Les indomptés

I really enjoyed watching this movie. Everyone says that the characters were too young, but that's how young Lucky and the guys really were. Christian Slater was actually a couple of years older than Lucky at the time the movie was set. The age of the characters adds to the amazing ability of the kids to "succeed" the way that they did. All in all, the movie was a lot of fun. Even if you don't care for the movie itself, you can definitely appreciate the determination of these four guys and the power and strength of their friendship. The movie is fast paced and fun to watch, so it does a great job of keeping you entertained. It doesn't hurt to have four hot guys with power and guns, either.

I have loved this film since it came out and I can't believe some of the comments! Did you really expect another Goodfellas from the Brat Pack? Or did you just watch the film so you could confirm your suspicions and have a good moan? The film is very entertaining and well acted. Robert De Niro and Al Pacino may be good actors but the cast of this film is much easier on the eye(!) and I don't think you can fault the acting in this film. Patrick Dempsey and Christian Slater are particularly good in their roles.

Stop being so judgemental and accept the film for what it is - an entertaining action flick loosely based on real events. If you expect a history lesson from the cinema you are bound to be disappointed!

This is a good mafia movie,with good story telling,good acting and good atmosphere.I really enjoy mafia movies,and therefore I think this movie is underrated.The story is not unlike other mafia movies,about robbing each other and killing everyone in the way,but off course with class. Highly underrated,good movie.

This is one of those guilty pleasure movies for me...it combines elements of the great mob movies with fast paced and hard hitting action. For the most part, the director pulls this one off pretty well, at least for what kind of movie he was trying to direct.

I've been reading a lot of comments stating that this movie can't hold a candle anywhere near Goodfellas or Godfather or even Donnie Brasco (all of which are excellent movies). Well, all I have to say is, NO, REALLY?!? I mean come on, with a cast like Christian Slater, Patrick Dempsey and Richard Grieco, what were you expecting? Another Vito Corleone or Lefty Luggiero? This one is aimed at a younger audience (perhaps teens to mid twenties) and I have to admit, they pull it off rather nicely. What I mean is that the movie, though serious throughout, does not try to be an epic, only a high octane crowd pleaser. The action scenes are bloody and well done, and the sets are lovely. Even the acting is surprisingly good, especially Patrick Dempsey and dare I say, Richard '21 Jump Street' Grieco.

What kills me about this flick is that, though it is an exciting movie and a more than anything else, an effective time killer, the direction cuts from scene to scene getting straight to the point and little else. This seriously detracts from characterization and overall storytelling (I totally agree with other viewers who said that this movie should be at least an hour longer). I mean, at the beginning, we are vaguely introduced to our protagonists, and then five minutes later, they are in their twenties, and have already established themselves as small time crooks. How? Movies like Goodfellas and Once Upon a Time in America are great movies partly b\c they had wonderful scenes of the main characters as children, so we can see their motives when they eventually become mobsters.

This one, like I said, jumps from one scene to another, not wasting a second on dramatic pauses or even characterization. It seriously reminds you of a cookie-cutter Jerry Bruckheimer production, minus the explosions. It does have nice touches here and there of authentic 1920-1930's life and old movies depicting that era which gives the film class (the tunes, the model-T's, the dancers, the neighborhoods and finally, the spinning newspaper headlines) instead of just being another Young Guns meets the Goodfellas. However, as I said, the film's objective, to make a fast paced mafia movie with popular actors suceeds, but it also leads to its biggest downfall of limited characterization. It is hard to feel for (or despise) characters without knowing their background all too well...all we get is, hey Lucky had a hard life, Benny likes to kill people, Don Massaria is fat, the other Don is a bad fella...anyway you catch my drift.

All in all, not a bad film, though it should have been longer. Watch this one only when it's on cable or when you have time to kill, for it is rather visually pleasing and entertaining. Overall, it is a movie that doesn't pretend to be something it's not, it's a decent film with a lot of action and good performances. I give it 7/10 stars.

This movie is based on the rise of four leading organised crime figures, from the end of WW 1 to the early thirties. The central character, Charles (Lucky) Luciano (Christian Slater)is credited, if that's the right word, for introducing modern corporate governance to a group of organisations previously based on ethnic affiliation and loyalty to a chief. So, in the movie he and his associates Meyer Lansky, Frank Costello and Bugsy Siegel works to bring down two aging Dons whose time has come. The Dons, played by Anthony Quinn and Michael Gambon, are certainly ruthless, but their imaginations are limited. The young turks on the other hand see new markets and new alliances. In the new mafia, Irishmen, Russian Jews and others work alongside Italians.

The period is evoked beautifully in shades of brown and cream. Unfortunately many scenes have a certain sameness to them - a couple of hoods meet in some office or hotel for a delicate business chat, each armed to the teeth. When an impass is reached the guns blaze away. This gets boring after a while and you start to wonder why they don't use the phone sometimes. It isn't because the FBI are after them (the IRS was a bit more successful) and they have the New York cops in their pocket. There are some very bloody scenes depicted with gratuitious graphicness.

Luciano and to a lesser extent Lansky are quite sympathetically depicted, with many of the killings being of "let's kill them before they kill us variety." Poor old Tony Quinn is put down not even able to remember the guy whose death is being avenged. One thing that does come out is that organised crime was in the US long before the prohibition era, but the money made then financed the mob into many other areas, pre-eminently gambling in Cuba and Las Vegas. Meyer Lansky was the biggest investor in the early Vegas casino the "Flamingo", opened I think, by Bugsy Siegal.

This is a moderately interesting account, though with some substantial departures from the historical record. Apart from all the gore my objection to it is that it glamourises some very nasty people who did a great deal of damage to American public life. The FBI, and all its attacks on civil liberties, justified its existence by reference to organised crime, yet did little to stop it. After the time covered by the film Luciano was imprisoned not through the efforts of the FBI but through those of NY prosecutor Thomas Dewey. Luciano was eventually deported to Italy, after assisting the OSS, forerunner of the CIA, in their wartime dealings with the Sicilian mafia. Al Capone, a bit player here, was famously imprisoned for tax evasion. Meyer Lansky was charged with tax evasion in the early 1970s, but beat the rap. He died peacfully at 81 in retirement in Florida. His family not only maintain his grave, but also a web site about him.