krocheav After seeing this mess of a movie I can imagine how hard to take the book might be. Writer/director Dito Montiel writes dialogue as if he's still penning 'songs' for his punk rock bands; Major Conflict or Gutterboy. Dito and some New Yorkers might use gutter language as every other word in all their sentences but it makes them look as if they don't have the imagination to think of any pronouns or adjectives (maybe their vocabulary truly is devoid?).Dito even has his senior detectives use abusive words when trying to gain the 'trust' of very young children...give us a break!. Not only are we thrown endless low life words - the general situations in this screenplay are too often as grotty as a clogged sewer pipe. Add to this, shaky camera shots supplied by generally talented french D.O.P Benoit Delhomme and it could be enough to make some viewers quite nauseous. If ugly story and situations leave you feeling entertained you might just be able to make it to the convoluted and somewhat implausible finale.The presence of big cast names from yesteryear doesn't help and won't improve their reputations. When the best performances come from a young Jake Cherry (who works well at his thankless role) and his dog Tiger, there's something amiss (only trouble is a thug violently kicks Tiger to death early in the piece). Someone will always find something to 'like' about grunge of this type but, from the look of the reviews and the box office returns there hasn't been all that many. When the lights come up the only ones left in the audience might be Tarantino and Scorsese on their industry complementary's.

mobie02 I must say that I was a bit skeptic about this movie but man I was surprised. I must say I got caught by the story line and I would recommend it. Great Cast by the way! Channing Tantum is become quite an actor! I cannot understand why people are shooting this movie down. I might be naive but I didn't get bored at any time while watching this movie. And you know you cant go wrong when you have Al Pacino in a movie. I wouldn't say its a movie I can watch over and over again but the story is very catchy. If you want a good solid movie with a good cast I would definitely recommend this movie! Enjoy

Thomas Aitken I simply can't agree with the other reviewers who gave this film a scathing review.I suspect a lot of the bad reviews came from people expecting a crime thriller, rather than what this film actually was - a crime drama.This was a classic slow burn police drama about a cop who is once again haunted by a past he thought he had successfully left behind him years ago.It is well acted, well scripted, well shot, well scored - almost like an indie movie, rather than a crime drama.In theory this film was supposed to be about redemption, but the failure to actually create a proper redemption narrative is exactly where it all came apart, and where I believe it slipped from being a great film to something that was worth the watch, but not a keeper.Ironically, it's only in the last moments of the film that things are ruined - and rather oddly I have to say, because everything is building towards the lead character taking that final step towards redemption by making a very public confession about his past, and the corruption within his police department, but nothing even remotely like this happens.The film simply ends with him getting on with his life, as if no heinous act of murder and corruption has just taken place, and thus allowed him to carry on with life as usual in the burbs.From a technical perspective it actually feels like they either ran out of money, or time, or they didn't know how to end this film so they just finished with an el-cheapo stock footage 'newspaper with important headline on the table in foreground' shot.In fact, the previous couple of minutes before that were a little bit problematic as well - the way Ray Liotta died was highly contrived and clichéd, and totally counter to where the film had been heading, and what it had built up to over the previous 80 minutes or so.Some of you may be thinking; 'but didn't they do the same sort of thing in 'No Country for Old Men?' - yes, but the very reason they did that was to make a point about suffering and evil in the world. If this film was trying to do the same thing it failed quite badly I'm afraid.Real shame, because other than that this was a good film.

kidchaos1969 I gave this movie two stars because it is well acted and well directed, but the script is really awful.The movie pretends to be a thriller and yet there are no surprises at all. We know everything from the beginning. There is no new information that would cause the characters to act as they do. There is no reason why the characters find the events so horrible as to act the way they do. There are simple reasons that things could have been different. Even if we accept the things as they happen there is really no big conspiracy. There is nothing here to hang a thriller on. This is a really well acted movie that is pointless. I have a hard time understanding why this movie ever got a budget or these actors. I'm truly amazed that this group of actors would waste their time on this film. Maybe I'm jaded and I should care more about a couple of murders of people who are horrible and are killed in basic self defense by a helpless abandoned child. Come on, seriously what is this movie about? Don't waste your time. IF you watch this movie and hope it will leave you with any kind of pathos you will be sadly disappointed. This movie is horrible.I'm sorry not to offer more analysis about why this film is bad. It really isn't worth the effort.