Reviews (135)

Warriors Come Out To Play!
This 1979 Walter Hill Film is said to be based upon a real Coney Island street gangs events. The ficticious gang the Warriors heads on the Subway to the Bronx from the most distant part of Brooklyn to meet the head of a gang named (Cyrus). Once in a Bronx Park, Gang Leader (Cyrus) preaches that if every gang in the city would unite, they could take over. During this speech Cyrus get's shot and a Warrior member is accused of the murder. Mayhem then breaks loose as Cops move in and the Warriors have to make it back to Brooklyn via Subway with all gangs hunting for them. Thus begins the urban nightmare when trains had graffitti and gangs fought with bats and switchblades. If this story is based on some real experinces the real gang from Coney Island were truly Warriors. For those unfamiliar 28 miles on the subway in the middle of the night with the cops and gangs chasing you makes the wild west seem like Disneyland. The plot is silly but the movie makes up for it with it's comic book like action and the ability to touch the fear of any urbanites. From gangs made up wearing Yankee Baseball Uniforms to Gangs on Skates the chase scenes are great. An emotional statement accompanies a suprise ending. This movie was a sleeper, partially because theatres would refuse to show it due to it's instigation of violence. As I was growing up not far from the movies origin I was put under the impression that this story depicted some true experiences. No gang related film ever came close to this urban rollercoaster ride.

COME OUT TO PLAAYY YAAA!
I remember when I first saw the "Warriors" back in 79, I was hooked on the realization and authenticity of NYC gang life that was portrayed on screen.It isn't your average gang movie where a bunch of punks is menacing innocent folks for 94 minutes. This cult classic gives you: a superb story plot,real NYC locations especially Coney Island(no Hollywood movie studios),creativity in the wardrobes of various gangs(some scary/funny),great fighting scenes(no guns-good ole fashioned punches,kicks,bats & switchblades) and very memorable one-liner dialogues."CAN YOU DIG IT,COME OUT TO PLAYY-YAA and CAN YOU COUNT SUCKAS" is repeated still to this day from us average folks and even some of todays rappers.I'm from NYC and I enjoyed the scenery and grittiness of this movie-subways stations and cars sprawled with graffiti & the huge corridors of the IND lines.The subway scenes cannot get any more real than that.From Cyrus's magnetic speech,the shooting which started the pandemonium,the twists and turbulent flight home and the final justice given to the Rogues the "Warriors" is magnetic and fascinating to watch.I just bought the VHS copy today and I'm gonna watch it over and over again! It's also good to watch with a couple of friends especially if they grew up in that time.Generation X may think it's funny/corny compared to the violence and gangs we have today.Finally,the beginning of the movie where they are being introduced is cut out unfortuna tely but this collectors' item is good enough to place in my "Movie Hall of Fame".can you dig it,Can You Dig It,CAN YOU DIG IT!

classic
This film brings back some wicked good memories... I give it 4 stars for content, (music, cast, story) and an extra star for the memories. Is it an award winning dialogue filled film with award winning performances? No, but it was well made and when you want to go back to the late 70s early 80s jump in your time machine(dvd player) and pop in this film , it is a way of time traveling back to this time period and rewatching how it was.

dont miss
One of my favorite films,"the warriors" recalls a more simple time,when gangs were cool and they didnt carry automatic weapons,and they did the fighting with bats and fists.Its an excellent trip through a single night in new york city.The armies of the night number 100,000;they outnumber the police 5 to 1; tonight they're after the warriors-a street gang blamed unfairly for a rival gang leaders death.dont miss this classic ride.

Warrriorrssss....Come out to playyyyyyyayy
LMAO....This movie owned badly. It came out a long time ago, but I saw it on DVD about a month ago. Gangs from the 70's are sooooooooo much different than gangs today. Like we might have bloods, and crips today. But the gangs back then actually had meaning, and a concept. A nice example is the Orphans. They all dressed up in raggidy !@# clothing, and kept to themselves. They had a gang like, they all dressed up in baseball uniforms, and wielded bats as weapons. Also, guns were rare back then. I mean some people had guns, but when the term "Are you packing" was said, people had whatever they can fight with. 2X4, Bath, Pipes, Bricks. Thats real....lol ... Read more

Reviews (53)

an underrated cult movie!
This was one of those big budget, high concept films of the '80s that the studio had high hopes for but ended up belly-flopping at the box office. It's a shame, really, because this is a wonderfully entertaining B-movie with A-movie production values.

Yeah, most of the songs (with the exception of the two awesome tunes by The Blasters) are horribly dated and totally inappropriate for the look and vibe of this movie (what do you expect? they were mostly written and/or arranged by the guy who produced Meatloaf's BAT OUT OF HELL -- ugh), which should have gone more with rockabilly and old school '50s rock 'n' roll instead, but oh well.

Michael Pare delivers his finest performance in this one as the silent tough guy Tom Cody and he has real chemisty with old flame Diane Lane who is perfectly cast as the rock singer who needs to be rescued. This was at the time when both of their careers were read hot (esp. Lane's after doing all those awesome Coppola films!) and this film was supposed to launch their careers into the stratosphere. Doh.

Surrounding them is a great cult cast of character actors... Rick Moranis as the annoying manager, Amy Madigan as the butch soldier-of-fortune, Willem Dafoe as the nasty, leather-clad bad guy and the blink-and-you'll-miss-'em cameos by Bill Paxton (great hair!), Lee Ving (from the punk band Fear), Ed Begley, Jr. (what the?!), Robert Townsend (I'M GONNA GET YOU SUCKA!) and a young Mykelti Williamson (Bubba Gump!).

This was also Walter Hill at his finest. After this, with the exception of JOHNNY HANDSOME, it was pretty much all downhill. But, man, he had a good run until the bottom fell out.

The transfer on this DVD is top notch with kickin' sound that really comes out if you've got the proper home theater set-up. It's a real shame that the studio didn't let Hill or anybody else involved provide some new extras! C'mon! If commercial flops like UHF and NEAR DARK can get awesome special edition treatments then so can this one!

A Terrible Movie That You Can't Help But Love
Personally, I really like Streets Of Fire, but strictly speaking, it's terrible. The script is really bad and the dialogue is some of the worst I've ever heard. However, it can be very fun to watch. The cinematography is excellent, and the beginning and ending concert scenes are the reason I bought this dvd in the first place (I'm a huge Jim Steinman fan). It really is fun to grab a few friends and some snacks and just laugh at Rick Moranis and Michael Pare overacting their corny lines. It also has Elizabeth Daily, whom you may know as the voice of Buttercup on The Powerpuff Girls. I love her! She's a joy to watch. I was dissapointed in the lack of special features on the dvd, and somehow I don't think there will be a special edition version. But hey, it's always amusing to watch corny dialogue transform into corny French dialogue, right?
Simply put, if you're a fan of cheesy movies and you don't take things too seriously, you will probably get a kick out of this film.

A "Grows on you kind of flick!"
Ok...when I first saw this movie the first thing out of my mouth was..."Ok...what was that all about?" lol...but after watching it again...and being a really big (self-proclaimed) Michael Pare fan, I gave it another try, and was really suprised that I enjoyed it! It grows on you...it's a "You can't help but love it" kind of film! The more you watch it, it becomes a guilty pleasure! A must see...if you like the kind of movie that you can love, and still think..."WOW...I really like that?!?!?!"

"You can kiss your baby goodbye."
If you recognize the name Ellen Aim you know your cult sci-fi rock movies, or, as director Walter Hill called his 1984 film Streets of Fire, your "rock and roll fable[s]."

Ellen Aim and the Attackers are a band that plays in an alternate version of the eighties, or maybe an alternate version of the fifties. It's either the eighties that couldn't let go of Elvis and pre-British Invasion rock and roll, or it's the fifties anticipating an urban underclass where everyone is on the edge of violence. Walter Hill loads the movie with a retro neon look, blending genres, similar to what he did in 1979's The Warriors, where he mixed the post-war social-issue movie with the seventies exploitation film, along with some ancient Greek history. (As Cyrus, the would-be savior of all the warrior gangs, booms at us, "Can you dig it?")

Michael Pare (as Tom Cody) stars in Streets of Fire. Cody's just out of the army in a what-if America that still has the social restraints from fifties Tab Hunter movies, but wallows in the corruption and depravity of Reagan's eighties. On this particular morning in America it's raining and everyone's on the verge of killing someone. Willem Dafoe's first appearance as Raven, the villain in black rubber, fresh from God knows what perversity, to the song "One Bad Stud" performed by the Blasters ("If he likes your baby, you can kiss your baby goodbye"), may be what got him typecast as a psycho in so many movies.

But in a fifties movie there has to be a love story. You can't have a guy without a girl. There has to be a Natalie Wood for James Dean, even if the romance is between James Dean and Sal Mineo. In Streets of Fire, Michael Pare's Natalie Wood is Diane Lane as singer Ellen, who Aims her Attack straight at your heart while she caresses one of those old round microphones that look like a hood ornament. Raven kidnaps Ellen and her old boyfriend Tom Cody (Buffalo Bill to the rescue) is called to save her. Unfortunately, Lane doesn't get to do much more than play the frail here.

Cody's real emotional connection is with McCoy (Amy Madigan), another vet who makes Cody hire her to rescue Ellen. McCoy brushes off Cody's half-hearted passes with "You're not my type." McCoy wears greasy old clothes and fixes cars better than Cody so I think I get the point. Especially when McCoy leers at a female nude dancer at the club where Ellen is being held. It seems like the movie was going to be more explicit about McCoy's sexuality but chickened out.

I won't spoil the story but you know how it ends.

I have a soft spot for movies that are original, even if they're not entirely successful. The music's good, the look of the film pulls you into its unique world, and the story is one of those mythic restatements that move you even when you know they're corny.

Yes, cheesy but the best kind though...
I truly love this movie, even though it is chock full of horrible writing and over acting, but all of this is done in a very cool way. I like to think of this as a pirate movie only on land with a bunch of bikers, cool cars, and tons of film noire dream like quaility action going on. Plus a great sound track to go with it. If you like Micheal Pare I recomend checking him out in Eddie and the Cruisers 2: Eddie Lives! instead of Eddie and the Cruisers. He's much more interesting in Eddie Lives! and it has a much better soundtrack with incredible songs done by John Caffhery and the Beaver Brown Band. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Richard Gaddis (John C. Reilly) catches young Rodrigo (Diego Luna) conning some casino waitresses out of chump change and decides the guy is just the right chump to help him run other local scams. The slyest thing about this diverting remake of the 2000 Argentinian heist flick Nine Queens is, in fact, how much everybody seems to have a scam in the works--there isn’t a single honest soul in sinful, sunbeaten Los Angeles. Richard and Rodrigo soon get caught up in a big swindle concerning some counterfeit currency, a game that ensnares Gaddis’ angrily estranged sister Valerie (Maggie Gyllenhaal), the concierge of the hotel that’s hosting the guys’ main mark (Peter Mullan, coolly brutish). What happens next isn’t really anything new--The Sting, anyone?--and the requisite final twist might not hold up to closer inspection, but director Gregory Jacobs knows how to lie back and it keep it gliding affably along (he served as an assistant director on nearly all of Steven Soderbergh’s films). The performers all hook into the low-key vibe: Reilly’s schlub persona fits snugly into his small-time grifter role, while Luna and Gyllenhaal seem more simmering and sexy in each new shot. The movie is as entertaining and inessential as L.A. itself. --Steve Wiecking ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Definitely Worth Looking For
A very nice film, devoted mainly to two central characters: Richard Gaddis (played by John C. Reilly) and Rodrigo (played by Diego Luna).The film traces a 24-hour period in which the two characters first meet, and subsequently have an opportunity to form partnership.Filmed on a shoestring budget, the movie had only limited released; however, I highly recommend viewing it on rental.

Richard is a con-man in every sense of the word, he's not to be trusted; even his past partners have run the risk of being cheated by him.Rodrigo is a petty thief, and works the small con.Their paths converge when Rodrigo is caught trying to cheat waitresses out of change in a local casino in which Richard is also at.Richard, posing as a local police officer, steps in and takes Rodrigo under custody.Once outside the casino, Richard convinces Rodrigo into working with him.

After a series of short cons, in an attempt to build trust and confidence in one another; Richard is contacted by his sister Valerie (played by Maggie Gyllenhaal) in regards to one of Richard's previous partners making contact with her (Valerie) at her job as concierge at the Biltmore Hotel.As it turns out, Richard and Rodrigo are placed into a situation with an opportunity to score the big con.It seems that Richard's former partner, Ochoa, was in the middle of a six-figured con when an impending heart attack struck him incapable of completing the transaction; he is no longer able to complete the deal.Furthermore, Ochoa's "pigeon" departs the U.S. in the next 24-hours due to his Visa expiration; therefore, Ochoa must rely on Richard to finish the con.

What happens next are a sequence of events of "How not to orchestrate the big con", which includes losing the counterfeit item being used for the setup.Richard and Rodrigo are forced to rely on one another whole-heartedly in order to accomplish the final swindle, which included liquidating both their total assets to front the cash required for a duplicate counterfeit item.

The film places you into mind to the con-man, and all the antics required to accomplish the long con.There are no high speed chases, or large scale pyrotechnic involved in this film; just plenty of dialogue and no stop conniving.With the added bonus of a plot twist ending, the film is quite entertaining.

http://farisreel.com

Nothing too special here
Criminal was a good little independant film with a couple of con men doing a job. The plot twists and turns are slightly predictable, though I have to admit that I didn't forsee the ending. Well, not exactly how it ended. I saw some aspects of it coming, but not all of it.

There are basically no special features on this disc. So if you pick it up or rent it, don't expect any behind-the-scenes info. You're getting nothing more than the movie itself.

Nothing too special here. A decent rental, but don't bother purchasing it. You're better off with something of more substance.

Formula Fare
I read in the NY Times that John C. Reilly is playing Stanley Kowalski in a production of "Streetcar Named Desire."Stanley?Mitch, maybe, but never Stanley.Not that Reilly isn't a terrific actor.He's proved himself in a series of scene-stealing supporting roles in films like "Hard Eight" and "Boogie Nights."He just doesn't have the heft of a Brando.But I like him fine as Karl Malden.He plays a Malden-sized character in "Criminal," a first film by Gregory Jacobs, the assistant director on the "Oceans" films.And that's the problem.This is the kind of preposterous "heist" film (apparently based on an Argentinian original) that requires a willing suspension of disbelief.Maybe if it boasted the eye candy (not to mention the heft) of a George Clooney in the lead role, and, instead of Diego Luna and Maggie Gyllenhaal, Benecio Del Toro and Julie Roberts in support, you'd be willing to overlook the holes in the screenplay.As it is, you aren't likely to find any of these characters evil or glamorous enough to care what happens to them.Instead, you'll be left to marvel that two such small-timers as Richard (Reilly) and Rodrigo (Luna) might even get close to a "sting" on the scale of the one outlined here.That said, I certainly like Diego Luna as an actor and wish him well in his career.He was terrific in "Y Tu Mama Tambien."Maggie Gyllenhaal, too, has done better work.And John C. Reilly gives it all he's got.He certainly makes a convincing louse.But he needs to go back to playing Mitch, and leave Stanley to the Brandos.

almost works
This is a caper film that would work, if John C. Reilly weren't such a smart and talented actor.

See, for the twist at the end to really be both shocking and fun, you've got to hate his character. I mean, he is a jerk who has tried to screw over everyone else in the movie at one point or another.Shouldn't it be satisfying that they all manage to collectively screw him over together?

Yes, but... Reilly's too good.He gives his character a little too much depth, a little too much humanity for us to cheer as he is carted off to jail. When he has to tell his little brother about the lawsuit, you feel his pain.When his sister demands her cut and his is down to nothing, he's on the edge of tears and desperation and you feel like this must be more than just a scam for him - something's at stake, even if we do not know what it is.This is good acting.Too good.We don't want to care about villains; we don't want to see them as people with problems and loves and fears.In the end, instead of feeling satisfied that the SOB got what was coming to him, I felt conflicted - sure, he's an SOB, but I still want him to win, at least a little bit.

Copycat movie.
This is so much like the recent, good grifter movie of last year, "Nine Queens," I stopped it midway through, with full knowledge of the eventual outcome and how it all would work out.

The young good-looking Mexican up-and-comer from "Y Mama Tu Tambien" stars in this one, unfortunately wearing uncomplimentary jeans throughout the movie, in order to bolster his straight-dude creds, and acting like some odd kind of mix between a choirboy and a grifter. You just know something bad's going to happen to his older, uglier cynical grifter partner, whose wicked comments against family and morality set him up for major rue from the clue canoe. Guess what, most of what's really bad has already been applied to the poor guy's mug.

Watch "Nine Queens" instead and get the dope straight from the (albeit foreign) source. This was just a shade too Hollywood for me, smacking of industry standard fare throughout. Where's the freaking originality?! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Direct-to-video stylist Albert Pyun sets this plotless, gun-crazy frenzy to the mambo beat of Prez Prado and runs with it. Mobster Ice-T calls dozens of associates to a newly built prison the day before it's dedicated, locks them in, and pits them against one another for a prize of $10 million, which the last three survivors will split. Bleached blond Christopher Lambert is a grinning psycho having a little too much fun, while the soul of the group belongs to the craggy-faced Michael Halsey, a ruthless killer with an odd sense of purpose and a code of honor. The story is merely an excuse for unending gunplay and giddy violence and Pyun rises to the occasion, executing everything from riotous free-for-alls to elaborate chases to Western-style standoffs (complete with a haunting spaghetti Western style guitar and trumpet theme). The video titles, dingy lighting, and dusky color give away the low budget and ultimately the script doesn't make any sense, but Pyun wisely avoids the confusing plot (which he himself sometimes loses) and concentrates on his particular strength: wild, wicked, practically nonstop action driven by a restless camera and rat-a-tat editing. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (20)

The Best action movie of 1998 and one of the best ever!!!
This movie is really awesome, I dont like to look at it as just a b-movie but maybe just a low budget action movei, low budget isnt always necessarilly a b-movie. The acting is excellent I think. Christopher Lambert is an outstanding actor and I dont care what anyone says about him, he can play any type of role. Ice-T is in top form, playing the all time bad guy. This movie is very cool, not necessarilly plotless or pointless. Just shows alot of the things mercenaries do, and what they will do for it. This movie has alot of humor, often sexy, even a bit dramatic especially towards the end. And is of course filled with nonstop action, and one of the best. Very enjoyable anybody who likes awesome action movies then check this one out, its killer. And as for the bongo music, I dont normally like that kind of music, but it fits quite well for this movie.

Quick, dirty, and oddly contemplative.
MEAN GUNS stars Christopher Lambert and Pyun regular Michael Halsey, and has only the merest shred of plot to propel the story: a powerful crime syndicate wants revenge on those who betrayed them, so it's set up a free-for-all in an empty prison where the condemned must fight to eliminate one another in six hours, or less. The three left standing get to walk away with some big money in their pockets.

Like most Pyun films, Mean Guns doesn't stand up to intense logical scrutiny, but that's not the point. The movie ends up being oddly contemplative, as the script draws out a handful of troubled characters thrust into a grotesque situation. While the emphasis is clearly on the action -- and there's plenty of it, well-shot as usual -- there are surprising moments of quiet where the audience is allowed to get close to these "bad guys" and come to at least part of an understanding of what their lives are like, what they think and feel. Lambert and Halsey are particularly good here, as a killer who's come unhinged because of a familial tragedy and another who's lost all hope of ever walking away clean, respectively. Good stuff, marred only by a very poor full-screen presentation.

Good Stuff
I am not going to sit here and analyze this movie as some people here who have no jobs and plenty of time do. I am very critical, and at first glance I was like what the hell am i watching over here. But then i just got hooked, something about the movie lures people ain and makes them want to watch it. maybe its the way the mambo music is scripted into the movie or the intersting chracters. Either way its a good movie to have around and laugh at every once in a while

Pulse Pounding This Ain't
You really must hand it to Christopher Lambert. After showing great promise in the action film "Highlander" back in the 1980s, his career rapidly took a nosedive. Lambert could have been the next big action star if he had played his cards right, but instead he followed up his initial success with the lengthy and oftentimes plodding "The Sicilian." Actors who make this type of mistake rarely call it quits; they merely head into the realm of B movies where all things are possible if one is willing to throw such antiquated notions like dignity and art to the wind. The 1997 film "Mean Guns" shows Christopher Lambert at the heights of his nadir. To be honest, Christopher shouldn't carry all of the blame for this lifeless excursion on Mount Boredom: Albert Pyun, a noted hack responsible for numerous dead on arrival film projects, directed this plodder. The fusion of an aging and desperate Lambert with Pyun's questionable abilities virtually insured that this movie would disappoint. What is so sad about the whole thing is that the idea behind "Mean Guns" is an intriguing one that, with a little bit of imagination and a bigger budget, could have been one of the best B movie action films made in the last ten years.

A powerful, and as sometimes hinted at, supernatural crime syndicate decides it is time to take out the trash that has been bleeding the operation over the years. This organization sends out invitations to the top killers who have worked for them in the past, inviting them to a meeting set to take place in a recently constructed prison. None of these thugs know exactly what is in store for them, but they all know that when the boss calls it pays to listen. As the criminals file into the penitentiary, they soon learn what's going on: each of these men and women must use whatever skills they possess to kill all of the others. To add a little spice to the contest, the syndicate stashed ten million dollars in cash somewhere in the prison as a reward to the last three people left standing. Heading up this operation is a platinum toothed Ice-T, a goon of especially unsavory reputation whose role is that of master of ceremonies. T rigged the prison with cameras and cellular phones so he can watch and hear the unfolding carnage as the murderers go at each other with gusto. The syndicate even supplies loads of guns and metal baseball bats at the start of the game to help things move along. Is this whole thing a trick or is the syndicate actually willing to shell out millions to figure out who is the best of the best?

Regrettably, "Mean Guns" fails on so many levels that it is difficult to outline all of the problems. I recognize that many people really enjoy this film as it is, but it could have been so much better. First, a movie that promises not stop action should have some nice, bloody shootouts. Forget about it. "Mean Guns" is as bloodless as an episode of "The A Team." People are beaten, shot, and stabbed with nary a popping squib to show for it. I had to go back and check the rating on this film after watching it because I simply couldn't believe that a 'R' rated film would be this prudish with the sauce. People taking a shotgun blast at close range do have a tendency to bleed, but not here. Sam Peckinpah could have worked wonders with this idea, but in the hands of the stingy Albert Pyun, it simply falls flat. Moreover, the director fails to properly design or photograph the massive gun battles that occur with great regularity throughout the film. Again, using Peckinpah's slow motion mayhem technique would have remedied many of these flaws. I don't know if film fans today just aren't used to seeing bloody action films intelligently captured on celluloid, but this movie had great potential to paint the prison red and it failed completely. What a shame.

The characters suffer due to a tedious, hackneyed script. You simply don't care what happens to most of these characters at any point during the film. Sometimes, films can make criminals interesting if the writer and director take a psychological approach to their subject. Look at "The Godfather" or "Casino" as examples. In "Mean Guns," most of the characters are simply cardboard cutouts serving as mere cannon fodder. An attempt to make Lambert's character, a bleach blond killer who cackles and clucks his way through the movie, suffer from some sort of flashback about the death of a child fails because it really isn't all that interesting either in its execution or in its explanation during the film's final showdown. Don't watch this movie thinking you will see smart characters expertly developed, although Pyun regulars will note the presence of leggy Tina Cote, an actress who appeared in "Omega Doom" and a few other Pyun films. Her head catching on fire provides the only sustainable laughs in this film, and only because it is so incredibly cheesy.

What do you get with the "Mean Guns" DVD? Not much, really. Some trailers and cast bios for Lambert and Ice-T is about it. The transfer looks acceptable at least, and if you like mambo music you're in luck as the whole soundtrack to the picture consists of nothing but mambo tunes. Bloodless gunfire and mambo; that is about the only thing I will remember about this movie. If you want to see a good Christopher Lambert film, watch "Highlander" again, for only die hard fans of the man with the French accent will appreciate this clunker.

mambo, mambo
really great story and I liked the way it played out, though theres some stupid bits and characters that really are just dumb, like Deborah Van Valkenburgh's role, the chick who lives at the end, she was stupid. Lambert is so insane in this one and his fight and gunplay scenes rock ass. Ice-T contributes some knife and gun skills as well. people get smashed, bashesd, gunned down, hung, stabbed, strangled, hit by bats, hit by frying pans and other cool ways to die. vicious fight scenes ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Awaiting Destiny
IF you are a hopeless romantic then this movie is definetly
for you. If you are just looking for a laugh, some emotion,
and a good time, check it out! I, for one, fit into both categories hence the 5 stars...

I love this movie!
I love this movie! I've watched it a couple of times now, and who'd have thought Roger Daltrey would turn out more sexy than Casper Van Dien! I just wish there had been more of the music. I played the ending over and over, listening to the songs. The love story was sweet, too.

An enjoyable movie!
This is a good-quality feel-good movie with excellent production, direction and performances from everybody. It's somewhat conservative--it has no (visible) sex or violence--but it still managed to hold my interest. The best thing about it is the Burning Prairie Band playing at the end: Roger Daltrey, Drake Bell, Carmine Appice, Kelly Keeling and Denny Laine. They sound great.

I'd recommend this for any of the gals--including young ones. It's interesting, unoffensive, and a great opportunity to watch some real musicians at work. The guys will like the guitar work there at the end.

Chasing Destiny
Moderately charming. Chasing Destiny is BY NO MEANS (maybe the worst movie ever made). With all of the bad movies that are allowed to be made, Chasing Destiny is a delightful excape from the norm. The cast alone is worth the purchase. Music icon THE WHO'S ROGER DALTRY-Nehemiah Peoples, DRAKE BELL-Walter (Nickelodeon's-The Amanda Show, Jerry Maguire, HBO's The Jack Bull), CASPER VAN DIEN-Bobby Moritz (Storm Troopers, Sleepy Hollow, Tarzan). CHRISTOPHER LLOYD-Jet James (Taxi, Back To The Future, My Favorite Martion), LAUREN GRAHAM-Jessee James (Gilmore Girls) and Music greats, Denny Lane, Spencer Davis and Carmine Appice. If you like music from the late 60's early 70's, this movie is a must.

Chasing Destiny
Heartwarming love story, laugh, cry and enjoy an absolutely wonderful movie. One of the very best I have seen in years. ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Not that bad...
Ok, so I watched this movie today and it was actually better than I expected. Longer too ~2hr 45mins which is something to rival Star Wars.

I also managed to see the original movie again a couple of weeks ago (after first seeing it years and years ago). What was most noticable to me were the flashbacks to the past which were so different to what was in the original movie. Ok, I don't mean not using any of the original actors like Heather Locklear or Drew Barrymore (like they would do this kind of movie now anyway) but the way the parents died, for example, was completely different to the way it was portrayed in this movie.

It was also sad how John Rainbird had developed his own personal little army which would eventually lead to a gigantic showdown btwn Charlie and the young "gifted" boys. I did however like the young guy who was helping Charlie through the majority of the movie. It's always nice to have someone you can trust who won't just run away when they learn the truth about you - as frightening as that can be. Too bad things didn't go as he or Charlie expected in the end.

I think the girl who played Charlie did a pretty good job but it's a bit of a shame that they didn't use the bits from the first movie as the flashback sequences. However, seeing they inserted some extra footage in the flashback scenes that weren't in the original movie it's understandable that they would need to use other actors to play those roles. Of course the special effects - including sound - were much better in this movie. Not surprising since the first movie was done 18 years ago.

See it on video if you're curious to see how Charlie turns out.

You guys need to lighten up
After browsing through a few of my fellow critics reviews I need to say this, lighten up. This movie is not that bad considering that it is a sci-fi channel miniseries style film. For a movie that does not need to rely on saying things like (beep) or having tones of (sexual intercourse) that most sequels rely on they really pulled off a treat to the eyes.

I think the problem that most of my fellow critics had was the fact that they read the book, did not like the first film because it did not faithfully adapt to the book. Who cares? The first film was fine and the second one lived up to it's predecessor.

Malcom McDowl played a fine Rainbird as he did an excellent job just like George C. Scott did. The new Charlie (what you expected Drew Barrymore to reprise her role) does a good job as the now grown up Charlie trying to survive as she is still being hunted. Rainbird new plan of more experimented kids provides a deadly advisary for her and overall I would say this movie is worth seeing.

However like I said I am little more liberal with the way I see movies but I honestly think that if one was to give this half a chance they would enjoy it. It is entertaining to watch to those who are willing to give it a chance.

Should not be compared to the original.
Many people are comparing this to the original and because of that are giving it bad reviews. This should not be. If you are looking for complete continuity of the original, then your looking in the wrong place.

Instead, view this a a completely seperate movie. It's also important to realize that this was a mini series, not a regular movie, so it's long.

Yes, it differs in many aspects from the original, but if you can look past that, its a very good movie/mini series.

Interesting but long...
I really think that the Sci-Fi channel did a really good job on this movie, especially when you compare it to the other movies that they've done. All and all it was really interesting but it's definately one of those movies that you can't get up and walk off for a second because then you don't know what is going on anymore. I watched the movie on cable and they made this 2 hour movie last for a whole 4 hours and honestly I think that was just plan out unnecessary!!! Not to ruin it for anyone but... the ending is really disappointing and kind of predictable especially if you've watched any kind of horror movie EVER!

Better than I thought...
Okay, this movie was made by the Sci-Fi channel so I'm not going to be so hard on them for not having the best script/special effects/story. I'm just going to focus more on the entertainment factor.

Yes, I was a huge Firestarter fan. I was a bit disappointed in the changes from the past during the flashback pieces... but the main story was still there. But this is the biggest reason I did not give them five stars... diverting from the real story.

However, I did enjoy the entertainment value. The idea of more children with unique abilities was fun... I wish they had shown more of these children. A glimpse at Charlie's life as she was all grown up was interesting, as well as other characters from the Lot 6 experiment.

The only thing I did not like was the ending... but this is the story of Charlie so it should have been expected. I'll leave it at that so I don't blow the ending for anybody. But it somewhat disappointed me.

No, this wasn't as good as the original. Of course, Stephen King wrote it and didn't have a hand in this, so of course it is better. I wasn't expecting much and was prepared to turn it off it if didn't catch my attention well. But I was entertained and I watched it to the end. Overalll, I would say, "Job well done, Sci-Fi Channel."

Would I recommend it? Maybe... if your expectations are high (don't expect a Terminator 2 type of sequel) then I would suggest skipping out on this one. But if you are into a night (this is a long movie) of cheap entertainment, pick this up! ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Not that bad...
Ok, so I watched this movie today and it was actually better than I expected. Longer too ~2hr 45mins which is something to rival Star Wars.

I also managed to see the original movie again a couple of weeks ago (after first seeing it years and years ago). What was most noticable to me were the flashbacks to the past which were so different to what was in the original movie. Ok, I don't mean not using any of the original actors like Heather Locklear or Drew Barrymore (like they would do this kind of movie now anyway) but the way the parents died, for example, was completely different to the way it was portrayed in this movie.

It was also sad how John Rainbird had developed his own personal little army which would eventually lead to a gigantic showdown btwn Charlie and the young "gifted" boys. I did however like the young guy who was helping Charlie through the majority of the movie. It's always nice to have someone you can trust who won't just run away when they learn the truth about you - as frightening as that can be. Too bad things didn't go as he or Charlie expected in the end.

I think the girl who played Charlie did a pretty good job but it's a bit of a shame that they didn't use the bits from the first movie as the flashback sequences. However, seeing they inserted some extra footage in the flashback scenes that weren't in the original movie it's understandable that they would need to use other actors to play those roles. Of course the special effects - including sound - were much better in this movie. Not surprising since the first movie was done 18 years ago.

See it on video if you're curious to see how Charlie turns out.

You guys need to lighten up
After browsing through a few of my fellow critics reviews I need to say this, lighten up. This movie is not that bad considering that it is a sci-fi channel miniseries style film. For a movie that does not need to rely on saying things like (beep) or having tones of (sexual intercourse) that most sequels rely on they really pulled off a treat to the eyes.

I think the problem that most of my fellow critics had was the fact that they read the book, did not like the first film because it did not faithfully adapt to the book. Who cares? The first film was fine and the second one lived up to it's predecessor.

Malcom McDowl played a fine Rainbird as he did an excellent job just like George C. Scott did. The new Charlie (what you expected Drew Barrymore to reprise her role) does a good job as the now grown up Charlie trying to survive as she is still being hunted. Rainbird new plan of more experimented kids provides a deadly advisary for her and overall I would say this movie is worth seeing.

However like I said I am little more liberal with the way I see movies but I honestly think that if one was to give this half a chance they would enjoy it. It is entertaining to watch to those who are willing to give it a chance.

Should not be compared to the original.
Many people are comparing this to the original and because of that are giving it bad reviews. This should not be. If you are looking for complete continuity of the original, then your looking in the wrong place.

Instead, view this a a completely seperate movie. It's also important to realize that this was a mini series, not a regular movie, so it's long.

Yes, it differs in many aspects from the original, but if you can look past that, its a very good movie/mini series.

Interesting but long...
I really think that the Sci-Fi channel did a really good job on this movie, especially when you compare it to the other movies that they've done. All and all it was really interesting but it's definately one of those movies that you can't get up and walk off for a second because then you don't know what is going on anymore. I watched the movie on cable and they made this 2 hour movie last for a whole 4 hours and honestly I think that was just plan out unnecessary!!! Not to ruin it for anyone but... the ending is really disappointing and kind of predictable especially if you've watched any kind of horror movie EVER!

Better than I thought...
Okay, this movie was made by the Sci-Fi channel so I'm not going to be so hard on them for not having the best script/special effects/story. I'm just going to focus more on the entertainment factor.

Yes, I was a huge Firestarter fan. I was a bit disappointed in the changes from the past during the flashback pieces... but the main story was still there. But this is the biggest reason I did not give them five stars... diverting from the real story.

However, I did enjoy the entertainment value. The idea of more children with unique abilities was fun... I wish they had shown more of these children. A glimpse at Charlie's life as she was all grown up was interesting, as well as other characters from the Lot 6 experiment.

The only thing I did not like was the ending... but this is the story of Charlie so it should have been expected. I'll leave it at that so I don't blow the ending for anybody. But it somewhat disappointed me.

No, this wasn't as good as the original. Of course, Stephen King wrote it and didn't have a hand in this, so of course it is better. I wasn't expecting much and was prepared to turn it off it if didn't catch my attention well. But I was entertained and I watched it to the end. Overalll, I would say, "Job well done, Sci-Fi Channel."

Would I recommend it? Maybe... if your expectations are high (don't expect a Terminator 2 type of sequel) then I would suggest skipping out on this one. But if you are into a night (this is a long movie) of cheap entertainment, pick this up! ... Read more