Jack Reacher

A decent enough film, almost a "thriller comedy" at times. It’s something in the style of Gibson's Payback, with one big minus - why did it have to be clear from the beginning that the person who did the shooting was not the arrested man, but someone else? Couldn't they have deceived us for at least half the film? I wouldn't have minded that at all. Otherwise, it’s a quality film in all respects. The opening shot through the rifle scope may steal from Two-Minute Warning, but then it's one great scene after another, with the bathroom scene being somehow perversely successful and the sensational car chase making me feel sorry for the beautiful mustang. I liked Tom Cruise better here than I did in Mission: Impossible, I liked Rosamund Pike as much as always, i.e., very much, and Robert Duvall was just the cherry on the cherry cake. As for composer Joe Kraemer, I hope that after Jack Reacher he will start getting more jobs like this, because he obviously has ideas and he knows how to do it. (15/06/2013)

This was great! It’s a fantastic genre film, which sprinkles one cliché after another in such a cadence that I snorted with joy for two hours. The film works in every conceivable way, from the (un)predictable story, the fitting music, and the hero’s catchphrases, to a few scenes that want to be quoted time after time (the opening, the bathroom, the chase, and even the rainy ending). This isn’t going to be the only movie theater screening. (02/01/2013)

You'd think they could always have gotten Nicolas Cage, since he must always be available. Instead, however, they pass the baton to Richard Krajčo's reject hobbit brother, who channels Langdon, the Equalizer, and that fighting guru with his heart in the right place, Michael Jai White, and mixes them all together with the kind of guy who goes on a castle tour and constantly snorts mockingly at every sentence the tour guide utters. It's a film so monumentally lacking in charisma that even Rosamund Pike rolls her cleavage on the table out of boredom, just to give the viewer motivation to sit through the scene. When a bunch of frenetic humor starts coming out of nowhere, it's like someone making fart noises with their armpits at their parents' funeral, and I've forgotten to mention the action scenes, which have no concept or choreography whatsoever, but are dominated by the kind of exposition that puts Ben Hur to shame. And most importantly, I don't know, but if according to the ratings this film really offers that whiff of the "good old-fashioned decent" crime film that makes every one and a half people here clutch at their hearts, I don't understand the low rating of Road House, which it kept reminded me of. (27/04/2015)

With a few exceptions, I generally don't like these types of movies. This film is shot professionally and has a good cast, so it gives the impression of a solid genre spectacle, but one it cannot fulfill. The director seems to have no clear idea of which genre he wants to be part of. Even a top-notch crime thriller would not be ashamed of the opening scene of the assassination, and the film initially appears serious and repeatedly returns to this expression. But while the murders may look brutal, suddenly a serious scene is followed by shots from a crazy grotesque, and in my opinion, this change of tone does not work at all for the film. Genre hybrids sometimes work and they can be charming, even irresistible. Unfortunately, Jack Reacher isn't one of these in my opinion. The ending is also predictable and completely undermines the feeling of the scenes that were done well. Overall impression: 25%. (28/01/2016)

I can’t remember seeing a movie which was be so likable, while at the same time undermining itself so much. The “good honest" thriller style of the 90’s has gone out of fashion, so every attempt to revive it is nice to see. Reacher has the advantage that despite being serious it doesn’t take itself too seriously which is even more admirable if we take into account the casting of Cruise who is certainly not the right person for the role of charismatic guys reeking of testosterone. Also worth mentioning is the cool directing (and that’s not just because of the opening eight minute taciturn sequence) and the emphasis on action scenes which aren’t over the top and involving cheating using CGI effects. Against that, it’s needlessly long. Not that there are unnecessary scenes, but many are longer that they should be and would be more suitable in the cut scenes section on the DVD/Blu-ray. Then there is the predictability of the plot which shifts the meaning of that word onto a completely new level (and it’s nothing to do with the fact that, for some weird reason, we know from the opening scene that this time Barr is innocent). The “who and how" is clear from the very beginning and very soon the “why" becomes apparent too, but the characters find out only after a good seventy minutes. And the biggest mistake you can make is to hire a (non)actor with one of the most charismatic voices on the planet for the role of arch villain, and then to use him as no more than an extra and in just two scenes. Otherwise I was satisfied and hopefully for number two the authors will learn from their mistakes. (09/04/2013)