ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

Kirandeep Yoder The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

Justina The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

LeonLouisRicci The Director has Made Some High Intensity Films like Midnight Cowboy (1969) and Marathon Man (1976). This One is a Trashy, Gut-Turning Movie that is So Over Emotional and Underwritten it Wavers Between Cathartic and Crass Exploitation.A Very Good Cast Highlighted by Sally Field and Kiefer Sutherland, All of the Other A-Listers are Wasted, the Most Obvious is Ed Harris. This is Essentially a Standard and Heavy Handed Revenge Movie that Does Not Completely Satisfy.The Underground Vigilante Group Seems to Be There Only to Justify the Mother's Motivations and the Support Group, as Irritating as it is, is Just More Insufferable Clichés. The Strength of the Movie is Sutherland's Creepy Killer (delivering some really edgy lines) and Field's Determined Detachment, but as a Whole the Movie is Nothing More than Average Social Commentary.Worth a Watch with Low Expectations and a Tolerance for Over the Top Tropes in a Genre that More Often Than Not Leans Toward Trash and This One is No Exception.Note...However, it is better than every Death Wish Sequel.

Raul Faust You know, as a law school student just about to become a lawyer, I'm much aware of the problems that making justice by yourself can cause to a whole society. That being said, I imagined this movie would try to justify the unjustifiable, but it surprisingly goes in a different direction. The victim's mother becomes obsessive after her daughter gets murdered, but the film never wants to show that she could just murder the bad guy and get easily away with murder. That proves this movie isn't cheesy or formulaic, as I was expecting. The family portrayed in here is very believable and likable, thanks to a great performance made by the three of them-- with highlights to Sally Field, who had an unintentionally funny scene when she swears at the sheriff. Also, directing is professional, doing just like many suspenseful thrillers from the nineties have done. The plot is coherent and well developed, allowing the spectator to understand why the characters were doing what they did, leaving almost no space for doubts. Kiefer Sutherland surely had no hard time on portraying such character, given he did a lot of psychos in the past. All in all, "Eye for an Eye" proves to be a mature film that many of you might enjoy. Recommended.

sddavis63 Sally Fields does a good job with this movie as a revenge seeking mother of a teenage daughter who's been raped and murdered. I suppose to make this worth watching, she has to do a good job with this. The story itself has been done over and over: seeking revenge after a violent crime because the justice system has failed. That's a pretty cliché type of situation and story, so there's not really a great deal to recommend this as far as originality is concerned. But Fields is good, and Kiefer Sutherland is appropriately creepy and threatening as the rapist/murderer. The portrayal of the rape of Karen's daughter was terrifying, but (thankfully) not especially graphic.) The same could be said for the later rape committed by Sutherland's Doob. The movie, in my opinion, also makes a fair point about the justice system leaning too far on the side of defending the rights of obviously guilty criminals at the expense of actually dispensing justice for their victims. I understand the need to protect the rights of the accused, but there does have to be a balance, and that balance is sometimes lost in the system that we have.I was kind of put off by the "group" the McCann's attended for people who had lost loved ones to violence. To each his or her own, I suppose, but I can't imagine that sitting around night after night talking about the same thing over and over and over again is really going to help anyone move on, and I wasn't convinced by the "vigilante organization" aspect of this.I have to say, though, that I did like the ending. What I was finding distasteful up to this point was that Karen was going to turn vigilante, and by so doing she'd be be risking losing her other daughter as well by ending up in prison, which might have satisfied her own desire for revenge but would have been very selfish toward the younger daughter. So, the way she played things, she made sure that (a) she'd get her revenge, but (b) that she wouldn't lose anything more by doing it. So, the ending worked for me. Overall, I found this a pretty good watch. (7/10)

cppguy Sometimes it's more interesting to review the reviews than review the movie. There's nothing technically wrong with this movie. Production values are fine. The acting is fine. Anyone rating this a 1 is an incompetent reviewer. 1-star reviews so far rant that Ed Harris ruined the movie and at the same time wonder why Super Ed was saddled with such a horrible supporting cast. Maybe reviewers should be allowed to vote 4-6 until they prove competency.Back to the movie. So far, I have yet to see a movie with Sally Field where she doesn't shine. While her movies may not be perfect, she's a superb actress. Like Tom Hanks, she generally picks winners to be in (funny they starred in at least 2 movies together). I'm also developing a liking for Joe Montegna. I see him in a lot of films and he brings a nice competency to supporting roles. Same for Ed Harris. I like Kiefer Sutherland in his various movies and he does a fine job (even if slightly over the top here) of being creepy.So let's talk film content. Revenge films are intriguing in many ways. To an extent, that concept is an easy way to develop conflict for the viewer. However, it's much harder to come up with a reason for the vengeance. "The Sting" took revenge to high art. "Eye for an Eye" is not high art, so no 10 from me for the film. A 7 will have to do. Others have compared this to the better known "Death Wish," but I think this was better produced and had better flow. Aspects of the movie are predictable, but I've seen many a good movie that was predictable.Summary: if you're scanning Netflix or Blockbuster for an unseen movie with decent action and dialog that moves at a good pace, "Eye for an Eye" isn't revenge on the level of "M," "The Sting," or "Gran Torino" but it's a decent watch... especially if you like the acting talents of Field, Sutherland, Harris and Montegna. If you like action/revenge films, pop some popcorn, curl up with someone special and enjoy.