44 Minutos

This movie is surrounding the events of February 28, 1997 in Los Angeles. More specifically, a bank robbery gone wrong. Although I have heard of many inaccuracies in this movie, it was still an enjoyable action flick, despite the fact it was based on a true story.

The shootout between the two bank robbers, Larry and Emil, and what seemed to be just about the entire LAPD lasted 44 minutes. This is a huge amount of time in real life and is probably the longest gunfight I have seen in the movies as well. I can't think of a longer one right now anyways. So after getting to know the characters just a little bit, it's on with the action, and it was gripping. The sight of the robbers, decked out in armor and standing in the line of fire and just taking hits and keeping it going was awesome. It reminded me of video games where you just keep shooting the bad guys but they never die. In fact, if I had one complaint about the movie, it would be that all the officers on the scene either could not figure out to shoot at their heads or were not capable. I guess the overwhelming firepower on the thieves behalf was just too much for them to think straight.

Standouts in the cast are, of course, Michael Madsen, who can make anything fun to watch, even though his role here was limited. Mario Van Peebles played the deeply religious officer who tried to straighten up kids before it was too late. His character was very likable. Andrew Bryniarski and Oleg Taktarov were great villains, as always, but not much to them. Ron Livingston did good for his role but I don't know if it's just me, and thought he was a bit miscast, or am I just never going to get Peter Gibbons from Office Space out of my head. That's one of my favorite comedies and going from that to a hard nosed SWAT team cop wasn't doing it for me.

Good movie, none the less. If nothing else, I can recommend it for the gunfight. 8/10

I watched this on cable the other night and was very pleasantly surprised. It's well done, with solid acting from old pros Madsen and Van Peebles and very tight directing. The documentary style works well, and unlike most cops vs. robbers movies it shows the motivation and thoughts of the bad guys without glorifying them. It's obviously a bit of a PR piece for the LAPD, but it also makes some really good points about the availability of assault weapons and the failings of the justice and political system in keeping crooks from getting them. The locations used in the movie were the actual locations where the shootout took place, and this added immeasurably to the realism of the story. This film is a real cut above most cable fare and is really worth watching.

After watching the film then doing the research of what really happened, I didn't know what was more unbelievable the film or the raw footage on you tube, even though the film doesn't stick to all of the facts I still couldn't believe that two guys caused that much chaos.

The film seen as it is is actually pretty good but I think after seeing some of the raw footage this film would've been a lot better if it stayed closer to the facts in order to add to the realism, but like I said the overall film isn't bad at all, the performances were great all around, Micheal Madsen's character was likable especially over what he does at the beginning of the film.

Personally I liked the film but would've honestly proffered a different take on the subject matter, at least this film doesn't glorify the robbers by portraying them as the victim.

It tells the story of the infamous 1997 North Hollywood shootout, where two bank robbers, wearing body armour and carrying AK-47s unleashed an unprecedented wave of gunfire at dozens of LAPD officers as they tried to make their getaway.

The incredible footage of this incident, broadcast live from TV news helicopters is unlike anything you've seen before. It's fascinated me for years, seeing such events, straight out of Michael Mann's Heat, played out for real.

So I was looking forward to this one but it was a disappointment and makes me wonder if the story could ever be done justice in a fictional movie. In the hands of director Yves Simoneau it's little more than a bloodier version of the countless Discovery and History channel reconstruction documentaries of the incident. Indeed the film's documentary-style approach, complete with talking heads, just reminds viewers of the fact that it's been done better previously. Instead of real people recounting the events we have mediocre actors. Instead of hard facts we have small inaccuracies and timelines altered for (understandable) dramatic purposes. Instead of the horrifying real footage we have poorly-edited action sequences.

I'd recommend watching one of those aforementioned TV documentaries, or the raw footage on YouTube, to get a better idea of what happened that day. That said, the drama inherent in the story means 44 Minutes can't help but be a moderately exciting film.

On 28 February 1997, two men heavily armed with AK-47 try to heist the Bank of America of North Hollywood, but their plan fails and they are kept under siege by the LAPD. Along forty-four minutes, Los Angeles witnesses live on television one of the greatest shoot-out of the American history.

Based on a true event, this movie impresses regarding the scenes of intense shoot-out, with the cast having also great performances. However, the statements of the characters, showing the LAPD as a brotherhood or family, do not seem to correspond to the reality showed in other police stories in American movies. Anyway, this film is a surprisingly good and worthwhile entertainment. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "44 Minutes - O Tiroteio de North Hollywood" ("44 Minutes - The North Hollywood Shoot-Out")