Wizard-8 "Tough Guys Don't Dance" is one of the strangest movies I have seen for quite some time - and I've watched a LOT of movies! Technically the movie is sound, with good photography and well chosen location. But everything else is bizarre. All the characters in the movie speak oddly, unlike the people you usually encounter in various aspects of your life. The acting is also over the top at times, perhaps to compliment the strange dialogue. Those facts may turn off some viewers early, but I had to admit that those attributes to me made the movie compelling - for the first third or so. After that point, the movie starts to become very confusing. There are some things that are never explained, like the hero's new tattoo and his dog suddenly appearing in a scene. (Was the movie's length cut down in the editing room?) Still, I admit that the movie is probably unlike any other cinematic experience you've had, so more adventurous and patient viewers may find it very rewarding. And I have to also admit it's a heck of a lot better than Norman Mailer's earlier movie "Wild 90"!

AlanSquier Okay, now that I have your attention, I don't guarantee that you will rate this the 7/10 I do, even if you qualify as an intelligent and advanced film buff. However, I do believe you will find something to chew on here.It's written and directed by noted author Norman Maileer. And it's tough in every meaning of the word.The rough plot sounds like a rather typical noir. An excessively drinking author given to memory blackouts doesn't know if he committed a murder or not.Believe me, it's not that simple and Mailer takes us down a long winding and convoluted path before we know the whole story. At times, it seems ludicrous, and although I disagree with the Razzie noms it got, I understand. This is the type of movie which some will find inexorably bad.However, it weaves a spell and the tough will stay with it because it's addictive. You will laugh at inappropriate times and groan sometimes, and yet the very serious film buff will continue watching it, and be glad he/she did. And I do believe that many will find this rewarding although certainly not unflawed. Maybe Mailer wanted it flawed.As others mentioned, Wings Hauser is the perfect actor in this. However, Ryan O'Neal gave this his all, and veteran B film noir actor Lawrence Tierney also adds to this.Some will love it; some will hate it. I did neither, but I did enjoy it. There was a point, the chain connecting the characters in their sex lives and in the chain of violence.Love it or hate it, I suspect you will remember this one and not consider it a waste of time.

chrisdfilm There are a lot of people who really hate this movie. Then strangely they go on and on detailing the things that bother them about it but that they also find fascinating and relentlessly hypnotic.It's unfortunate that people are so rigid in their definition of what makes a 'good' movie.Norman Mailer is by no means a terrible director. He actually does a very credible and commendable job of adapting his own novel to the screen. The dialogue is at times overblown and purplish, but it is never boring and frequently it's downright brilliant.Every performer acquits themselves well, even Debra Sandlund as Patty Laureine, Wings Hauser as the sociopathic macho police chief and John Bedford Lloyd as the eccentric, messed-up millionaire, all of whom can be accused of overacting. But ultimately their performances are completely in tune with their insane characters and draw us into a nasty labyrinth of twisted emotions and nightmarish memories. Ryan O'Neal actually gives one of his finest performances as an alcoholic loser who has messed up his life and who is so prone to blackouts, he's not even sure if he's killed someone. Lawrence Tierney is excellent as his tough guy dad who helps him make sense of the chaos in their small-shut-up-for-the-winter-and-consequently-spooky-as-hell Provincetown coastal neighborhood. Isabella Rossellini is also great in what appears to be an, at first impression, thankless role, but who in fact turns out to be the character who gets the last word and the best revenge.The great thing about this film is it manages to have its cake and eat it, too. It's not only an at times very creepy modern film noir, it's also a frequently hilarious black comedy. Also, contrary to some people's perceptions, the film has a complex narrative structure that pulls the viewer in, much like the best mysteries. If you go in not expecting a conventional mystery thriller but more of a cross between David Lynch, Roman Polanski, Jules Feiffer, Hal Ashby and maybe Arthur Penn(when he directed NIGHT MOVES), I guarantee you you will not be disappointed.

patrickboyle-1 I read the book last year. After so many years of disappointments I tried once again to find a piece by Norman Mailer that had the impact on me of "The Naked and the Dead". Alas "Tough Guys" is not that book. However it is a genuine hoot. A hard boiled mystery with a rapid succession of over the top scenes and characters. Not by any means an important book but a a great light (or lite) read.The movie however is just a mess with the exception of Wings Hauser. I was charmed that Mr. Hauser the King of the B Movies finally got a part that let him eat the scenery. John Bedford Lloyd is a problem as the protagonist's effete and ineffective rich college buddy. Lloyd is a big guy and a superior actor. He has been type cast as the the big guy in "The Abyss" and several other roles. He towers over poor little Ryan O'Neal. The nerdy Lloyd character was supposed to have always looked up to the physical O'Neal character. Mailer the director wouldn't change the lines written by Mailer the writer. Poor Lloyd spends all of his scenes hunched over trying to look smaller.It's even worse than the Shawshank Redemption where a 6'5" Tim Robbins tried to be the small weak guy the other cast members talk about.We keep hearing that most of directing is casting but why do we get Peter O'Toole a foot to tall for Lawrence and Mel Gibson a foot to short for Wallace?