1926. The Chinese Civil War. Drifter Ted Beaubien is captured and forced to witness his girlfriend's execution. He finally escapes and vows to avenge her death by taking on a deadly mission... See full summary »
It was an ingenious enough plan: rob the Riviera Casino's count room during an Elvis impersonator convention. But Thomas Murphy decided to keep all the money for himself and shot all his partners, including recently-freed ex-con Michael Zane. With $3.2 million at stake, the Marshals Service closing in, and single mom Cybil Waingrow and her son Jesse constantly confounding things, Michael must track down Murphy. Written by
Jeff Cross <firstname.lastname@example.org>
When the film finished shooting, Kevin Costner and Kurt Russell disagreed about the way the film should feel. The studio let both stars edit their own versions which were then shown to test audiences. Russell's cut was more comedy oriented and focused on his character's relationship with Cybil (Courteney Cox) while Costner's was more action oriented. See more »
During the casino robbery, the off-duty police officer who gets his hand caught in the elevator identifies himself as "Vegas PD." The law enforcement in Las Vegas has been called the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department since the 70s, and a real officer would have identified himself as "Metro Police." See more »
Alright, Murphy, if you're not coming out, then we're coming in after you.
You don't want any of me!
See more »
Then, there is an out-take with Kevin Costner and Kurt Russell. Kevin Costner says "You're going back, Michael, back to the future!" See more »
Scrolling through the 135+ comments, I'm amazed at how outraged so many viewers are at the "excessive violence," "explicit sex," "foul language," etc., etc., etc. C'mon. A film is advertised as Elvises robbing a Las Vegas casino during an Elvis convention. How much more lead in do you want? You expect, action, thrills and ... content? Amazing. Listen. This is one of the funniest, outrageous films I've seen in a long time. Yes. The story's incredible. But, in any film, we have to consider the level at which we're willing to "buy in." I mean, some people were outraged at the farting scenes in Shrek. Now, they're complaining because Russell and Costner-- especially the latter-- are too violent. Well, let's go back a year or so when Russell and Costner both made Wyatt Earp films, playing the title roles. From my view, both vehicles were ghastly but entertaining. So, I submit that what we have here is the COSTNER and RUSSELL Revenge vehicle. Costner is always on the leafy edge, whether he's dancing with wolves, building baseball fields for ghosts or water-skiing as bait for sea monsters. Russell, whose track record in shoot 'em-ups is no less than Stallone or Arnie, is likewise coming off some hound dog roles, such as being an automated soldier, a remake of his Escape from New York (LA? Why'd anyone want to go there in the first place?) and the sci-fi Stargate. Now, we get these two guys in a mindless, black comedy, full of S&V-- the most since the cult film Thursday-- with quirky twists and turns. Mindless violence? Yes. Gratuitious sex? Yes. Entertaining? Yes-- but only if you don't take it too seriously. I loved it.
71 of 81 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?