thing.Some of her early films (well, early is relative if we speak about Drew, being given her extremely precocious screen debut) established her as a sex starlet. Those are, in fact, the Drew movies I have liked the most. On the other hand, these were roles of bad girls. But in other movies she was required to make nicer roles, more good—natured, if one can use such a term.Drew brought a note of simplicity, charm, sincerity and naturalness that is delightful. I mean, of course, that roles that needed such a thing. Her part in Guncrazy (1992) needed these nice qualities.I guess it was not a single trace of style or of art in those early Drew films from the '90s—but this is not the point. They were but patchwork, yet …. It was plenty of Drew—and this is something I could fully appreciate. Her screen presence was one of the most enjoyable. She also had some kind of natural ability to display in those roles of nippy, nimble bad girls and nymphs. In Guncrazy (1992) we find some nodding acquaintances from the early '90s B cinema: people like Ironside, here as a noisome cop. Guncrazy (1992) is interesting because it seems made by its very protagonists.Drew's adolescent body and physical allure offered a spicy contrast between her homely plenteous shapes and some kind of paprika eroticism she was so good at displaying. This gave the piddling movies a certain pleasant picturesqueness.

t-mieczkowski Drew is the focus of this feature; for how old she was during the making of this film [15? 16?] she doesn't really disappoint. Her pouty beauty is on ample display in this film. That said, in a couple more years, I think she would have fit more into this role. I wasn't surprised that it was a Matthew Bright script; this has much in common with his later directorial/scripted work "Freeway" in terms of character development. (I feel Bright is an outstanding B-film auteur). Tamra Davis blew some important scenes that could have went another way, but she made up with this with some pretty inspired casting for some of the supporting roles. Ironside, Drago... and I don't remember the sleazy guy who played Drew's mother's boyfriend... but they were all in high style and rare form. You can't beat these guys when they're hitting their cues. LeGros certainly didn't embarrass himself and carved another good portrayal (this guy is a great actor!). For a film that seems to be now so cheap that it's practically in the public domain ($1 DVDs at WalMart and such...) .. I'm surprised this hasn't gotten more recognition, and I'd be sad if it was written off as badly by the producers as I assume it has been to be in such disarray marketing-wise.

moonspinner55 Drew Barrymore plays a hick-town lass in denim who meets a struggling young ex-con determined to go legit (you know he's not going to last long--the close-ups of Barrymore's pretty, dangerous smile and gleaming eyes tell you that!). Director Tamra Davis isn't interested in copying old film-noirs (such as "Deadly is the Female"), yet her original set-up isn't very intriguing either. The drowsy material at the beginning with an over-aged Ione Skye doesn't work, and Davis takes a good hour to get the energy pumping. Finally, in its last third, "Guncrazy" starts feeling a little feverish and exciting, the action sequences far out-weighing the canned dramatics. Barrymore has a lovely presence on-screen, but she needs a much tougher director to guide her through the complexities of character, not someone like Davis whose grip on this material just isn't firm enough. ** from ****