Turk 182

The Paul Sorvino sequence itself is classic. Timothy Hutton makes a fine hero for this ultimate feel-good movie. I've seen this 3 times, and enjoyed it more each time. Robert Culp is perfect as the mayor. Darren McGavin and Peter Boyle are both wonderful in their supporting roles, as are Robert Urich and David Wohl -- even though they are given less to do. I see a couple people referring to this as a turkey, and I'd like to know why. I thought the characters are very true to themselves, and the relationships were well-thought out, well-paced and well-executed. Forget the critics, just watch and enjoy.

Kim Cattrall looks fabulous. The movie may be old but she was new. There was a short love scene but, unfortunately, there was no nudity.

I miss Bob Urich. How can someone so incredibly healthy die so young.

The movie plays well--heavy, fake accents and all. The one exception to the enjoyment of this simple fare is the soundtrack. What a god-awful music score. It's like trying to watch a fun movie while sitting next to a calliope. Otherwise, I did enjoy the movie.

I'm taking away two stars for the story and to pay for some acting lessons, and two stars must die for the music director's mistake.

-Cosmically-Psychic-Bob

Turk 182! is one of those films that doesn't explain itself. The plot is explained, but the culture and backdrop are not: New York City is presented in all its glory, as the bureaucracy and the politicians who run it are pitted against an injured firefighter (Robert Urich) and his graffiti-artist-turned-political-activist brother (Timothy Hutton), who ensures that neither the Mayor nor the city forget the name "Turk 182!" Kim Cattral appears as Hutton's sidekick/love-interest, and sidecar passenger in his motorcycle, in a role far more "sexier in the city" than anything she turned out in her HBO series. Notables in the remainder of the cast include Robert Culp as the over-the-top mayor who wants to regain control over the "vandalism," and Paul Sorvino in a highly amusing cameo involving the abuse of the Giants' Stadium scoreboard.

In this movie, Turk's brother was injured off-duty while saving the lives of some children during a fire. Since he was drunk at the time, the city refuses to pay his medical expenses, and Turk's activism is born. Like any good graffiti artist, Turk leaves his mark anywhere and everywhere, while eluding law enforcement. As one who was a teenager living in New York City in the 1980s, and who knew several serious graffiti artists, I can say that while the movie was a sanitized version of what they do, they got enough of the flavor of that culture to show its power when confronted with an injustice.

If you've never been to New York, or if you are there now but weren't in the 1980s, the movie is an excellent period piece that will reveal a great deal about the city through its backdrop and subplots, many of which were as or far more interesting than the main plot. New Yorkers generally don't care about anything that doesn't affect them, but when they do, the city literally grinds to a halt, as do the New York politicians who follow their lead.

With so few movies reflecting New York City so accurately, this one is definitely worth watching, and the story it tells, however simplistic and over-the-top in its execution, is still worth telling occasionally in yet another form. This is a very intriguing film.

...the directors of this film hired the Columbia University marching band (or several members of it, anyway, including myself) to be the band for the scene at the Queensborough Bridge. Despite having been in the movie, I only watched it for the first time last night, and did it ever stink! We were definitely the highlight of the movie, despite being made to wear those stupid polyester red bandanas to make our official blue and white uniforms more colorful. It was torture to have to wait for our scene, near the end of the movie. What were they thinking when they wrote this dog?? I'm almost glad they didn't bother to credit us...

OK, I'll have you know that I own a copy of this film so don't think I hate it viciously. It's not a bad story, and Hutton and Urich do well at their heavy New York accents. Actually, if there's one thing that makes the story, it's the thick flavor of 80's NY that runs through it. Some notable bit characters (notably Dick O'Neil) do great jobs as curmudgeons, and Culp and Boyle are completely evil. However, Steven Keats COMPLETELY blows it as a total NY buffoon stereotype- lines like "Dis is bee-yoo-tee-fulll", and "Dis is yoo-ge (huge) wit a capital U!" don't make him much more than a cartoon. Kim Cattrall's acting is pretty flimsy to boot. The ending is absurd beyond words- all of a sudden the mayor and all the cops revert their anger towards him and all cheer on Turk in a complete Hollywood photo finish. Please.

For me, the draw here is pretty much linked to the graffiti aspect of the movie. The sequence where Hutton sandblasts the subway train is fun stuff, as well as the over-the-top feats with the scoreboard, the mounted police horse, etc. But it's important to note, especially in the time period, that no such graffiti writer in New York could avoid massive and brutal prosecution. The story of NY writer Smith has so many parallels to this story it's hard to tell which came first- Smith's late brother Sane has even gone by Sane 182 in homage to the film. Smith painted his name on the side of the Brooklyn Bridge and not only made headlines, he came under the city's first million-dollar lawsuit. Turk 182 effectively makes the mayor look demonic, but only in a silly comic book way. There are some real heroes with real stories to tell from those days; maybe one day a realistic portrayal will come down the pike when people are ready to see both sides of that story.