Tony Scott was originally slated to direct. But the studio balked because at the time they felt he was not accomplished enough to pull off the project. He would go on to direct the remake Man on Fire. See more »
And so. That's how I ended. A stiff in a body bag.
See more »
Man On Fire is a pretty good movie. On the grittiness level, I would give it a ten. It is gritty. It is mean. It is the kind of movie that is good suspense and entertainment. But the "European Style" ruins parts of the movie. There are crucial scenes (like the ending), where the director cuts away to something else, and you never see what happened. That is a typical trait of the European style of movie-making, and it is highly annoying to be cheated out of the climax of some of the action sequences. So you have to guess what happened by watching the next scenes and discovering which characters are still alive and which ones have been killed or hospitalized. Except for this major issue, I like this movie a lot. It has a lot of power which comes from the under-stated acting of Scott Glenn. Because he is not a muscular athletic action star his predicaments are more realistic and the danger feels more real. Glenn and his co-stars do a good job of under-acting. One of the best things about Man on Fire is that the events unfold in an exciting manner because all of the actors are very subdued and natural. The cast is made up of outstanding actors.
16 of 24 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?