Point Blank (1998) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
29 Reviews
Sort by:
Good in a hangover, otherwise terrible.
juhakoo16 June 2002
This is a very bad movie.

The actors seem to be on drugs, the action scenes are unspeakably clumsy and the plot virtually non-existent. There is a lot of sadistic and unnecessary violence featuring weird slow-motion scenes, which could be intended to cover up Mickey Rourke's slow, bulky moves. There are also terrible sentimental scenes where the convicts tell their life stories in a weepy voice.

Above all this nonsense a lot of boring guitar music plays in the background. In one scene, where a dying man goes nuts with a Gatling gun while thinking about his wife, the music choice is "Silent Night"... It is almost too absurd to speak of.

All in all, this movie is a horrible shame to everybody involved. But even the worst movie can be good in an appropriate situation: Watch this in good company when having a hangover, and there is no end to the joy. This could also be good when drunk, but I couldn't forgive myself if I rented this a second time.
18 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
What was Rourke Thinking?
Comeuppance Reviews26 March 2004
This is one bad film. With clumsy editing, terrible performances and rip-offs galore! One of the major missteps is the editing. Rourke's character Rudy is a supposed "Karate Master" but when he does a roundhouse kick to a guy it first cuts to the foot then jaggedly cuts to Rourke killing him. This is Rourke's monotone years, where you need subtitles to hear what's he's saying. If you somehow hear the wretched dialogue he's reciting, mute the TV. It is better without the sound anyway. Danny Trejo gets shot like 15 times (twice in the HEAD!) and he's wearing a motorcycle jacket! Just don't watch this film unless you're having a party and everybody is drunk.

For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
a guilty pleasure
wigz8 October 1999
Anyone who has followed Rourke's career lately has to be pleased that this flick was made.Yes,the movie rips off countless other action films but who cares when you've got the pumped-up Rourke whooping ass in the middle of all the cliches.Danny Trejo gives a very creepy supporting performance and I really enjoyed the score as well.I bought this movie after renting it and have screened it for several friends,all of whom immensely enjoyed it.A must for true Mickey fans.This title,as well as Bullet,hold a special place in my film library.
15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Die hard at point blank range
Andy22 June 2003
Well, this isnt so much of a B-movie version of Die Hard, but a tongue in cheek parody of that whole action movie genre, and an achingly funny one at that. It's all here, slow motion fight scenes, big explosion's, and the slightly insane crime boss. Mickey Rourke grunts his way through the tough guy script with a bone dry delivery that make's you certain he's talking this whole thing seriously. Everything's over the top, the acting, the stunts, and Bruce Lee like battle's, an instant underground classic.
11 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
"Oh, the horror...the horror...."
innocuous27 May 2008
There are actually a couple reasons to watch this movie. The first is that, while it's mindless and mind-numbing, there's actually a story and you do become involved enough to want to find out how the story ends. Second, you may actually enjoy picking out the "dumb things" and the totally improbable or impossible.

Of course, there is also the weird fascination of watching Mickey Rourke (at a mere 41 years of age) totally over-the-top with steroids and immediately after one of his face lifts. It was only 12 years earlier that Cimino's "Year of the Dragon" was released, but it seems like it was a lifetime to Mickey. (To be fair, the early 1990s were not kind to him.) YotD was not one of Mickey's best movies, but the contrast between the Mickey of 1985 and the Mickey of 1998 is almost too much to be believed.

Danny Trejo is, as always, fun to watch. Kevin Gage turns in a surprisingly good performance in what is probably the most difficult role in the movie.

I normally don't pay a lot of attention to editing in a movie (unless it's just really bad) but this movie is one of the most obviously-poorly-edited movies I've ever seen. It could be a poster-child for bad movie editing. I'm going to be generous and guess that the editor did not have enough film to work with or that the director failed to block and cover shots as he should have. But with that aside, this movie is worthwhile if only to show your friends or your date what bad editing looks like.

Four stars awarded for having some entertainment value, even if no artistic value. After all, you could have wasted your time on a J. R. Bookwalter film.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
not as horrid as it's made out to be (almost reached guilty pleasure status)
movieman_kev22 April 2007
Gay Howard, a prisoner convicted of white-collar crimes masterminds a prison break while his fellow prisoners are being transported. They succeed and hole up in a local mall where they take hostages and try to make demands of the police who surround the place. Unfortunately for the criminals a former mercenary and all-round tough guy, Rudy Ray (Mickey Rourke) is after them, in no small part because his brother is one of the escaped prisoners. Check your brain at the door for this one, folks. It's all about explosions and lots of gunfire. None of it makes much sense under scrutiny and the films ever so slightly homophobic (I referred to Howard as 'gay Howard' earlier in the review as the film makes it abundantly clear). The action is good, if utterly ridiculous and the film apes from MUCH better films (Die Hard, Leon, etcetera), but fans of Rourke or Danny Trejo (who is suitably over-the-top as the 'crazy' villain) will enjoy this flick. Just don't expect anything more than a fun little weightless diversion. It feels more like an '80's film than one for the late '90's though.

My B-movie grade: B-
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Mickey Rourke, this is your life.
stephen niz21 July 2000
A bunch of escaped criminals take over a shopping centre. One of them is a genuinely nice guy, so his well-meaning brother Rudy Ray (Mickey Rourke) infiltrates the shopping centre to save him. Still reading? If you were expecting a good film, you've got the wrong POINT BLANK. It's terrible - plain and simple.

It was Greil Marcus, talking about Rod Stewart, who famously declared: `rarely has anyone betrayed his talent so completely'. Of course, the phrase could be aptly used to describe Mickey Rourke. The finest actor of the 1980's (Angel Heart, Barfly, Prayer for the Dying, White Sands, Rumble Fish, 9 1/2 Weeks) always lives up to expectations. Unfortunately, expectations of Mickey Rourke are not what they once were. A string of embarrassing pictures led to a self-imposed retirement. On return, his fortunes have not improved.

If this reads like a career obituary, that's not the intention. Fingers crossed that a Soderbergh, Tarantino or Ferrara can resurrect his fallen star. Anything - absolutely anything - to spare us any more films as bad as POINT BLANK. It's a juvenile action romp, so gleeful in its stupid, sadistic violence it's almost unbearable to watch - and certainly impossible to enjoy.

If it hurt Mickey to have his scenes removed from Terrance Malick's THIN RED LINE, or even DOUBLE TEAM, it seems his role has been reduced here too. He fades in and out of the action - perhaps he's trying to hide in the background. Either way, the results are inevitable, and nobody - least of all Rourke - could care less.

It's not just that it's been done a million times better. The shoddy logic of the filmmakers is inane beyond comprehension. (a) The crime kingpin decides to sedate a frenzied psycho-rapist by giving him a whole brick of cocaine to snort. (b) After tormenting a female hostage, she then willingly performs a private sex-show for the pervert. (c) After the striptease he takes her out on the balcony and shoots her in full view of the surrounding cops. (d) He achieves the incredible feat of actually snorting the whole brick of cocaine in ninety minutes.

That's just one incident that doesn't bear close scrutiny. The writer and director clearly revel in sex/drugs indulgence, and it comes out just as dubious as one would expect. There's dramatic license, but then there's a police force that idly watches as hostages are randomly executed.

And let me assure you my vote of one for this film is no knee-jerk reaction. I tried - and failed - to watch it twice. But much like Mickey Rourke in the ring, his audience has a habit of coming back and suffering again and again.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Just a Bad Film
rpm_37120 May 2006
The film was shot at Seminary South, a semi-closed mall in Ft. Worth,Tx, likely the cheapest location they could find. That was the primary reason I watched this film, being a local.

Letdown? That's an understatement. After hearing the local preproduction hype I was hoping for more than an outlaw version of Walker, Texas Ranger.

Sadly, I was forced to watch just that.

The writing's bad, the acting is poor and the production values are pure B-grade. But, Mickey looks like he has been spending lots of time at the gym.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
great action movie!!!
Teen_guy_us2 January 2003
This movie is so great and has alot of action!!!!! Why do all you idiot non-action fans hate this?!!! I think it is the best movie as a matter of fact, I am going to dub it or buy it for my movie collection! The hostage plot was so cool because some of the criminals actually didn't mean to be harmful and most were really mean!!! Alot of action and I recommend it to people who love action! Don't listen to those stupid people asses who don't know what they are talking about!!! They are the ones who like stupid movies and hate good ones like this!!!! Point Blank rules!!!!!!!
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
This movie kicked major ass!!!!!!!!!!
Joker420_69772 May 2002
Mickey Rourke was perfect too as Rudy. The film a good action scenes and good actor's such as Danny Trejo, Micheal Wright, Paul ben-Victor,and Kevin Gage if you like escaped convicts on the loose type of movie then you will like this movie. Go check out the movie Trust me it is a execellent movie!!!!
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Eric Chapman4 January 2001
May not be the sorriest I've ever seen, but it's very very close. It's certainly the worst I've watched in a good while, and keep in mind that I've seen "The Haunting". I am totally serious when I state that the title must be the filmmakers' admission that the film has no 'point', that it is literally an entertainment 'blank' or void.

A bunch of hardened convicts break out of captivity and immediately take 8 or so hostages (business must be down) at a local mall? Then they hunker down and wait for their ruthless, business-guy ringleader to figure out what demands they're going to make as Local and Federal law enforcement surround the place? And one of the cons starts indiscriminately blowing away hostages as another con's former Marine (or something) brother shows up to dispatch the villains one by one Die Hard style? WHAT? HUH? WHAT? Who wrote this? Escaped cons would never do that. They would never ever ever do something like that. It is one of the most moronic concepts I've ever heard of. For starters, there would be like 40-50 points of access which they could not possibly guard. And why would they ever put their trust in someone (though he bankrolled their breakout) who they all despise and they know is stringing them along? Doesn't work. Can't do it. Better come up with something else, Mr. Screenwriter. He, like the ridiculous characters in this movie, boxes himself in and tries to blast his way out, with predictable results.

Even given this premise's painful absurdity, the film could at least deliver on all of the routine but fairly dependable and mildly diverting staples of this genre, like say the way the ones starring Charles Bronson and I don't know, Michael Dudikoff do. But it fails badly when it even tries to do that little, as the action sequences are so gratuitously illogical and disconnected to narrative (what little there is) you will cry. And only two of the hostages are even given close-ups (a pretty girl in a mini-skirt and a slutty girl with a drug habit) so it seems like there's about 5 hostages or so, instead of the hundreds you'd think would be roaming the mall at the time of the takeover. Plus, there's lots of inertia in this movie, lots of standing around, as if the actors had to constantly be reminded that yes, they were taking part in the filming of a motion picture and that, don't worry, everything will come together in the editing room. (Uh, not quite.)

As if that weren't bad enough; self-pitying, disinterested Mickey Rourke is the putative star. The film is quite unspeakably ghastly on its own, to be sure, but Rourke's involvement is very much like dropping a ten ton elephant on an already sinking ship. He gives another one of those deadening, lobotomized non-performances that he first patented with that "Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man" bomb about ten years ago. He shuffles and mutters his way through the debacle as if he'd lost some bet to the producers when drunk and had no choice. (Though he must've made them agree, I suppose wisely, that his participation was contingent on his not having to speak more than 50 words of dialogue.)

Rourke is an actor who at some point evidently decided that the drama and spectacle of his own strange life far surpassed that of any movie he could possibly be in. Every movie like this he does seems like a cry for help, just another installment in his sorry, self-conscious saga of self- (and career) destruction. Amazing when you consider how surprisingly good and professional he is in a fine made for TNT movie he appeared in around this time called "Thicker Than Blood".

Every film, no matter how bad, must have a central theme, and this one's seems to be that "It's bad to hurt innocent people". (At least, Rourke's character mentions something along those lines a few times.) Anyway, I think that's something we can all agree on.

So why make this film?
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Better than it sounds
kentasauras8 February 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Years ago I saw the trailer for this movie on another video. Needless to say I was sold. The trailer featured the action scenes to the thumping music of Guns 'n' Roses' "Knocking on Heaven's Door" and showed an incredibly beefed up Mickey Rourke strolling through the carnage in slow motion like he was indestructible. After big budget high concept crap like "Con Air" and "Armageddon" this movie looked like a refreshing throw back to the good old days of 80's cinema. And in deed it was. The plot, a knock off of "Die Hard" and numerous others, isn't the central story. The main focus is on the Mickster, an ex Texas Ranger, who might have to kill his brother, a drug dealer, who along with his low life cohorts, has escaped from prison and taken over a mall and everyone in it hostage. Mickey does a good job playing the tormented former lawman and he also proves he's upto the action scenes. He is HUGE in this movie. Bigger than the rest to the cast.


Credit must be given to Director Beesley. What could have been another dime store direct to video action stinker turned into a nasty, in your face movie that had some surprising moments, especially the final touching scenes between Mickey and his dying brother.

Some people have complained the film has too much slow motion. I don't think so. At least an effort was made to distinguish this film from hundreds of others. Although it's not perfect it serves up action better than the last couple of Stallone movies and it is certainly the best thing Mickey's done in years.

3 out of 5
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Con Air rip-off?
Tics26 January 1999
Ok, one more prisoners-escapee movie, and not to forget, Danny Trejo is in it, the guy who played Johnny-23 in Con Air. A pretty good B-movie about a former cop,soldier,mercenary that is going to stop a couple of bad guys that is holding people hostage (Die Hard). Trejo is once again a rapist,murderer and total sick-o. Got some good action, the end is the coolest. And don't I detect some Leon-the professional here also.

For a B-movie it is very good, for a Con/Hard rip-off it doesn't even come close. What happened to Mickey Rourke's career?
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
What has happened to Rourke´s face?
Roger J10 August 1999
The most fascinating thing about this movie, is the way in which Mickey Rourke has physically demolished himself totally. Especially his face which looks worse than it did in Johnny Handsome. He must have had steroids for breakfast, lunch and dinner to get this pumped up. I just love it. I laughed my pants off when I saw him barechested in Double Team. True artists suffer to accomplish what they want to express. You won´t believe it until you see it. The movie itself is a pretty bizzare one, combining extreme violence, insanity and the like with really sentimental parts, almost like in Hong Kong-movies. Sadly not as good though. Although this may sound very pessimistic, I strongly recommend it to everyone who wants to have a good time looking at pumped muscles, weapons, toughguys and violence.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Was a Good "B" Movie
americanbamf26 October 2007
for this Movie to be a B type Movie i thought was was actually pretty good . i mean it had a good cast ,plot , and Decent acting to be a B Movie . i don't see why the Haters of this movie didn't like it bc it was worth the watch . and i for one cant see why its rated so low on IMDb bc it was a good movie and i enjoyed every minute of the movie .if you like Mickey Rourke , Trejo , or Frederic Forrest then you will like this movie . imo i think this is one of Mickey's Best Movies . i would say don't Listen to everything you hear(i.e Read ,hear or see ) bout things Especially Movies in General bc Critics have been known to be wrong b4 so watch this movie and judge for yourself . yo will not be disappointed .
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
see it, Point Blank!
poohpooh26 March 2002
I got your message! I saw Point Blank last year, and I admit I was surprised by Mickey's new body. He looked huge compared to how he looked in his earlier years. But personally, I still thought he looked swell smoking that cigarette! I watched the movie and observed the new Mickey. I don't know if this movie has ripped off other movies because I have not seen any of them! But this was new for Mickey and I thought it worked quite well. If Mickey is failing to deliver the same kinds of movies he did before, it's because they aren't being offered to him. Point Blank was a tough guy action movie, and I'm not mad that it got made. At least Mickey takes risks and he is always fun to watch. You know you're not gonna get the same old thing, ya know? I have so much fun just seeing what he's gonna do next. This movie was good for a laugh and to check out Mickey doing something different. Check it out if you are an admirer of his. It was worth it to me. It may not be the best of his movies, but it is a movie! See it at least once! Mickey, at least in this movie, looks macho as he they say he is.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
koeyjay19 April 2004
You would have to be completely nuts not to be able to enjoy this movie. When Trejo asks "What did I do??" at the end, and you're not completely satisfied...you suck

The arch-villian is perfect, the mini-gun on the roof of that crappy mall is perfect, and that scene of rourkes brother all close up walking toward the light at the end of the movie is beyond perfect, it brings tears to my eyes.

Beautiful villian heart to hearts, a real 'feel-good' flick if ive ever seen one. Says here i need at least ten lines, so ill try to sum it up as such, really really good, although it IS better is you're pretty drunk with your buddies, but i cant think of a single movie, or thing in general that isn't for that matter.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
bronsonskull7213 July 2003
Mickey Rourke stars as Rudy Ray a soldier who breaches a group of terrorist's stronghold (This time a mall being held hostage) to save his brother and thwart the terrorists in this mind numbingly awful movie that is so dumb it doesn't even have a sturdy handle on the lame plot. No redeeming value.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Bruce Willis rip-off!
cat-7624 May 1999
This movie would only appeal to someone who likes counting dead bodies. Poorly acted and with an extremely unlikely plot. A Bruce Willis Die Hard clone that does not work with Mickey Rourke!
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Why Mickey Why?
King 80z11 December 2001
This is the worst movie Rourke ever made. I am a huge 80z Rourke fan but this is just pathetic. Not because it is a rip off of other movies. Not because it is a stupid B-movie. Not even because Rourke has destroyed his looks. It is awful because Mickey actually thought he was giving a good performance. This is the standard he now sets for himself. That's just sad. Is this really the same guy who was in Diner?
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Mickey the Terrible
frankwhat15 November 2004
All I can say for this one is man did it suck! If the encyclopedia ever did an entry on how not to make a movie it could incorporate a load of information on this one alone. Well at least this established that even with Mickey Rourke's former ability to act well back in the 80's he can not be an action movie star. He does have a great build now but it's so obvious he took steroids...I mean the guy was rail thin back in the day and now he's gigantic. Plus his face looked horrible as if it were going to melt right off. I don't know if it was plastic surgery that went haywire or just occurred from a lifetime of neglect. I'm glad someone else also saw the copying of the scene from "Leon: the Professional" (towards the end and done much worse) because that drove me nuts. It's just like it compiled all these scenes from other successes and converted them so they'd be entirely unbelievable. The supporting cast was just so awful that I'm not going to even start on them because I'd literally be going on for much too long a time. Even with the low expectations I went in with prior to viewing this film I still came out shortchanged. It blew!

Final Acquittance:

Movies: NOOOOOO!

DVD Purchase: I'd buy it just to have the pleasure of smashing it across my knee.

Rental: I was sorry I did.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
I really wanted to like this movie...
steve-5452 January 2000
I decided to roll the dice when renting POINT BLANK. My desire for a B-action film became unbearable and past experience proves that solid B-action films do exist in the direct to video market (e.g. Black Cat Run, The Guyver II: Dark Hero). Mickey Rourke is an established actor (YEAR OF THE DRAGON) who in the past years traded his legitimacy for a few inches on his bicep (I did enjoy DOUBLE TEAM however). But then the ripoffs within POINT BLANK became unbearable... Mickey Rourke plays an ex-military, ex-Texas Ranger now working for Pa who mentions to him one day that his brother is one of a group of convict escapees now holding an entire shopping mall hostage. Pa also mentions his brother's future is in his hands. An overriding theme of sentimentality plays well in the movie between the two brothers and even with some of the convicts revealing their human side. I also enjoyed the music played during these sequences. But that's about it... Paul Ben Victor (over)plays a gay ex-business man convicted of money laundering coming back to roost in his office underneath a mall, now stashed with military weaponry. Having masterminded the convict breakout, his motives conflict with the other convicts including Rourke's brother (who merely wants freedom and money....I think....the storyline gets a tad muddled here). With the ok from lead Tex Ranger in charge, Rourke makes his way into the mall and "pays homage" to many of the action movie greats of the 1990's: Martial arts by a non-martial artist, two gunmen shooting at each other between obstacles a la John Woo's Hard Boiled and Hard Target (but looking MUCH more clumsy), high floor mini gun without the dramatic punch of T2, and finally the most blatant artistic theft possibly EVER coming straight from Luc Besson's THE PROFESSIONAL (you've got to see it to believe it). Couple this with extremely sloppy editing and you've got yourself a film that maintains the reputation that direct to video films are of low quality. As an action hero, Mickey Rourke does have potential. He possesses a cool, calm bad ass quality reminiscint of an early MAN WITH NO NAME Clint. His physique compares to that of a Van Damme (of course without the grace or charisma). However, if he ever wants legitimacy as an action hero, a film of "grander" (not necessarily more expensive) proportions is needed.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
marginal B movie
Bob722 June 1999
I had to agree with reviewer "Tics" in Sweden, this is pretty marginal stuff, way below Con Air and the Die Hards. I gave it a 3, which means I was sorry I wasted the rental money. And yes, Mickey Rourke's career is really disappearing ... and my wife can't stand him, that can't help :-) The whole movie was just too lame and weak.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Shameless Rourke-sploitation
Chris_Mac_2518 March 2018
I'm a massive Rourke fan, and enjoyed the shit out of this film, despite his obvious contempt for it.

He's jacked and in the best shape of his career

With the help of Chuck Zito he puts together some great fight scenes.

This was made during the years when Mickey was on the outer of Hollywood, and roles like this were his only offers of work

Regardless he kills it with help from Danny Trejo and Kevin Gage

Rourke sleep walks through the film, shrugging and grunting menacingly, dispatching bad guys with ease. This and Double Team show Rourke in fantastic form
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Greatest Movie EVER.
diggydup3 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Possibly the greatest movie of all time for fact. The guitar solos when Mickey Rourke and Danny Trejo were in the fight scenes will be collected by the Library of Congress and saved. So, in a 1,000 years our people will know of this historical matter.

When at the end, Mickey Rourke dodges that bullet and Danny Trejo keeps screaming no and the girl just whisper "Yes" and he never shoot him at point blank, ~wink~, was euphoric

The writing was some of the greatest since Citizen Kane. When Rourke goes up to his dad with his crotch in his face and the guy moves away was a metaphor for why the ongoing social struggle in a neo- capitalistic world in euphoria.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews