Your problems with this film. Seriously.

I agree with everything you said, I'm a huge fan of Paul Newman and I think this was possibly his best performance (or at least my favourite of his performances). He got the accent spot on too, I had a granduncle who lived in the states for years and that is exactly how he spoke. On top of that the cinematography was a work of art in itself, and the pacing gave you time to appreciate the whole package. My only problem is the reaction from hanks character and his son to the murders, especially the son - you'd expect a kid to fall apart, but maybe they were tougher back then!

Film is a home run on so many levels.

[deleted]

Truly a masterpiece. The directing, the cinematography. Paul Newman is brilliant. I've seen this a dozen times and watching it again right now.

it's definitely a masterpiece as it's a 10/10 level movie. it's also my 'go to' movie for great cinematography to as some scenes in the movie really stand out as not only do they look great but they are also great moments in the movie to like the scene where Tom Hanks kills Paul Newman in the rain at night with the Tommy Gun and the end scene where Jude Law shoots Tom Hanks in the back and proceeds to take his picture.

this movie wipes the floor with a large percentage of the movies in the IMDb Top 250 to say the least.

for the record... a 10/10 rating is something that i hand out pretty rarely to as only 63 movies so far out of the 1800+ total movies i have seen managed to get a 9/10 or 10/10 from me as i ultimately rate movies based on how much i enjoy them and the further they get away from that then the lower the rating. so basically anything i give a 9/10 or 10/10 is pretty much as much as i can enjoy a movie.

----------
My IMDb Movie Lists etc = http://goo.gl/pZ8XG
----------

I did like the film very much, but in regards to the novel it came from it was sort of a let-down. In the novel, Sullivan is considered the angel of death and he definitely shows it. There are many shoot-outs where he is dodging bullets and taking down the enemies. It's been awhile since I've watched this but I only remember one scene where he kills a few guys and all they show is his feet. So yes it was good, but not action-packed like the novel was so not as good as it could've been.

"The saddest thing in life is wasted talent." ~ A Bronx Tale (1993)

Loved the movie. The problem I had with it though, was the way they portrayed Frank Nitti and the office. I like Stanley Tucci as an actor but they had him playing it like Nitti was a respectable businessman and this was an office for any corporation when in reality, Nitti was a ruthless thug and murderer and anything but respectable.

This is a very flawed movie indeed. I'm only half through the movie and it's almost ruined for me already.

Because Jude Law apparently HAD to go on that shooting rampage in the Diner and kill the policeman just like that and for nothing. Having shown his face to EVERYBODY there.

It's just not believable. Same exact problem I had with 3:10 to Yuma - not fuсking believable any way you look at it. Not plausible.

This is how one scene can ruin the whole movie.


Also, can you name a reason why this movie had to be set in the 1930s? Other than to show that Hollywood almighty CAN??? Can everything could've easily happen in our times, nothing's changed.
--------------------------------------------
I own you.