IMDb > Righteous Kill (2008) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Righteous Kill
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Righteous Kill More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 25:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 243 reviews in total 

41 out of 67 people found the following review useful:

De Niro and Pacino make it a good movie…

Author: gregmovies from United States
14 September 2008

This film has a lot of problem, but the great performances of its stars still make it worth seeing at the theater. The twist was way too predictable (I had it solved half an hour in, and I'm usually unable to figure out twists way ahead of time) and the script wasn't very impressive. The direction is OK, but nothing special. There were some pretty funny moments and one liners though. The only thing that makes this better than a sub-par thriller is De Niro and Pacino, both of whom put in great performances and really save this movie. The supporting actors do just fine, but are overshadowed. I was really anxious for a movie in which the pair finally share some significant screen time together, and this movie was about as good as could be expected, considering the makers of the film.

It isn't the best movie out right now (try Burn After Reading), but I do recommend going to see this one. I give it 7/10. I hope Robert De Niro and Al Pacino team up again, hopefully with a better screenplay and director.

Was the above review useful to you?

52 out of 89 people found the following review useful:

Self Indulgent Old People

Author: doofy-8 from United Kingdom
19 December 2008

This film is appalling. De Niro is 65, Pacino is 68, Dennehey is 70. Serious actors who have all done some brilliant work in their time labouring under the delusion that they can act 'young'. And of course they can't. It is embarrassing. Clint used to be the master(?) of this genre, Harrison Ford has had a shot at it - but to see actors of the calibre of De Niro and Pacino having a go is dreadful; surely they did not need the money... De Niro's love interest is in her 30s and looks it - despite having had enough botox to sink a ship. In the real world De Niro can pull a mid 30s woman because of his money and power, but as a humble detective? I think not. There are mild sex scenes - spoiler alert? - and they make you wince. Even the basic stuff like, er, movement is cut to protect the guilty; starting with a full body shot and then cutting to upper body only. UK readers of this comment over 50 might recall Dixon of Dock Green and how, as he aged, there were less full body walking shots and the 'running' looked a bit silly. There are loads of buddy movies out there, often with the hard nosed lieutenant, and this does not begin to compete. Because the leads are too old. I am all for 'willing suspension of disbelief', but Dennehey (at 70) threatening a 68 year old about his pension, while looking like an extra from Cocoon? It does not work. This movie is all about 'lazy' and trading on reputations. I think Pacino is a genius - I watched Carlito last night, De Niro is brilliant - I think 'Ronin' and "I ambushed you with a coffee cup", Dennehey has done wonderful work - the first Rambo movie for example. In this film they are assuming that nobody will notice that they are all 20 years too old. They are wrong and I find this a bit disrespectful.

And all the above is before beginning to consider the plot. Which is lazy and formulaic - if you make it to the final 'twist', you will be neither surprised nor care. This film is aimed simply at the 'fan' market - those who will get excited at Pacino and De Niro in the same film together a la 'Heat'. But 'Heat' was a brilliant film, and this is but a piece of lazy self indulgent nonsense.

I am not a 'fan' of any artist per se; I am a 'fan' of their serious work. If they chose to disrespect me - in the way that the three male leads here have done - I feel that I have very little choice but to disrespect them for my part.

Pacino has had a dabble with Shakespeare - his Shylock was excellent, I have not seen his Richard - I would love to see him do Lear. I do not need to see him put on his leather jacket again. Not at 68.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 27 people found the following review useful:


Author: David Ferguson ( from Dallas, Texas
14 September 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Greetings again from the darkness. Yes, it is cool to see Deniro and Pacino on screen together again and it's inexcusable that it didn't happen a few more times over the years. But cool casting alone does not make a movie. Director Jon Avnet ("88 Minutes", "Fried Green Tomatoes") and writer Russell Gewirtz ("Inside Man") have discovered that.

On a bright note, Avnet somehow managed to avoid the whiny, screaming Pacino that we have been subjected to so many times these past few years. Instead we get a guy drifting through the film as if drugged like a hyper-active child. DeNiro on the other hand does all he can do to be the tough, aging cop. We are treated to the facials, hand gestures and top notch line deliveries that we have come to expect.

The two legends are joined by rival partners John Leguizano and Donnie Wahlberg, who are convinced that Deniro's Turk is a serial killer. Their captain in this is the rarely seen Brian Dennehy. DeNiro's character somehow is hooked up with the department ME played scorchingly by Carla Gugino, who in real life would undoubtedly be cheating on her multi-millionaire husband and not working for a living. Almost as a story line toss-in, rapper 50 Cent plays a drug dealing club owner who tries to play ball with the cops. Also want to mention that Alan Rosenberg has a small role and offers a reminder of his skills, which have been rarely seen since he became President of SAG.

The film has many twists and turns and diversions, but there really is no doubt who the serial killer is. The video of DeNiro apparently confessing to the crime was actually a good idea and some of his best work. As with "88 Minutes", I am just not pleased with Avnet's directorial style. The attempts to shoot cool shots and toss in some quick focus just give it the look of someone trying too hard to be Scorcese. Still, it is worth seeing for DeNiro but you probably won't be surprised.

While certainly watchable, this one is just not quite as smart as it tries to be.

Was the above review useful to you?

39 out of 65 people found the following review useful:

Like Lennon and McCartney... sure, if not with the best director

Author: MisterWhiplash from United States
12 September 2008

Righteous Kill is a kind of prototypical modern cop thriller that has the intonations of a neo-noir mixed in with some iconic figures. The script, in a way, is much better than I might have thought, and the actors- stars Robert De Niro and Al Pacino, in a film technically for the third time and for the first time technically in the frame for more than a few seconds (a pressure obviously from those who whined about their bit at the diner in Heat) as well as the likes of Brian Denehey and Carla Gugino- do their best to make it an entertaining ride. And for all of its recycled elements and plot turns and tough-guy take-no-s*** dialog, it's a fun ride for what it's worth as far as substance goes. You want to see what will happen with these two veteran cop characters as they delve deeper into this killer case (somewhat ripped off from Magnum Force, or something like that in terms of the victims), and what the "twist" will ultimately be.

For those who might think it tired or stiff, I wouldn't put any real blame on the stars, or even Gerwitz's (flawed) screenplay, which does occasionally pull off dark and funny banter and some coarse dialog and action and thrills to the degree that one saw in his Inside Man script. The problem mostly was the direction; Jon Avnet is not a visionary, nor is he a really well-suited neo-noir director. He's just a competent technician (if not veerying close to outright hack) enough to dig up a few potent bits or visual touches, and mostly tries to make the film "hip" and "fresh" and "inventive" with the approach to style in the flashbacks, and he doesn't possibly bypass the pitgalls in Gerwitz's script. What is pleasing, ultimately, about the picture is that it's not bad at all, and is actually a good movie. But with characters played by near generational icons dubbed in the film as "like Lennon and McCartney", this isn't quite up to their previous snuff together. They deserve just a little better with the likes of Godfather 2 and Heat to their previous collaborations.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 31 people found the following review useful:

Great work by Al and Bobby!!!

Author: deniropacino89 from Boston, USA
15 September 2008

I had really low expectations when I went to watch the movie.All the reviews I read were negative,I wanted to see this mainly because I am a big fan of both Al and Bobby.The movie was enjoyable and it is nothing like what other viewers/critics have said.Some have said that this is disgusting and predictable...awww gimme a break! this is not disgusting!This has got two of the greatest actors of all time and they still seem to have a lot left in them (They have a lot to offer in the future and I am sure they will not disappoint).I felt both Al and Bobby did a great job in this movie.They seemed to have great chemistry between them and I would like to praise the rest of the cast as well especially Carla Gugino,John Leguizamo,Brian Dennehy and Donnie Wahlberg.Curtis Jackson should not have been in this movie but he does a reasonable job.I feel Jon Avnet does not deserve to direct a movie with stars like these.I just hope that Al does not work with him in the future.This movie is not in the league of Godfather 2 and Heat but it is definitely worth watching.DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT THE CRITICS SAY(THOSE GUYS ARE ALL SCUMBAGS).THE ACTING IS GREAT IN THIS ONE AND IT IS A MUST SEE FOR ALL FANS OF DE NIRO AND PACINO!!!

Was the above review useful to you?

60 out of 111 people found the following review useful:

They OWN the movie

Author: pritish-sai from India
15 September 2008

Most people (including yours truly) are anxious to see this film cause its been 13 years since the two screen legends have appeared in the same movie. First and Foremost the movie delivers on the hype. Deniro is there and Pacino is there n from the start till the end they OWN the movie.

The movie's strong point is that the two legends are back to the their roots .Witty wise cracks ,top notch swearing ,drugs and violence. Pacino is as brilliant as he was in his previous movies but when compared to heat he dosen't show the same energy that he did. DeNiro on the other hand was everything that made him what he is today . One of the immortals Deniro kicks a$$ and with Pacino there the duo literally tear the movie apart . Its superb.

As far as the story goes the plot was nothing new but the twists and turns are highly innovative . Its like a an old 70's crime story with more modern elements. Curtis Jackson surprisingly did an above average job despite the fact that I thought that he would screw up. However when talking about the other acting its just bland cause you know why.

Overall an enjoyable film. Definitely worth watching at least once. But I still feel that these guys have a lot left in them and I am eagerly waiting for them to team up again for another movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

What a complete waste of time and money!

Author: silvia_ns86 from Spain
21 October 2010

I saw this film yesterday afternoon thinking about how great was going to be seeing Robert De Niro and Al Pacino acting together, but the truth is that I felt very disappointed.

Actually, since the very beginning of the film I realize it was a complete waste of time and money, of course, because I bought it.

I can't help wondering how could Al and Robert make a film like this? Didn't they see that the script was horrible and predictable? In conclusion, "Righteous Kill" is the best example of that kind of film that seems to be good but at the end, it is absolutely disappointing. It is clear that I don't recommend it.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Been waiting 13 years for another De Niro/Pacino flick, and this is how they deliver??!!

Author: Deveousdevil from Brooklyn, America
12 November 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

***Minor Insignificant Spoilers***

What a disappointment. People have been waiting since "Heat" in '95 for another film where Pacino and De Niro co-star and this is what us loyal fans are given? Unacceptable, you have two of the greatest actors playing side by side and you give them this predictable and twisted script? WHHYYY!!?? If they were going to make another De Niro/Pacino flick they should've made it fantastic. This is mediocre. First off, why in name of all that is holy would they include 50 cent in a De Niro/Pacino movie. Who does that? It's as if they are purposefully lowering the value of this movie. Rule number 1 when making movies with classic actors - don't use ghetto gold tooth untalented rappers as filler actors, use good ones. Heat was full of good actors who played their parts well and spoke clearly, unlike the infamous "fitty".

The story is very bad. It's too twisted and nonsensical. It's similar to Street Kings, which is a very bad thing. Pacino and De Niro act well, but not what you'd expect from these kind of actors. It's not entirely their fault, it's not easy making a rusty script shine even if you've been acting for 30 years.

The music is pretty good. It sets the proper moods for most of the situations so it adds a little realism to the movie. The action is pretty weak. Heat was full of intense, unpredictable, and suspenseful action. This movie has predictable, poorly filmed action.

Now, here comes the spoiler, to those who saw Heat. The ending is exactly the same as in Heat only the other actor gets killed this time. Honestly, could they get any more desperate that they have to copy the ending of a classic to make the ending of a bad movie slightly better. What's even sadder is that it didn't make anything better, especially if you're a Heat fan.

Conclusion: If they wanted to make another De Niro/Pacino movie the writers and director should have tried much harder to make another classic as good if not better than Heat, or they should never have tried in the first place. It's insulting. You should watch it just to judge for yourself but don't get your hopes up.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 11 people found the following review useful:


Author: logans_place from Andorra
27 September 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Unaware of any previous reviews I went along with an open mind. The talent list is impressive and the title engaging. Nothing could be further from the truth. A film where fiddy cent is a better actor than the two headliners with a fixed facial expression, is destined to fail and it does.

This is not a weak film, it is simply bad. Right from the basic building blocks like editing and production. The script is tedious with three funny bits saved for the two other cops (who are the best actors by far). The acting is awful and I felt that Pacino and De Niro never had the heart for it. Indeed I would say that they did this in their lunch breaks whilst doing other, more worthy, films.

Words don't really do justice to how laughable this film was. A huge disappointment, the plot and the motives made no sense, the characterizations was useless and the swearing was totally unnecessary and the ending in the warehouse was simply stupid. Really? Who did not guess that Pacino was the man!!! Avoid like the plague.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Contrived and Clichéd

Author: isabelle1955
26 September 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is a very contrived vehicle for Robert De Niro and Al Pacino with almost nothing to recommend it that I could discern. It contains every cop movie cliché in the book, lots of 'manly' dialogue and ends with our two cop buddies spouting deathbed philosophy.

On a broad scale, movies come in three sorts;

1. Stories that just have to written, because they need to be told. Often these are based on real events. Then someone thinks about how to put it on screen and who might be good actors to cast in the various roles.

2. The truly vivid, memorable imaginings of someone really creative who wants to construct an entertaining fantasy. Then, as in number 1, someone thinks about who might be good actors to cast in the various roles.

3. Highly contrived (and often unlikely) vehicles for Big Names, who want to make another movie, and may have convinced a studio exec that they can fill a few seats in movie houses. And get paid a lot.

In other words, in 1 and 2 the story comes first and in 3, the actor comes first. I'm a big fan of the first two, and very dubious about the third. And I'm afraid Righteous Kill comes squarely in category 3. I didn't actually hate it, but it overwhelmed me with indifference. And I used to love these guys!

De Niro (Turk) and Pacino (Rooster) – and even the names put me off – are two veteran (very veteran, but more of that later) New York cops. They are working a case which appears to involve a serial killer who has set himself up as judge and jury to take out the nasty people the courts let off. They may or may not have put the wrong person away for a murder some years before. The sticky, serial killer, finger of guilt is pointing inexorably to it being one of their own, a cop. It's really just a case of staying awake long enough to establish which one of our tough guy, anti-heroes it is.

Now it seemed so blindingly obvious to me within the first half an hour who the guilty party was, that I thought it must be a double bluff. You know, it's so obviously X, that it must really be Y, but, hey, that's too simple too so really it's X after all but we're supposed to think it's Y etc. But no. It really was that simple. It was X all the time, and any double bluff was merely my over-active imagination striving to keep me interested. (Although I will say in the movie's defense that my spouse didn't 'get it' until the very end. Unfortunately that may say more about him than it does about the movie! He'd had a tough week at work.)

I hate to have to say this, but De Niro and Pacino are just too old to convincingly play tough guys any more. Pacino bears a passing resemblance to Keith Richards these days, and although De Niro may have weathered slightly better, I kept thinking as I watched this, that no studio would ever cast two grizzled women in their sixties as street wise cops, so why am I ( a grizzled woman in my 50s) supposed to find these two guys convincing? The female characters are the usual run of plain but virtuous, weeping rape victims and semi-clothed quasi hookers, beloved of tough guy cop movies, except for the token CSI copette Karen Corelli (Carla Gugino) who is, of course, a stunner. (She appears both clothed and semi clothed.)

We see very little of her professional aptitude, but our Karen loves nothing more than a bit of rough sex with Turk and as there are only some 28 years between Gugino and De Niro, I should probably be grateful she wasn't bonking Rooster. In one particularly gratuitous scene Karen gets sexually aroused by Turks' vivid description of the violence inflicted on a suspect, which is doubtless intended to get that vital 18-30 male demographic giggling, but should really have the whole NYC female police corps out on strike in protest. At the vital moment she loses her bottle and can't shoot the bad guy.

Sigh…………… I just find such sexist tripe so tedious these days. I can't imagine where my sense of humour went? I mean it was funny the first two or three hundred times I saw it. In movie after movie. But now? No thanks.

Definitely 2 thumbs down for this clichéd, hackneyed, tedious B flick. De Niro and Pacino, do you really need the money THAT much?

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 2 of 25:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history