innocuous Worth renting, but not buying.The plot is absolutely, 100%, stone-cold predictable simply from the premise. Still, Rubinek does an excellent job with his main gimmick for the film...smooth, seamless scene transitions between different time periods and geographic locations. They are worth waiting for.The movie is a black comedy, but I didn't really find much humor in the wry situations. I'm not sure if they were not-enough or a little-too-much.Mantegna goes a bit overboard in playing the laid-back "button man" as part-philosopher and part-salesman, but he does an adequate job. Sam Rockwell fares better as the kid who grows into the profession, enjoying it a bit more than he probably should. His desire to do something in a way that's "different" reminds me of a newly-wed couple looking for that new sexual position.Durning is wasted in his role, as we never take him seriously as a threat to anyone, much less as a stone-cold killer. Chaykin fares better as a basically inscrutable "boss" who pulls the strings through some sort of managerial fog.The cameos by Macy and Danson are good, but a bit strained. We're so busy watching them as victims in inescapable circumstances that we don't keep them in the proper perspective. The bit parts they play are overwhelmed by our expectations.I enjoyed the movie, but, if you really want an interesting take on the "old hit-man bringing along a younger guy", try ,"Cohen & Tate" (1989), which I find has much more interesting dynamics between the protagonists.

Marc Sparks This is part of my Scarecrow Video Guide inspired movie-trek, following "Steven Soderbergh's Schizopolis"."Jerry & Tom" is a fun little black comedy, but it reminded me a little too much of another fun little black comedy..."Coldblooded", starring Jason Priestly & Peter Riegert. (Oddly, Riegert shows up here in a similar role. And, as of now, both films have a 6.7 on IMDb.). I'm not sure which one is lesser known, but they both have something to offer."Jerry & Tom" is the "better" film, if only by virtue of the performances. Joe Mantegna is always good, and Sam Rockwell can't lose, IMHO. But nothing much happens here. "Coldblooded" was more fun, as I recall. (It's been at least 7 years since I saw it.) I could tell 10 minutes in that "Jerry & Tom" was based on a play. It's basically a series of conversations, some brilliantly funny, centered around a group of hit men. It would be a great play, but as a film it's a little lacking. There's an amazing series of creative transitions to show time passages (the story takes place over 10 years), and some hilarious flashbacks. But the scenes in between are incredibly slow.Still, it's hard to fault a film with great actors reading great lines. Aside from Mantegna and Rockwell, Charles Durning is predictably excellent, and William H. Macy shines in a brief role.Perhaps these two films would make a good double feature. Watch "Jerry & Tom" first and savor it, then have a few drinks and enjoy "Coldblooded".Next on the trek- "Forbidden Zone"!

Dr.X There are moments of drama and irony in this film, but mostly it's a very well-written and well-acted comedy that is at times hilarious for the ease with which it captures icons and styles from other films while at the same time twisting and mocking them. There is some very cool, matter of fact dialog that brings home the idea of all jobs and actions creating their own reality around them and becoming mundane, no matter how unusual or dangerous the work. While making the viewer laugh, it also brings home the pain and horror the hit men create, especially when they don't behave professionally or fail to follow their own code of distorted ethics.

George Parker A tedious, dialogue-intensive story about the vicissitudes of a mentor/protege hitman team, "Jerry & Tom" is a study in understatement with a pointless plot and an ending which may make you want to "whack" yourself for having watched the whole thing.