License to Kill

I paid a buck to see this film. Yep, Denzel Washington did not have a spectacular part. I will recommend this film for it's great message. Denzel Washington does well in portraying the helplessness that must often be felt by people who are wronged and have to wait for justice to be done. Perhaps they feel justice does not get done. The tragedy and heartache suffered by the offended and by the offending persons in this film is well portrayed. Don't buy it, rent it for $1.04 like I did. (Is that ten lines yet?) Nope, it wouldn't let me go. So I'll repeat some things for emphasis. I paid a buck to see this film. Yep, Denzel Washington did not have a spectacular part. I will recommend this film for it's great message. Denzel Washington does well in portraying the helplessness that must often be felt by people who are wronged and have to wait for justice to be done. Perhaps they feel justice does not get done. The tragedy and heartache suffered by the offended and by the offending persons in this film is well portrayed. Don't buy it, rent it for $1.04 like I did.

There's really not a whole lot to say about this low budget made-for-TV drama about two families whose lives intersect as a result of an accident involving a young girl and a drunk driver. The courtroom sequence in the second half contains some tension. And the overall acting is decent.

Maybe in its day the movie had some merit as a propaganda tool. But a generation later, the film's blunt, too-direct theme is highly off-putting. The story is not particularly entertaining. Indeed, it is something of a downer. Characters are all cardboard cutouts, lacking any degree of complexity. The family of the victim is highly respectable and squeaky clean. The head of the other family is an arrogant businessman named Tom Fiske (Don Murray) who is easy to dislike. The film's plot is trite and predictable. Script dialogue contains very little subtext. And the film's low-key piano score reeks of cheap elevator music.

I can think of no reason to recommend "License To Kill". Its thematic message of don't-drink-and-drive has long since been pounded and beaten into Americans, the highly moralistic theme belabored, ordained, and codified in countless other ways. To find films with relevant social themes, the viewer will need to look elsewhere.

I picked this movie up because it looked pretty good and Denzel Washington was in it. I was pleasantly surprised with it, though when I realized how old it was, I didn't think I would enjoy it. It turned out that they used Denzel Washington as if he were a main character, but he was barely in it. However, it caught your attention in the horribleness of driving drunk. It should be shown to all kids getting ready to get their licenses and what can happen if you do drive while under the influence. A little depressing, the death of their daughter is very gripping and made me think of my own kids and the potential dangers, but definitely worth watching.

Though Denzel Washington is used to promote this movie, it's not really a Denzel vehicle -- he doesn't show up until halfway through the movie, and during the second half of the movie, his appearances are staccato and brief. In other words, he's not the star.

The main characters are the members of the Peterson family -- father John (Farentino), mother Judith (Fuller), and younger daughter Amy (Meyers) -- each of whom struggles with his or her grief when the elder daughter of the family, Lynne (Vigard), is killed by a drunk driver. The family drifts apart as John obsesses over getting the guilty driver convicted of manslaughter; Judith sinks into helpless depression; and Amy is left lonely and afraid, her world suddenly upside-down.

Denzel comes into the picture as the extremely overworked but nevertheless competent public prosecutor Martin Sawyer, who is assigned the case against the driver charged with Lynne's death.

It's not a spectacular movie -- it has its maudlin moments, its result is predictable, and there are times you'll want to kick some of the characters for their obstinacy -- but as I say, it's a product of its time, and there are worse ways of spending an hour and a half. The message is a little heavy-handed, but it remains a valid one, however dated the movie itself may be (check out Denzel's glasses!).

A box showing current Denzel Washinton with an automatic gun and a synopsis that let's you expect a film like Man on Fire looked promising.

But despite what the cover promises, you end up with a badly dubbed (at least German version) below standard lawyer TV film without any surprises or tension. Denzel Washington appears for just a few scenes, playing a overburdened attorney without the possibility to show his brilliancy as actor and the rest of the cast is acting uninspired either.

Granted, for a 80s TV film, it might not be that bad, and without the feeling of being cheated to buy it, but watching it on TV on a very boring day, the rating would be a 3 out of 10. Given the circumstances, this shameless attempt to get another buck out of a low budget production deserves the worst rating of all.