IMDb > Gangster Squad (2013) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Gangster Squad
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
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
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Gangster Squad More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 25:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 247 reviews in total 

155 out of 195 people found the following review useful:

You've already seen this movie, but better.

Author: jarryds from Australia
12 January 2013

Originally intended for release in September of 2012, Gangster Squad has belatedly hit theatres this week. The film follows the story of LA crime boss Mickey Cohen and a group of off-the-book beat cops to bring him down. "Based" on a true story (What movie isn't these days?) the film and its fantastic cast promise much but come across as bland and boring.

Set in Los Angeles in the 50's, Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn) is a crime lord who has taken over and there seems to be nobody who can stop him. The few good cops are outnumbered by the cops Cohen has bought and it seems all hope is lost. But Police Chief Nick Nolte decides something needs to be done and assigns good, hard cop Josh Brolin to put together a team to go after Cohen. What follows is the assembling of a team of not-so- perfect cops and the war they wage on Cohen's empire.

Sound familiar? That's because we've all already seen this movie, only done much better. You can tick the cliché's off as you watch. Good cop being grilled by his dirty cop superior? Check. Older tougher cop and his young protégé? Check. Evil henchman of the chief bad guy? Check. The list could go on but would approach spoiler territory. The climax of the film is somewhat predictable about half way through. You can foresee almost all of the events that will play out in the last 20 minutes and while it's enjoyable enough, it's nothing you haven't seen before.

The cast is a who's who list of names. Which makes the film all the more disappointing. With names like Brolin, Gosling, Penn and Stone they should blow you away. But the characters are nothing more than caricatures and nobody gets the chance to portray any real depth, with the possible exception of Giovanni Ribsi. Sean Penn looks bizarre in a mountain of makeup, although it matches his completely over the top performance. Ryan Gosling turns in a nicely subtle performance, but most of the rest of the cast are stuck in cardboard cut out roles with individual stories set on railway tracks. We all know where they're going to go, we just have to wait for them to get there.

Also worth mentioning in the reason for the delay in the film's release. Originally the film was to be released in September 2012, but then the Aurora shooting took place. At that time one of the key set pieces of the film was a scene in which the characters shoot at people from behind a movie screen in a theatre. Realising how disastrously that would be received in the wake of Aurora, the studio immediately suspended promotion for the film and set about reworking that scene. The cast re- assembled in August to reshoot the sequence, now taking place in Chinatown.

Something I liked: Robert Patrick's performance as the grizzled older gunslinger. As a Terminator 2 fan it was great to see him still taking out people almost at will.

Something I didn't like: The predictable climax. At the 60 minute mark I mentally made a list of things I thought would happen in the last 20 or so minutes of the film. Of my list of about 6 things, 5 of them happened exactly as I predicted.

Something that bugged me: The scenes with Josh Brolin and Nick Nolte seemed to be shot out of focus. It was particularly noticeable in the shots of Nolte. For a film with a budget of $75M, this just shouldn't happen.

Summary: Ultimately Gangster Squad is an enjoyable enough 100 minutes but isn't anything significant. There's no great performances, no spectacular set pieces nor any big moments that you'll go home talking about. For the ladies there's an ample amount of eye candy in the form of a suited and fedora-d Ryan Gosling, and for the gentlemen there's Emma Stone and a no-nonsense Robert Patrick. But the story fails to ever really leap off the page and become something. We're told Mickey Cohen is bad, but he's never anything more than "that bad guy". We don't hate him, we don't sympathise with him or desperately want him to be taken down. He's just "the bad guy". The same can be said for all of the characters, and the story as a whole. Which makes it on the whole, ultimately forgettable.

Was the above review useful to you?

158 out of 256 people found the following review useful:

Incredibly Cliché

5/10
Author: mdspittl from United States
8 January 2013

I saw a screening of Gangster Squad last night and to say the least, I was unimpressed. I had decent expectations for the film with a stout cast the likes of Sean Penn, Josh Brolin and Ryan Gosling along with a director whose last two films I enjoyed (Zombieland and 30 Mins or Less). So what went wrong? Like the summary says it was incredibly cliché of every gangster movie out there and tried so hard to be like LA Confidential and the Untouchables. While this movie would have done much better in the 90's I don't feel it fits in this generation of film.

You have Sean Penn as Mickey Cohen who decides he wants to be the king of Los Angeles and he will take out whoever is in his way. Nick Nolte plays the police chief who is tired of the way LA is going and recruits hard nosed, do-as-I-please Sgt. John O'Mara (Josh Brolin) to create a crack team to take Cohen down. From there you have the obligatory round-up-the team where he gets the bi-focal smart guy, the past-his-prime outlaw and side kick, the token black guy, and the cop who doesn't want to join at first but is thrust into the fray.

You then have a typical hunt down the bad guy, have a couple of shoot outs where an incredible amount of bullets fly and no one gets touched, and a very flat romance where you wonder why these two are together for no other reason than they are really good looking. There were also moments in the climax of the movie where the audience burst out in laughter and I feel that it was incredibly unwarranted.

The only real redeeming quality was Sean Penn who gave an intense, powerful performance as Mickey Cohen. All in all I was disappointed in Gangster Squad and feel like the entire movie brought nothing new to the table of the gangster genre.

Was the above review useful to you?

78 out of 104 people found the following review useful:

Guilty Pleasure

5/10
Author: David Ferguson (fergusontx@gmail.com) from Dallas, Texas
9 January 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Greetings again from the darkness. Admittedly, I am one of those who take movies very seriously. Good movies make me happy (even the sad ones), and bad movies make me sulk. Every now and then, one comes along that I find myself enjoying despite the warning buzzers blasting in my film snob brain. Such is the latest from director Ruben Fleisher (who also directed the entertaining Zombieland).

"Inspired by true events" should always be interpreted as a disclaimer that the movie will play fast and loose with history and the details of the story. Sean Penn plays Mickey Cohen, a renowned Los Angeles gangster from the late 40's. Due to widespread police corruption, Police Chief Parker (Nick Nolte) authorized an "off the books" team to take down mob operations (gambling, prostitution, etc). This much was documented in Paul Lieberman's book. How this story is presented by Fleisher and screenwriter Will Beall (signed on for the Justice League movie) has more in common with a comic book than actual history.

The movie is extremely beautiful to look at. It's slick and stylish with a glamorous color palette, and the production design is top notch - capturing the look and feel of a booming Los Angeles. If you are expecting the next "L.A. Confidential" or even "The Untouchables", you will be disappointed. It's more in line with "Dick Tracy", "Scarface", and "Hoffa". In other words ... it looks great and the action, characters and dialogue are all way over the top.

The cast is superb, but most are underutilized. Josh Brolin is the tough leader of the squad that features Ryan Gosling (the token cool womanizer), Robert Patrick (the token dead-eye gunslinger), Anthony Mackie (the innercity, knife-wielding token black cop), Giovanni Ribisi (the token geeky electronics expert), and Michael Pena (the rookie and token Hispanic cop). Unfortunately, my crude descriptions are just about as in-depth as the movie goes with any of them. In fact, Yvette Tucker playing Carmen Miranda, gets almost as much screen time as any of these cops as she sings "Chica Chica Boom Chic".

The violence is cartoonish in its fervor. The aim of these gangsters is among the worst in movie history, and that's quite an accomplishment. Using Tommy Guns and pistols, my estimate is that one in every 167 shots actually hits an intended target. Many elaborate set pieces are destroyed in the process. The exception is Robert Patrick's character, who is actually featured in a detective serial. He never misses ... even after being wounded. Penn plays Cohen as a ruthless mob boss, unwilling to accept any failure from his crew. And you know what that means. No pink slips here ... just ugly death via power drill, burning elevator or classic car tug-of-war.

An interesting note is the presence of three actors from recent cult TV shows. Holt McCallany (Lights Out), Mireille Enos (The Killing) and Troy Garity (Boss) all have key roles in the film, as does Jon Polito, whose face and voice make him a must-cast in any gangster film.

If you are able to turn off the logical and reasoning part of your brain ... just sit back and enjoy Emma Stone smoking a cig while wearing a red evening gown, an understated Ryan Gosling with an odd speech pattern, Sean Penn wearing a prosthetic nose and spewing hilarious bad guy lines, and the creepy feeling that Josh Brolin is just 25 years away from looking and sounding exactly like Nick Nolte ... then hopefully you can take this one for what it is - a guilty pleasure. www.MovieReviewsFromTheDark.wordpress.com

Was the above review useful to you?

107 out of 167 people found the following review useful:

No names. No badges. No mercy.

7/10
Author: moviewizguy from United States
7 January 2013

Glossy, slick, bloody, violent, dumb, crowd-pleasing, and undeniably entertaining. Filled with every gangster genre cliché rolled into one, GANGSTER SQUAD ain't high art, nor is it aiming to be. It seemed as if director Fleischer was trying to tell this story in the most fun possible way, and he succeeds with flying colors. The film is at its best when its loud and dumb but falters when it tries to be anything more than that.

The cast seems like they're having fun, especially Sean Penn who has a field day with his role as the villain Mickey Cohen. The lines he's given are pure gold. Josh Brolin does a great job as the lead and Ryan Gosling is charming and charismatic as usual. However, Emma Stone is underused with a thankless role, but it's nice that she's in the film anyway. Overall, GANGSTER SQUAD is fun entertainment. No judgments, little pretense.

Was the above review useful to you?

107 out of 176 people found the following review useful:

Penn wants to be De Niro and Pacino simultaneously, but instead emerges ridiculous.

4/10
Author: GoneWithTheTwins from www.GoneWithTheTwins.com
10 January 2013

When it stays light and adventurous, "Gangster Squad" has its minutes of spirited entertainment. But too often it attempts to mimic other films while pulling back the reigns of exuberance for a much darker approach. Zigzagging between callous seriousness one minute to comical zaniness the next, the film offers a mishmash of tones, styles, and gangster movie clichés. Consistency is not its strong point. By the third time slow-motion shootouts and glamorous dames awash in billowing cigarette smoke give way to tedious villains and brooding montages, any sense of direction vanishes - along with the fun.

It's 1940's Los Angeles and power-hungry mob boss Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn) begins a relentless quest to take over the entire city. In order to stop him, Police Chief Parker (Nick Nolte) tasks gung-ho Sergeant John O'Mara (Josh Brolin) with creating the "Gangster Squad," a secret group of unorthodox officers who will stop at nothing to bring Cohen down. Quickly becoming as ruthless as the very thugs they're assigned to apprehend, O'Mara, Wooters (Ryan Gosling), Harris (Anthony Mackie), Kennard (Robert Patrick), Ramirez (Michael Pena), and Keeler (Giovanni Ribisi) begin destroying Cohen's empire one operation at a time. But when Wooters falls for Cohen's girl Grace (Emma Stone) and the gangster discovers the identities of his adversaries, the battalion must prepare for a war that will determine the fate of the city.

"Gangster Squad" doesn't know what it wants to be. As eclectic as the colors are in the movie (though certainly not as extreme as "Dick Tracy"), so too are the continually shifting tones and styles. The end credits appear as pulpy vacation postcard illustrations (the last of the unexpected fluctuations in imagery) which sharply contrast with the initial scenes of ultra bloody violence (featuring a man being torn apart by vehicles, a la "The Hitcher," which seems like a goofy execution in the face of serious villainy), the later moments of romance, and the climactic showdown in the Plaza Hotel. It's all as hodgepodged as last year's "Lawless," continually trying to impart severity, attraction, adventure, and even comedy at different moments, but forcing the wrong emotions. Several scenes of action will likely garner eye rolls, while elements of brutality will evoke laughter… unintentionally (the incredibly high rate of gunfire is hilarious in comparison to stricken targets, especially as enemies unleash machineguns against pistols and still hit nearly nothing).

Penn wants to be De Niro and Pacino simultaneously, but instead emerges ridiculous, forgetting his accent and tripping over his unnatural, obligatory mercilessness. The language, hats, coats, dresses, flasks, guns, cars, and cigarettes all bring momentary authenticity, but they're no match for the exceedingly contemporary camera angels (zooming through car windows during breakneck midnight chases), high definition slow motion, and overly apparent special effects, which take every opportunity to pluck audiences from their suspensions of disbelief to draw attention to the technical methods. There are junctures of fun, however, in the guerilla warfare tactics, battling crooked cops, assembling a dream team (not unlike "The Untouchables" or "Ocean's Eleven"), and the Wild West, loose cannon, one-liner gun show that is Robert Patrick. But O'Mara's confidence and "bull in a china shop" approach to law enforcement is frequently too generic and consummates in dead civilians, revenge attacks, and massive shootouts in which participants stand like stalwart statues in plain sight while bullets whiz around them, making contact with every prop in the background. Few viewers will be seeing these ideas for the first time.

- The Massie Twins (GoneWithTheTwins.com)

Was the above review useful to you?

64 out of 103 people found the following review useful:

Stereotype-ridden Snorefest

4/10
Author: theredraylives from United States
26 January 2013

Though made for a plethora of reasons, a film need only achieve one goal to be successful: it needs to be entertaining. Engaging characters, good performances, and a story that is engrossing, even if a bit cardboard or cliché. When a film ultimately fails, it is because its characters are wooden or stereotypical, the storyline is boring, and the only question it might raise is, "was this intended to be sleep therapy for a study on insomnia?" Set that film in 1949 and make it about gangsters and cops, and you've got Gangster Squad, a film so inept that Ruben Fleischer should win an award for managing to make a violent action movie that could put an Olympic sprinter to sleep in mid-stride.

Josh Brolin stars as Sgt. Something-or-other, a no-nonsense cop who is recruited by the grizzled police chief (Nick Nolte, who eats sandpaper, apparently) to stop a gangster from taking over Los Angeles. Brolin broods as the take-no-prisoners Sarge, his squad rarely referring to him by name because they probably can't remember his name either. Despite how stylized the trailers may seem, how action-packed and exciting it promises to be, this is little more than a stable of stereotypes loosed upon mid-twentieth-century Los Angeles and hoping not to bore it half to death. It becomes exhausting to try to care about what's going on in the film because the characters haven't got a shred of credibility between them; the only enjoyment comes from Robert Patrick, himself packed tightly into the stereotype of the sharpshooting old westerner.

Sean Penn's utterly ham-fisted Mickey Cohen is taken down, but who cares? The film never makes you care about the struggle against him or the city under his rule; he's ruthless, he's tough as nails, and he's every other stereotype of the evil gangster that Sean Penn could look up the day after he got cast and decided to cram into the character. Every single actor in this film has been utterly fantastic in other films; how could the ensemble be so frightfully uninteresting? The utterly versatile and likable Ryan Gosling is so bland and watered-down that he seems confused as to why he is even in the film. Emma Stone is rendered to eye candy, a crime given her considerable talents.

Yet, as contrived as the characters are, it doesn't come close to touching how terrible the script is. Penn mugs at the camera, his only character direction seemingly "sound more angry" or "be more gangster-y." The film does itself a disservice to not show Cohen's rise to power- it wants the audience to see how powerful Cohen is, but killing his own men for their ineptitude and eating a steak dinner at a fancy restaurant does nothing to imbue the fear that Mickey is supposed to represent into the script. He quite honestly seems rather harmless, and without a villain to care about, the gangster squad's mission to tackle said villain becomes even more pointless.

The real tragedy here is the fact that for two hours, there are guns firing, flashy action sequences and big period set pieces, yet none of it seems all that interesting. It needed to be longer; it needed to go deeper. Having Sarge's wife tell the audience that he'll pick duty over family is supposed to be meaningful, but the scene is unnecessary- the opening sequence with Brolin's character tells everyone that. Too much time is spent between characters needlessly talking exposition at the audience. Time better spent developing a camaraderie between the squad members is instead spent on slow-motion sequences or on Brolin's chin-set, Mickey-Cohen-is-bad speeches. If Mickey Cohen is so terrible, why doesn't a film about his downfall just show the audience that? Not to say that Gangster Squad is completely bereft of enjoyment. The period setting was very well done, with some magnificent costume and set design. It may have been senseless and boring, but at least it felt like it was boring in 1949 and wasn't really out of place. A chase sequence early on with some vintage automobiles is excellently handled, filled with some great explosive tension, figuratively and literally. The film handles most of its gunplay and action sequences quite well, it's just a shame that all the bullets are coming from guns shot by gunmen and are flying at targets that are equally vapid and meaningless. These aren't characters, they're shells, into which an actor was poured and just told to act like a single-line description from an old pulp novel about gangsters.

Despite a moment here or there of decent action, there's nothing redeemable about the entire experience that is Gangster Squad. It is empty, boring, and ultimately will leave the audience feeling... well, nothing. What should have been an excellent period film with gangsters and cops with some depth and character exploration is instead ripe with brevity, with everything thrown at the screen wrapped in a stereotype with so little substance, you can almost see through Mickey Cohen.

Check out my profile for links to my other reviews!

Was the above review useful to you?

58 out of 94 people found the following review useful:

Serves no purpose other than showcasing a series of tiresome gunfights

3/10
Author: Likes_Ninjas90 from Australia
7 January 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In 1949 Los Angeles is a city ruled by the mob. At the top of the crime syndicates is Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn), a ruthless mobster involved with murder, women and drugs. To combat Cohen, the police department look to construct a special squad of cops who will shut down his operations. Bill Parker (Nick Nolte) pitches the idea to honest cop John O'Mara (Josh Brolin), who is also a happily married war veteran. His wife gives him the idea of picking men that have little ambition and therefore less likely to be corrupted. One of the main men to join his squad is Sgt. Jerry Wooters (Ryan Gosling), who has eyes for Cohen's etiquette teacher Grace (Emma Stone). The other members of the squad include Coleman (Anthony Mackie), Max (Robert Patrick), Conway (Giovanni Ribisi) and Navidad (Michael Pena), each of whom has their own specialties.

The most depressing realisation about Gangster Squad is not simply that it is the lowest form of pulp trash, but that it leaves in its wake the question of "what if?" Director Ruben Fleischer (Zombieland, 30 Minutes or Less) has assembled a cast that the most seasoned director would salivate over, only to show complete ineptitude towards authenticity and controlled performance registers. The only positive to be drawn from the film is that it contains some momentarily appealing photography. The rest of the film is a shambles. It's badly directed, allowing for poor performances, glossy over-stylisation, and serves no purpose other than showcasing a series of tiresome gunfights.

How did Warners Bros, who produced some of the most important gangster films ever made, let this happen? It's through no fault of the source material. The film is based on a seven day L.A. Times series by journalist Paul Lieberman, who in 2008 chronicled the real life formation of the Gangster Squad. Historical facts notwithstanding, the film is as it claims "inspired by a true story". It's the treatment of the material that fails. Discussing the film's cop-turned-writer Will Beall, Lieberman stated in an article for the Nieman Reports: "With 'The Gangster Squad,' he understood that the studio wanted to go big, with flying bullets and fists." Evidentially, someone at Warner Bros. felt this subgenre had to be modernised by removing the substance and racking up the violence.

The classic gangster films of the past were more psychological than ostentatious. Filmmakers like Howard Hawks used them as public warnings against the real life threat of gangsters and to pressure governments to take stronger action against them. The films provided cautionary tales about the way that ordinary people could be seduced the allure of power and money, raising their social status but dispersing their friends, family and moral values. Actors like James Cagney transformed the gangster figure into tragic Shakespearean characters that were physically and mentally corroded by the failure of the American Dream.

The heavy emphasis on the violence and the action in Gangster Squad lessens the opportunity for complex moral ambiguity. A character asks John late if there is a difference between the criminals and the gangster squad. It's hard to believe given the film's insistence of what a monster Cohen is, along with Penn's disappointingly monotone performance, which substitutes nuances for snarls and angry grimaces. After an opening scene where he orders someone to be drawn and quartered between two cars, there's little by way of sympathy or psychology.

Similarly, if Fleischer is interested in blurring the lines between the criminals and the police, why does he frequently romanticise their battles with adolescent techniques like slow-motion, freeze framing and careless juxtaposition? In one sequence he contrasts a raid with the Carmen Miranda song 'Chica Chica Boom Chic', as the camera crabs sideways, scanning the crew as they beat up crims. Is there any reason besides including a superficial pop reference? This is true of Fleischer's overwrought visual style, one which desperately claws for your attention, only to remain vacuous. There are pretty moments in the film, like a sumptuous wide shot of L.A.'s neon glowing nightlife and Emma Stone's first appearance in a red dress, but they're designed solely to distract you from the film's emptiness and artificiality, as these colour techniques are divorced from a theme.

The performances in this mess range between embarrassing and vapid, and in some cases, both. Brolin's character is a dull lead, the can-do officer with the beautiful home and concerned wife. I found her surprisingly more interesting but the exchanges between the pair gnaw at terrible clichés: "The war is over. Stop fighting," she tells him. When the rest of the cast is allowed to speak, and some of them aren't, they're embarrassed by laughably ornate dialogue, such as: "This is a war for the soul of Los Angeles!" and "The whole town is under water and you're using a bucket when you should be grabbing a bathing suit". Gosling is the only actor who seems aware of how silly the project is. But his performance is compromised of poses and jokey lines, so chilled that he could play Jerry in his sleep. Likewise, Emma Stone's reunion with her Zombieland director leaves her with only two things to do: smoke and look po-faced. The gangster squad itself is little more than a collection of action figurines, defined by quirks than personality, like the knife thrower, the fast shooter and the Hispanic guy.

I liked this movie more when it was called The Untouchables (1987). A tremendous cast and glamorous production design is wasted hosting loosely connected action scenes, with little substance to support them. Warner Bros. decided to delay the film six months following the Aurora shooting. Or was it because they already knew how poor the film was? Now after the events in Connecticut, how will they sell a film that's only interested in gunfire?

Was the above review useful to you?

50 out of 81 people found the following review useful:

I don't understand the hate....

7/10
Author: Matt_Layden from Canada
15 January 2013

The year is 1949 and Los Angeles is being run by mob king Mickey Cohen. Now, a secret team of detectives and cops form together to bring him down and bring peace back to the streets.

Gangster Squad was a nice romp back to the days where detectives said funny lines, smoked indoors and held tommy guns. Here is a film that looks slick with a nice polish, a great ensemble cast and a story that has enough meat to it for us to chew on. Yet, people seem to be hating on it. Did they all expect another Untouchables? Sure, Gangster Squad has moments where the inspirations from past films peep through, but not once did this film try to be more than the sum of its means. Gangster Squad is a fun film, has thrilling moments and will entertain you.

Josh Brolin plays Sgt. John O'Mara, a tough as nails cop who is willing to put his life on the line for truth and justice. This annoys his very pregnant wife, who seems ready to pop at any moment. She takes it upon herself to help form the team he needs in order to protect him. The team involves: Anthony Mackie, an officer who is deadly with a knife, Giovanni Ribisi, a smart wire tapper, Robert Patrick, an ace with a pistol and his protégé Michael Peña whose eager to learn. The last addition to the team is the young, hot and dangerous Ryan Gosling, who seems to have found himself entangled with the mob king, Cohen's gal, played by Emma Stone.

There are obvious moments in the film where it tips its hat to predecessors like L.A. Confidential and the more obvious, The Untouchables. There is even a sequences involving a stairwell, although not as tense and more by the numbers shoot em up, the sequence is still one of the exciting pieces in the film. Both those films are more intricate with plot, characters and structure, by a mile. Gangster Squad doesn't focus on stuff like that, it wants to thrill you. Which is why some sequences in which we are suppose to care whether our characters live or die don't really pan out.

It has a graphic novel feel to it, very film noir and for those who've played L.A. Noir, will get the same sense of style. While the film looks great in a lot of sequences, that same style has some short comings, mainly the use of CGI as movement for the camera. It's the most noticeable, at least for me, in two scenes. With Josh Brolin in an elevator early on fighting two crooked guys and the second is when Ryan Gosling decides to pull his gun out in the middle of a club. The second scene in question is in slow motion and focuses mainly on his face, but the jarring background movement opposed to the steadiness of his face is just that, jarring and it takes you out of the film and makes you realize you are watching a film.

Everyone plays their roles respectively well, even if the team seems one dimensional. Sean Penn hams it up in a role that demands him to overact. The make up may distract some, but it added to the character for me. He was the one who seemed to have the most fun with his role. A lot of people scream style over substance and this may be true in some cases. I for one never went into the film expecting writing of another calibre and thus I found myself enjoying it a tad more.

There are some laughable scenes due to how cliché they are. One involves a character throwing their badge away into the water and another has the classic, character yelling another character's name as they walk away, when that person stops and turns, no one says a word. Moments like these that are played out in numerous films make me yawn and roll my eyes.

So go into Gangster Squad with an open mind, don't expect greatness, just a fun ride.

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 46 people found the following review useful:

Cliché on Cliché

5/10
Author: lilantman10 from United States
12 January 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I love Ryan Gosling. I love Zombieland. I think Micheal Pena is one of the most underrated actors working right now. I don't know what happened. No Wait Yeah I do this is one of the laziest most sterile scripts that I've witnessed in recent memory. This feels like a studio executive went up to a script generator and typed in "Undercover cop movie" and it printed out the Expendables but with cops . Then he read it and put in " Undercover Cover Cop movie set in classic Hollywood".

To get the positives out of the way, the movie has a great aesthetic. It's beautiful, colors pop out nice and saturated. The actors here are all solid. Nobody is really embarrassing themselves, aside from being in this movie, from their performances and some of them even manage to deliver some pretty cheesy lines really well. The pacing here is pretty good almost too fast, but i'll come back to that. The action is nothing to speak of it's just there. The Direction leaves a lot to be desired, unlike the atmospheric classic hollywoods movies this rips off which have a slow focused camera work to them this is shot like any other action movie. Ruben Fleisher is definitely an actor's director he is able to get decent to good performances from actors, and I don't want to right him off just yet.

The Ugly. This movie is so generic. Even worse it's predictable. I've noticed a slew of genre movies recently that take a traditional typical story and it's clichés and turn them into tropes and strive to make them better. Lincoln Lawyer, 21 Jump Street, End Of Watch, take traditional story and plot points and make them better and inventive . This movie relishes in it's clichés, but not enough to make fun of them. The first thing the villain does it kills somebody. No nuance or tension he just kills somebody. The next scene is the cop whose too dedicated to his job making an arrest he shouldn't as his partner advices him not to. The scene after that he goes into the chiefs office. Had it been more over the top, I was laughing hysterically at some parts not intended of course, I could've enjoyed it more, but it's not smart at all. It even could've been like Sherlock Holmes 2009 or Pirates, but no it's fine being a standard action movie.

The Bad. This movie is written by Will Beall who is currently writing the Justice League movie that is set to come out in 2 years. Yeah, after the reviews for this movie come out and the box office take Justice League will find a new writer. I have nothing but contempt for this guy. This script has no meat it has stock characters with great actors. Once again if this was Edgar Wright or Joss Wheedon they'd get some dimension or have a lot of heart or be really funny, but no. The team consists of The Overdedicated cop, The guy who never misses, The guy who uses a knife, The tech guy, and the Newbie. There either needs to be Character development with a mediocre story, or Story Development with stock characters. This has neither. In every scene you get force feed exposition. If Tyler Perry directed an action movie it'd be like this. No subtly.

****SPOILERS*** There was a line so corny I didn't realize how bad it was Until I left the theatre. Sean Penn is the bad guy, whose scene can't end without someone being killed or yelled at, and he says to his henchmen who execute some one " You know the drill". Then they pickup a drill and kill him with it.. I couldn't make that up **** SPOILERS OVERE

This movie is a bologna sandwich. It's the yellow starburst of movies. Although It is more enjoyable then the Expendables, I couldn't tell you why it's the same idea big cast no effort, This movie is something you watch at a friends house. This is the perfect movie for one night at Redbox. All the people who don't watch 2 movies a day will enjoy it and think it's a good movie. All the smart people can have some friends over with some beers and laugh and make jokes about it and play " Name what movie that scene was stolen from". Basically an alternative go watch Mad Men or L.A. Confidential or go play L.A. Noire much more rewarding.

Was the above review useful to you?

74 out of 133 people found the following review useful:

Captivating and intense, but lacks some substance for those who can't "let it go and watch the movie"

9/10
Author: LindseyThePirate
11 January 2013

This movie has everything you could ask for, in an action-packed emotional thrill ride, provided that you are able to just let go, and let yourself to be engrossed. For those who prefer films that may have a little less predictability, or people that find themselves unable to maintain the "suspension of disbelief", this movie would be understandably less enjoyable.

Right alongside moments that range from somewhat cringe-worthy, to positively grisly, there are enough instances of justice, and pleasant surprises to cause powerful feel-good moments just shortly after even the darkest of situations. I personally felt a constant paralyzing tension keeping me glued to my seat in the theater throughout the entire movie, and couldn't bring myself to leave and go to the bathroom.

The cast and their acting is just about flawless, (though admittedly a bit cliché at times), and the sets and cinematography are superb. Sean Penn is positively frightening, and shines in his role as the villain, while Josh Brolin and Ryan Gosling perfectly portray the face of their vigilante-style band of misfits; The Gangster Squad.

If you are familiar with the story that this movie is loosely based from, you may be disappointed by the fact that it is QUITE loosely based indeed. I feel that this makes is a likable, albeit somewhat predictable movie, but others who expect it to stick with the "real story" may not find it as enjoyable, despite the overall positive tone that the new adaption allows.

Though the reviews seem to be a horse-a-piece, I recommend seeing it and judging for yourself, because it truly is an interesting thrill ride that will have you rooting for the good guys, tearing up from time to time, and cringing at the evil that Sean Penn is able to embody in an absolutely brilliant and stylish movie about good guys doing wrong to take down bad guys doing worse.

Was the above review useful to you?


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

Add another review


Related Links

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