[Alf S]

Saw a preview of this last week...pretty darn good movie...beats a lot of the crapolla that's come out in the past year IMO...I'd recommend seeing it.

8 out of 10

[Patrick Sun]

American Gangster is competently filmed (I would expect nothing less from Ridley Scott) as a nice period piece taking place in the late 1960's up to the mid-1970's, but the screenplay is a miss because it fails to craft interesting characters from its source material (gangster Frank Lucas and Det. Richie Roberts), and keeps us at arm's distance from gaining much perspective into either men. There are broad strokes, but I think it needed a little more personal backstory explaining personal motivations and heightened sense of justice and morality/immorality than what is provided on the screen.

It's sort of uninteresting to watch Denzel Washington with a no-nonsense scowl on his face for 140 minutes of the 160 minutes running time. There's no sense of charm balanced with brutality, it's black and white, with nary a shade of grey in Frank's characterization. The same is sort of true about Richie's own ethics on display which turn him into a pariah in his own precinct. Many scenes in the final act just sort of peter out, lacking punch and vitality as the film draw to a close.

I give it 2.75 stars, or a grade of B-.

[Robert Crawford]

This thread is now the Official Review Thread for "American Gangster". Please post all HTF member reviews in this thread.

Any other comments, links to other reviews, or discussion items will be deleted from this thread without warning!

If you need to discuss those type of issues then I have designated an Official Discussion Thread.



Crawdaddy

[Chuck Mayer]

This was one of my "target" films this year, and I think it delivered. It wasn't a grand slam, but it was solid and compelling for a long running time. Meticulously crafted, with an exceptional sense of pacing, it works by having two of the best actors in the world playing their own roles until the very end. Scott is working in a field he hasn't before, and gets a lot of mileage out of his considerable directorial skill.

I agree it doesn't delve too deep into either man, but it does present them as complete (to me, at least), while exploring the criminal enterprise with a bit more detail. It does not demonize or exalt Lucas, and it does show the results of the drug influx (though perhaps not as cruelly as it could have) on his neighborhood.

I thought Washington was outstanding, and Crowe did extremely well with a smaller role. Many, many character actors fill the other roles, all doing admirable jobs.

Scott has directed better films, but this is a very solid entry in a very, very strong filmography. Well worth a trip to the theater!

9/10,
Chuck

[DavidJ]

I was a little disappointed by this film and I too would put much of the blame on the screenplay. The direction and acting are both very good, but I wanted more out of the story. In my opinion, the ending was not handled well and I found that I wanted more. What led to Frank and Richie developing a relationship where Richie became his lawyer? Still, the movie is well above average and worth seeing. It is just not all that I had hoped. I would give it a B+/3-stars kind of rating.

[Jose Martinez]

The best gangster movie since Goodfellas!!! Way better than that over-rated crap that won Best Picture last year!!!!!

[Robert Crawford]

I really like this film, but I agree with others that the final resolution told to us at the end of the film could have been backed up with some more flushing out as to how the two main characters came to have such a relationship. Other than that problem with the script, I thought the acting and direction were excellent.





Crawdaddy

[Tarkin The Ewok]

I'm mostly in agreement with Patrick. "Competent" is a good word to describe AG. It gets the job done, but there are no star turns, and it feels every bit as long as its running time.

2 out of 5 stars