Going In

Talent and entertainment packed into a visually epic depiction of the late 80s. Great soundtrack to complement the aesthetics and story line. Character development follows the unique screenplay to keep viewers entertained all the way through. Flashback to classic 80s action with many clever twists. Classic cars, authentic costume design, witty humour, much needed street hoops and squash... Topped off with a great ending and an overall awesome theme that did not disappoint. Imaginably difficult if this was all on a strict budget but the talent pulled it off.

Toronto is back on the map cinematically!!!!!!!!

Cheat code soundtrack. Fictional street drugs. Montages with the main characters deleting beers. Over the top villain. Crucial basketball scene. This has everything for someone who grew up on 80's action movies. Highly recommended.

'Going In' sets the vibe in the first 5 minutes of the movie and doesn't let go. Our main characters Leslie and Reuben hit the streets to find Reuben's brother who has been kidnapped by a ruthless street gang pushing a deadly narcotic. I won't spoil anything but the ending absolutely rules.

Well shot, acted, perfect pace, and the aforementioned soundtrack rules. Support independent cinema and give this movie a shot.

This movie falls neatly into the second category. It's one thing to make a film on a budget. But a good indie flick makes up for limited funds with a great story, good writing, and most importantly, decent acting. Well, sadly this one lacks all three.

I thought I'd give it a chance but, as usual, I should have looked at how many people rated it on IMDb. The number was unsurprisingly low. That should have been my first tip. Second, of the three reviewers who praised the film, two had only reviewed one film. That smacks of "friends and family" rating the movie. So it's relatively high rating is really meaningless.

I gave the film about 40 minutes and just had to bail. Life is too short to watch mediocre movies. Nice try folks. Better luck next time!

--MovieJunkieMark.

At the movie's intro, the viewer is taken into the world of late 80s Toronto... or what, at least, we're told it is. The plot starts very on the nose of the aesthetics of the late 80s with the characters integrating as they should; living their existences. Then, with the introduction/ reuniting of the two leads aided with alcohol, we see that this world slowly unwinds and descends into absurdity.

The movie is delivered straight the entire time - through its performances/conviction - where we still might not know what's intended by the director. Is this on purpose? Do we know if it's a form of satire? Do we know if it could also be totally straight? Do we know why it's... ambiguous on purpose? The characters (and even actors) certainly don't, and that decision swollenly builds from beginning to climax, then through til the very end. For some reason this didn't waver my attention: only sharpened it.

After seeing it, my summation is this: To start, the writer was dead set on it being funny, but in a more covert Trojan Horse type way. Secondly, the director shows us this world by its style, conviction, and musical score (oh my god that Tangerine Dream inspired synth) with both action thrills and spectacles. Finally, at the very end, the lead actor shoots off a cheap callback pun to let us all in on it: the 1980s were a total joke. Fitting that all of these three things were done by the same guy. Friggin LOL. Brilliant dick move.