encyclpedia

I can see that this movie had much depth, and it takes deep thinking to understand it all. I will still talk firsthand and say that this movie never unfolded it's purpose. This movie was 2 hours and 5 minutes of total drag. Jack Nicholson in his most boring and slowest acting performances I've seen yet. He trys to be this tough, yet sympathetic(retired, have you) detective who goes around picking up clues from things as little as kids drawings. The acting was horrible, yet somehow interesting(what a mix) and everyone seemed to be lost. I can't see what Sean Penn was trying to tell the audience when this movie ended. It makes you hold your breathe for nothing. Although, I did enjoy the little cameo by Benicio Del Toro as Toby. Gee, he would have been better off as the detective(sheesh!). The only thing I enjoyed about this movie was the mystery it portrayed. Though, the mystery went unsolved in debating whether this movie was worth my time. I came to the conclusion that it wasn't. (Rating: 5/10)

Any Robert De Niro flick looks good, because he's in it, but he didn't even shine in this movie. The first ten minutes were the best throughout the entire picture, and that is bad news. It's the last ten minutes that should be the best. Always. Do you understand? Anyways, other side problems were the lame buddies he had, like Joey. It's hard for me to buy that any member of the mafia would have the giggles like Joey did, or even be sympathetic when he was. Watching Robert De Niro cry was like watching a fly take a bath. What's wrong with these directors? Can't they get a stunt double or a better actor for the crying parts that De Niro must perform? The story was lame, Billy Crystal was lame, and so was Lisa Kudrow(what else is new). As for what I liked. I liked how De Niro kept his toughness at times. Seeing him tilt his head to the left and trash talk was always a thrill. I also enjoyed the fish in the big tank while they were in Miami. Oops, did I get off topic? Of course I did, because this movie doesn't have a topic, only the one I brought up about how bad it was. On the flip side, if your the biggest De Niro fan in the world you might give this movie an 8. I gave it a 6. (Rating: 6/10)

It's hard to always understand what prison is like, and Attica depicted an old one, but it was still prison, and it was gripping. This was a good movie. The character played by Kyle Maclachlan was a wimpy one, but yet, a way for us to see things through an innocent standpoint. This was a movie about a prison that was not contained to the proper ordinance and showed what could happen if it wasn't. In that result, it played out to be a movie that can keep you at *awe* and utter despair for the prison gaurds. The role played by Samuel L. Jacson was a good one as well. He is always been such a good actor and to me, he shined in this one, to a point. Those were the good things about it, and my only gripes were seeing naked inmates, Mike Smiths' feistiness, and the totally annoying head gaurd. I forget his name, and I don't much want to know anyways. Aside of those little pests, I enjoyed the film to it's fullest. Frankenheimer did a good job directing this one. This was my rating: 8/10