El halcón está suelto

I'm torn on HUDSON HAWK. After watching it, part of me went, "What the hell was that?" But another part suggested that maybe I wasn't hip enough to "get" what it was trying to do. Part of me thought it was a completely ridiculous waste of time. Part of me thought it was just good, clean fun.

Though certainly not for everybody, there are enough redeeming qualities in HUDSON HAWK to avert its dismissal as a multimillion-dollar turkey. Bruce Willis is Eddie "Hudson Hawk" Hawkins, a cat burglar intent on retiring but who is forced to steal Da Vinci works of art for a (gasp!) world domination plot. Along for the ride are Tommy Five-Tone (Danny Aiello), mysterious nun Anna Baragli (Andie MacDowell) and conniving bad guy George Kaplan (recognize that name?) played by the late James Coburn.

The plot sounds like it could have made for a good DIE HARD-style caper, but director Michael Lehmann had other ideas. As he reveals in the DVD version's audio commentary, HUDSON HAWK was meant first and foremost as a comedy. Trouble is, it was promoted more as a Bruce Willis action blockbuster. Audiences were left scratching their heads as their favorite tough guy engaged in Stooge-like slapstick, sipped cappuccino and, most astoundingly, crooning Crosby classics.

Not that mistaken expectations are the only thing wrong here. Indeed HUDSON HAWK is simply too silly for its own good. The gags frequently fall flat, nearly embarrassing the talented performers involved. The plot is overly convoluted, and Richard E. Grant and Sandra Bernhard as the villainous Mayflowers are a bit hard to take. At its lowest points, you'll be astounded something like this could receive a theatrical release.

To get the most out of HUDSON HAWK, go in with an open mind. It's unlike anything you've seen before -- in both good and bad ways.

Is this a great movie? Not really. Will I absolutely stop and watch it if I happen to see it's on? Yes, I will. It's truly an oddball comedy, most definitely not every joke works, but its manic energy and silliness still manage to crack me up.

The real credit, for me, goes to the movie's two ridiculous scene-chewing villains, Minerva and Darwin Mayflower who pretty well have to be seen to be believed. If you looked up over the top in a dictionary I think you could possibly see a picture of them, and yet they're played with such conviction and flair that I love every scene they're in. For me, without them, the movie wouldn't be anywhere near as fun.

This was one of the first films that I saw when I came back from the Persian Gulf War. It is listed as among the biggest money losers of all time and when it came out it generated some of the most scathing reviews of all time. When Bruce Willis made The Last Boy Scout later that year, one reviewer said "He gets punched in the mouth so many times, he must feel like he's still reading reviews of Hudson Hawk" Willis wrote the story for this film, so I'm sure this must have particularly hurt him, this film put his career in the toilet before Pulp Fiction revived it. I don't think the film was all that bad myself, even though it wasn't Citizen Kane and wont go down in history as a classic I am at least hoping that it might generate a cult following. At least it attempts to be original, you have to give it credit for that. So many movies these days are just rip offs. Willis gives an engaging performance as the cappachino-drinking, wise-cracking cat burglar who is forced to pull off one last hiest. I really laughed at the scene where he and Danny Aiello pull off that robbery while doing such a wonderful rendition of "Would You Like To Swing On A Star". Aiello is a great actor as is Andie McDowell and James Coburn who also give great supporting performances. Coburn has a lot of fun spoofing his tough guy image. It sort of reminds me of In Like Flynt. My best advice is leave your brain at the beginning of the movie and just have a good time. Yes this film wont cure cancer or anything like that, but its still a lot of fun if you just give it a chance.

This movie has no logic to it, it's as ridiculous as many Hong Kong action are and just as much fun! The audience I saw it with liked it a lot. This is not great art, but it is great B movie escapism at its finest. Richard E. Grant does a great job of chewing up the scenery as the over the top bad guy, I even liked the "Swingin' On A Star" duet between Bruce and Danny. Bruce Willis is also ultra cool as the wisecracking master thief, Hudson Hawk. And hey, how can you not love a movie with lines like, "Slurp my butt"? Anh? Ciao!

As the title of my review suggests, this movie got better with age. Don't believe me, check out the reviews. Check out the score timeline. The more time expires, the higher the ratings. That's because when this came out it was panned as a vanity piece - a work of Bruce's ego. But it really wasn't. It was a bunch of mostly A list actors at the time having fun with the script and in general, over acting every scene. When I first saw it, I laughed the entire movie and then the hate started. This was pre-internet so it was mostly movies reviews in magazines or TV like Siskel and Ebert. I began to wonder if there was something wrong with my humor. Was it me? What did I miss? Or was it simply some people just didn't get it. I think it was the latter and with the internet to quickly overrule the critics, this movie went down the tubes.

So it depends on how you approach it. If you look at it as a serious "Cat Burglar" or "Heist" movie, you're going to say, "WTF did I just watch?" If you watch with a big bowl of popcorn and want to se some actors having fun with a movie that doesn't take itself too seriously, you'll like it. Bruce said him self in several interviews that Hudson Hawk was intended as a satire of the genre. He insisted the absurdity was supposed to be part of the charm. Meant to be a joke, but few at the time saw the funny side. If it had been made, just a few years later, maybe after Pulp Fiction, it could have been viewed differently. Don't panic - I am not comparing Pulp Fiction with Hudson Hawk. Where Pulp Fiction sewed comedy and drama perfectly, Hudson Hawk was ham-fisted and comically awkward. Both were ahead of their time with it's mixture of genres: the movie spoof and a violent action film common of the time. Audiences and critics weren't ready for Hudson Hawk's sometimes shaky deliver and thus, by and large generally misunderstood since it fit into neither category neatly.