Hudson Hawk - Il mago del furto

A movie that I've never understood the critics' response against. Yes, it's primarily a Bruce Willis ego-trip. Who cares? It's a _fun_ Bruce Willis ego-trip. He smirks, smartmouths, struts, sings, and strides through every scene. But he still doesn't manage to steal the thunder of Danny Aiello, James Coburn and his band of covert agents, and Sandra Bernhard and Richard Grant in a truly bizarre series of sequences as eccentric (to put it mildly) billionaires. Andie MacDowell doesn't make much of a romantic lead, but even she gets a goofball sequence when she starts speaking in Dolphin-ish.

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.

Hudson Hawk has the dubious distinction of being the final film produced by TriStar Pictures prior to their being bought out by the Sony Corporation and merged with Columbia Pictures.

Plot In A Paragraph: Hudson Hawk, the worlds greatest cat burglar, has just been released from prison in New York. He is immediately blackmailed in to stealing some of Da Vinci's finest work in order to aid a world domination plot.

Bruce Willis gives one of his worst performances as Eddie Hawkins/Hudson Hawk, likewise Danny Aiello is not up to his usual standard as Tommy Hawks best mate, Andie MacDowell is very blah as Anna, Hawks love interest. David Caruso and Frank Stallone are both fine in their supporting roles. However Sandra Bernhard and Richard E. Grant are simply awful. Cringeworthy bad. They ruin EVERY scene they are in.

The movie doesn't seem to know what it wants to be, a slapstick comedy or an action adventure, and sadly ends up being neither.

One thing I did like was a running joke in the movie that has Hudson and his partner Tommy (Aiello) singing songs concurrently but separately, to time and synchronize their exploits. Willis-Aiello duets of Bing Crosby's "Swinging on a Star" and Paul Anka's "Side by Side" are a bit of fun in an otherwise mixed bag.

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.

...no, don't take it seriously, as the movie doesn't take seriously itself. It's as funny as it's silly, and that's what makes it enjoyable. Characters are all dumb, the good guys are no saner than the cartoon-looking bad guys, the story is just the basement for a set of somehow childish jokes that, even being a grown up, I really enjoyed when I watched it a couple of decades ago. I decided to watch it again today, to find that it's still funny enough to have a nice time in the couch.