Anthony Iessi Hoffa is not the disaster many film critics made it out to be in 1992. It's a movie made in earnest from it's director, Danny DeVito. DeVito explores the life and disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa with fascination and plenty of style. He makes Jimmy Hoffa come back to life, and convincingly so by an incredible turn by the great Jack Nicholson. Arguably, one of the great roles of his career. His most underrated by far. Hoffa is portrayed here as a true leader and a working-man's hero. A man who fought endlessly for the Teamsters. Despite his criminal activity, DeVito and screenwriter David Mamet convey how Hoffa's passion for his people made him beloved by all that knew him. The ending proves to be controversial, as DeVito dares to take a guess as to how Hoffa disappeared. Whether it's portrayed as a metaphor, or simply just a matter-of-fact assassination attempt, it's interesting, if anything, to see this take on one of America's greatest mysteries. Hoffa is no masterpiece, but it's pretty good for what it is.

rowmorg I don't care that the ending was fictional, because it was poetically correct. The life of Hoffa was poetical in its intensity, and the burning righteousness of the man comes through in this picture. Nicholson plays Hoffa excellently on his own terms, conveying the fearlessness of the man and his complex relationship to the mobsters who cashed in on his enormous pension fund by taking legal loans that Hoffa didn't skim. The climax of the story is genuinely tragic as Hoffa is persecuted by Bobby Kennedy, thrown in prison, and murdered by the mob when he gets out and tries to get his union, the Teamsters, back under his control. The motivation of Hoffa drives this picture and its a scandal that the film apparently never made a profit, presumably because of prejudice against unions in the mass-media. Hats off to Danny De Vito for putting up the money for this picture and for directing it and co- starring. His depiction of Hoffa's little lifelong under-man is fine. Altogether a high-minded and grand picture that held my attention for the duration, and moved me at the end. More American movies like this would help their cause no end.

ElMaruecan82 Life made him famous, but death turned him into a legend. If it weren't for his mysterious disappearance probably due to his connections with the mob, it's doubtful that Jimmy Hoffa, the leader of the most powerful union would have been such a deeply rooted figure in American pop-culture. This posthumous place among the unsolved mysteries of the last century was begging for a movie adaptation, and Danny DeVito's turned into quite an interesting biopic, but strangely enough, it says a lot about the man without saying that much. At the end of the film, I knew some of his achievements, but the motives, the traumas, the obsessions, what makes a character fascinating, were still a mystery. This is not to belittle the film's educational value, but I don't think such a complex public figure can be understood if we don't even have some quick glimpses about his past, his background and his family. It's as if Danny DeVito sticked with the public image of Hoffa and didn't give us enough to hook our hearts on outside the Teamster business, which is a pity because Jack Nicholson made the character and gave him such an aura that it genuinely made me curious about the man. Yet, nothing is shared except what he tells his friends, the mob, the journalists, and Bobby Kennedy. I was begging for an intimate moment with his wife, not because "behind every great men, there's a woman" but because men do confess to their wives, share with them the off-the-record stuff, but "Hoffa" is not in the same caliber than, say, Oliver Stone's "Nixon", which is about a no less controversial figure. And I guess I wasn't surprised because I saw the wife in the middle of the film but because she was showed while she was useless plot-wise.On the other hand, the film tackles its subject in a very serious and entertaining way that I'm asking myself if DeVito or the screenwriters did have enough material to approach the privacy of Hoffa, maybe they didn't, or maybe they had but they didn't have enough time. The film is more trying to answer to the question of Hoffa's whacking than the typical rise and fall, it's more about the way he became an instrument of the mob with a pragmatic view on the ends- justifies-the mean theory, but we never see how effective they are for the Teamsters. I learned more about the rights and the struggle of truck drivers from the underrated film-noir "They Drive by Night" or the thriller "Wages of Fear" than "Hoffa", which is saying a lot because it had to be about trucks too, Ebert said that DeVito showed a man who was all about trucks, he talked and breathed 'truck', well how about showing these trucks in the first place? The film fails providing insights on the character by focusing too much on the controversy; it doesn't help to get enough perspective. Imagine if "Nixon" was only about the Watergate, you wouldn't have known about Nixon AND the Watergate either, DeVito's film lacked focus and scope.It's interesting that the film was made in 1992, the same year than another and better biopic, Spike Lee's "Malcolm X", the film is three-hour long but takes you from the roots of the leader, when he was a small-time crook to his rise as one charismatic orator. In "Hoffa", we never see him driving a truck, nourishing his heart with socialist ideas and revolting against the system. From the beginning, he's like a politician haranguing the comrades. I take it from granted than what he say is true, but it's not about belief, but empathy, the film is not about making Hoffa a good or a bad guy, but letting the viewer figuring out. If he was bad enough (in the "practical" meaning) to stick with the gangsters when he became powerful, it would be interesting to see how he started as an idealistic man, and it would make the corruption of his morality more interesting. That's what great biopics are about: evolutions, and never in "Hoffa", do we feel that the guy is changing, in bad or good, it doesn't matter, but there's no dynamics whatsoever.And again, it's a pity because the performances are good, I can't believe Nicholson got a Razzie nomination for this, granted it wasn't the best of his career, but he did bring some energy and passion in the character. But what lacked was a structure, a right choice of episodes that would tell us something about a controversial figure. The film is two-hour and fifteen minutes long, I wouldn't have minded it being much longer if it could enlighten me on the private face of Jimmy Hoffa, we're talking about a character played by Nicholson, who's got a great chemistry with his real-life friend Danny DeVito, the film had the potential, the ambition, probably the budget, the writing was good, but the storytelling not so.Still, for what it is, it's not wasted time, and the film has a solid consistency in it, and at least, it does something that almost redeems the flaws I mentioned: it ends with the best scene, the most memorable one. In terms of shock and emotion, even though we know the story of Jimmy Hoffa, we don't see the ending coming, and it did left me puzzled and shocked when I saw it for the first time. The film needed more moments like this, but all in all, it's a solid drama.

jc-osms I'm halfway through a biography about Jimmy Hoffa but couldn't wait to finish it before the chance to watch this bio-pic arose. I will still finish the book as I wasn't completely taken with this ambitious and sometimes imaginative film.My problem with it was principally the construction. While I accept the premise of grafting on an ending to resolve the mystery of Hoffa's last movements, the audience manipulation involved, which sees violence erupt from an unexpected source and dissolve into a Peckinpah-ish slow motion "dance of death", and repeated returns to the, in truth, less than compulsive build-up to the climax, only serves to slow down the momentum of the film. In addition, the lack of any definite kind of date-marking of events also served to confuse as the narrative jumps forward in time giving little indication of the time-spans involved.Danny DeVito's direction has some imaginative, if occasionally derivative, flourishes but for all that Hoffa is undoubtedly an interesting character, I felt the film dragged along until the final quarter. I would also take issue with the portrayal of Hoffa himself as it seemed to me the writing and direction wanted to significantly whitewash his shady dealings, especially the violence and other dirty tricks he orchestrated and employed for his own ends. I get that he may have been a hero to his members, but it almost seems that the film doesn't think he should have gone to jail at all. In addition, his celebrated encounters with his nemesis Bobby Kennedy fizzle out almost as quickly as they're introduced and as for the depiction of a family life to add some depth to his character, well, there was very little of that too.As for the acting, I'm no fan of the over-actor supreme Jack Nicholson, but he certainly looks the part, although, as ever, you can see him going through the gears for a big scene, usually involving him screaming the "F" word ad nauseum. De Vito himself does okay as his best bud who refuses to sell him out and JT Walsh performs well as the one-time lackey now leader, who does.While a watchable effort, I felt this movie overdid the questionable respect its title character was due right down to the lush, omnipresent orchestral score which I felt all told amounted to far too soft a treatment of such a contentious individual.