Out in Fifty

As much as I love Mickey,it has become evident that when he stars in a bad movie he gives a bad performance.Just like most of the stuff we've seen him in the 90's OUT IN FIFTY is a very poor movie and Rourke's performance here goes nowhere.In fact he seems totally disinterested. From the irritable intro to the end this film lingers on ,into oblivion. All the characters here are unwatchable.The plot,script and direction are weak to say the least. Luckily since this film it seems that Mickey Rourke is getting some richly deserved decent roles. The man deserves a break.He was afterall the most charismatic actor in the 80's. I await his comeback with bated breath.........but if one is expecting to capture his former glories in this movie......forget it.In fact avoid Out In Fifty with a vengence because it may put you off Mickey Rourke for good.

Here we have the basic formula for a revenge story. Mickey Rourke stars as cop whose wife is accidentally killed one evening whilst entertaining a strange young man. He then starts stalking the convict on his release.....which leads to Rourke's lust for revenge. Had the story been this straight forward on screen then it surely would've bored me to tears, but the films eccentric characters and the complex relationships within the film carry it completely. Balthazar Getty makes a cameo as a whacked out pimp/motel owner Overall well worth a look.

It's unlikely you'll see Rourke in a low budget movie again, since his career has taken off again (finally), so check this out if your a fan.

Let's face it, Out in Fifty is just a movie to kill time watching (but aren't they all?). That said, Scott Leet did an excellent job with his role. The guy's got real star presence. With a little luck Leet will get a break in a first-tier film and make it big. Hey, if a limited-talent like Vin Diesel can make it, why can't a more-talented Leet?

>

Out in fifty. No! More than 50 minutes of boring scenes. This movie did not in any way impress me and my friends. The plot is hard to pick up and the scenes are practically flat and bad. A guy gets imprisoned for accidentally killing a hooker whom he had sex wearing an underwear. And what's another guy doing in that same room? Sightseeing! The next scenes were all boring and nowhere to go. If you haven't got a thing to do, don't pick this movie up in the video store. Just go home and watch the latest news on TV or better yet watch a cartoon film.

The other film is "Point Blank" (1997) In this one he plays a really, strung out cop on the edge. He drinks,smokes, and speaks in monotone. That's not the character, that's Rourke. He's unshaven and mumbles so much you can't hear what he's saying. He has one scene with James Avery (Uncle Phil from the "The Fresh Prince of Bel Air") that's just hilarious. You need subtitles. Just watch it for Rourke's non-performance. If he thought the character "Jack Bracken" was like this, this is an amazing performance begging for repeat viewings. I like Mickey Rourke. He is a excellent actor, with masterpieces like "Year of The Dragon " (1985), "Barfly" (1987), and "Pope of Greenwich Village" (1984). This is just a detour which he will eventually go on the right track.

For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com