Scherzare col fuoco

I agree with Chuck O'Leary from Pittsburg. I loved this movie. In fact, in the mid-80's it was one of the first VHS tape productions that made my sorry old Samsung (1973) look good! I ran the sound in "hi-fi stereo" through my stereo rig and this was my first home theater (don't laugh!). Anyway, the story is good and if you like Burt, well, you have to see the movie. Unfortunately, no DVD out yet, nor any great demand. But, hey, if Green Ice can be released on DVD, can Stick be far behind?

Things to look for on the (eventual) DVD . . . the many fine Florida sunsets. There's lots of "perfect lighting" in this movie, with both exterior and interior shots. The bad guys are sufficiently deserving of your verbal lashing. Finally the soundtrack is very mood inducing but not ornate. Think Miami Vice meets Live or Die in LA. I'd give the movie as a whole, 7 out of 10 stars, especially considering its age.

Oh one last thing, very important. Hit the mute button when Candice Bergman starts to sing. Life's too short. . . .

A few years ago I was working at Blockbuster Video and bought this movie brand new for $1.00 on VHS. It was worth it. Most people don't like this movie, but I have a certain fondness for it. I am a huge Elmore Leonard fan and also a Burt Reynolds fan so I liked it. I admit that it has flaws like Candice Bergen's wooden performance. But it has two great acting jobs by Charles Durning and the late stuntman Dar Robinson as the albino hit-man Moke. His performance is truly terrifying. It is terrific when Burt taunts him as Bunny Eyes. Durning is also great as a red haired drug dealer. There are a few good action scenes at the beginning and then at the end. The middle of the film drags. If only the intensity of the beginning could be kept up to the finish this would have been a great film.

Having read some of the comments from other users and some of the reviews, this film has come in for some criticism. Whilst some of the comments are fair, I think it's important to take into context the life of this film. Another user has already pointed out that Reynolds was suffering with TMJ at the time of the release and had a few flops before hand, so his star was on the wane. However, this movie was supposed to have been released in 1984 and initial filming (judging by many scenes) indicate Reynolds was in good health. Somehow the studio didn't like the first cut of the film,not enough action,too slow,not good for box office. However, the film as a character piece may well have been quite interesting and judging by the first 15 minutes which were excellent,less studio meddling would have more beneficial in this case. Reynolds did not want to make an all out action film but the studios panicked and asked for re-shoots. By this time though, Reynolds had lost a lot of weight due to the TMJ problems and was clearly neither in the physical or mental state to shoot these extra scenes. As a result, we have a number of scenes where Reynolds is markedly thinner than in other scenes. This creates a very disjointed look and obviously doesn't help the film at all. It would be very interesting to see the original cut as Reynolds intended - i'm certain it would have ended up being a far better movie than the result we got. As it stands, I think Stick has some very good moments and some very sub-standard moments. The good are the first 15 minutes,especially the scene with Mokey,Rainy and Stick in the van - nice tense atmosphere in the van, well directed. Other good scenes are when Stick has to remove the ex-driver from the party ('now say goodnight' as he poured gasoline over his face and flicks out a lighter), the mo-key death scene (a superb stunt and not bettered for many years),the scenes with Candice Bergen and Burt (i thought they quite effective). The sub-standard are the poor editing, healthy Burt, v.ill Burt..it's very obvious.Some of the action scenes,especially where sticks stops and waits for mo-key to catch up? the training sequences - why show that, is this Rocky..bit of vanity for Mr Reynolds there i think. The ending was a bit weak..i don't think it was originally intended to be like that - i haven't read the book, so i could be wrong but again we had ill Burt in this scene. In conclusion, this movie could have been a lot better that it was but due to a number of circumstances it turned out to be an fairly average Burt Reynolds thriller. Could have been another Sharkeys but not meant to be. A shame really, now where is that original cut?

When I read the novel I had no problem picturing Burt Reynolds as the charming and laconic ex-con. And supposedly Reynolds himself thought he was perfect for the part. Unfortunately, the studio demanded he re-shoot the second half of the picture, basically trading in Elmore Leonard's scam plot for brutal action. There's always something very satisfying about watching Burt kick ass, so even if I was wondering why anyone would want to trade Leonard's smart and funny writing for a run-of-the-mill action script, I still enjoyed the finale of Stick.

Still, the Ernest Stickley from the novel called for the more lighthearted Burt from Semi-Tough, Hooper and Rough Cut. I would have loved to have heard Burt deliver some of the smart-ass lines Leonard wrote for the character in the novel. Also, some scenes just don't make a whole lot of sense now, like Stick wanting to learn about investments from Kyle or the movie pitch scene. Both of these were pivotal in the book, but just go nowhere in the film.

There's a lot of good stuff though. The scene on the balcony is awesome, the scorpions were a nice touch (not in the book!) and I liked the way the murder in the beginning was handled, with Stick's subsequent getaway through the corn field.

If you like Burt Reynolds Stick is certainly worth your time, just don't expect a faithful adaptation.

"Stick' is a fairly routine Burt Reynolds action film. I was never convinced that Reynolds motivation, revenging the death of his drug runner friend, felt warranted. The villains are highlighted by a brutal albino, and Charles Durning wearing a ridiculous wig. Cartoon like violence detracts, and were it not for some welcome humor associated with George Segal's flamboyant character, the movie would be totally forgettable. Candice Bergen as Reynolds love interest is cold as ice, and never convincing in her role as a financial adviser to Segal. The choppy editing and lack of any suspense further detracts. I would say that "Stick" is watchable but has little to recommend it. - MERK