Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

st-shot Developer Jack Browning (Ronald Reagan) plans a daring armored truck robbery but comes up short as the wheel man during a rehearsal. His doll Sheila (Angie Dickinson) contacts an old squeeze and one time promising race driver Johnny North (John Cassavettes) for the assignment but he still has feelings for Sheila, creating discord between him and Browning. The job goes without a hitch but the after plan haywire with betrayal and whacks. The Killers is a reworking of the 48 Siodmak classic where the title characters instead of an insurance agent search for answers. It may lack Siodmak's lush compositions of informing ambiance but it does have Don Siegel's healthy pace editorial skills that keeps the film on a continuous roll as the double cross keeps all involved off balance, the pursuit non-stop. Sexy as Dickinson is she does not have Ava Gardner's smooth fatale chops, her seductive powers somewhat stilted. Cassavettes tends to overacting while the image of the 40th President of the United States acting surly and slapping Angie around is jarring in a variety of ways. Lee Marvin's stone cold killer with a curious side takes the acting honors but watching veteran minor player Claude Akins stretch more than usual in one brief scene deserves mention as well.As noir's go The Killers 64 lacks the light and shadow monochrome of the 48 original as its color stock lights up interiors like a supermarket. What does make it unique is the total absence of a hero in its last man standing scenario where the deep cynicism of all involved never lifts.

christopher-underwood Watched this after being slightly disappointed with the 1946 Siodmak film of the same title. This lacks the magnificent noir opening and other moments of excellent B/W cinema but it makes so much sense to follow 'the killers' than 'the killed'. Also Lee Marvin is so good. Blu Gulager has fun as his younger sidekick and the pair proceed to rip through the background to the 'hit' for which they were hired. Ruthless and violent but always wit a touch of humour, this is a delight throughout. Maybe a little too long is spent with the racing cars but they are very colourful and we get to meet Cassavetes and Angie Dickinson. I'm not convinced by the lady's performance but perhaps that's director Siegel's intention. Too keep you guessing. Its fun to see Ronald Reagan but my, he was a bit wooden wasn't he? He suits the part though as an almost past it Mr Big and is in there till the end, which is really great and completely over there top.

TheLittleSongbird Admittedly, the 1946 film is the better film, it is better-looking, more atmospheric and has more tension. However, in terms of tautness, excitement and the quality of the acting, it and this remake is about equal.The Killers (1946) is mainly hindered by its production values, often looking like a hurriedly-made TV film, with less-than-slick photography (at times) and a drab look. The racing sequences look cheap too and are very clumsily staged. John Cassavetes , for my tastes, seemed uncomfortable in a role that didn't give him much to work with. Some of the script borders on the repetitious side too.However, Siegel's authoritatve direction maintains the terseness, excitement and suspense that The Killers ought to have, clearly understanding that The Killers is the sort of film that should be taut. And that is exactly what the storytelling is like, it is never dull, tightly structured, tautly paced , doesn't feel confused and has real edge and some appropriately shocking violence without being too gratuitous. The last 15 minutes are incredibly well done. While the script has its flawed moments there is still a good deal of provoked thought and wit, and while it is nowhere near one of his best scores- it was a very early one after all, and he was yet to find his distinctive style that he is known for- John Williams' score complements well and has some good tension and energetic bombast.Last but not leat the cast, while I was indifferent to Cassavetes the rest of the cast were to die for. Angie Dickinson does a great job playing against type, and while Ronald Reagan is not that highly thought of as an actor (he is more well-known for his politics) he is surprisingly good in a very bravely atypical villain role and is suitably larcenous in his last film role (some people may disagree but to me it's one of his better ones), one really does feel the sting of the slap in the slapping scene. Clu Gulager is very good and cool, but the standout, and the best thing about the film, is Lee Marvin, who brings a wonderful steely intensity to an 'anti-hero' sort of character.In conclusion, could have been better but has a lot of great benefits. Marvin is the main reason to see it. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Harriet Deltubbo Surprised that their contract victim didn't try to run away from them, two professional hit men try to find out who hired them and why. The story is well told, my only problem with the film was the supporting cast. It's the kind of film that proves that a small story can be much more meaningful than a larger one. A great score and tight editing help. The cinematography is stark and bare, with only the soundtrack adding some effect. From an artistic standpoint, there were some plot elements and character developments I didn't think were totally needed. Watch for Ronald Reagan in an understated role. Verdict comes in at 7 out of 10.