Un flic sous influence

Is this the worst movie ever made? No, it's still better than "The Lonely Lady," but it's pretty bad. The most amazing thing about it is the dialogue. It's pseudo-deep, but utterly meaningless. Character A utters an overwrought line that has nothing to do with the plot or current events in the movie. Character B responds with an overwrought line that has nothing to do with anything Character A said. The poor actors torture the lines pathetically in a hopeless attempt to make them sound as if they aren't meaningless, but really deep. I can't imagine how the actors prepared for these roles. "Okay, what's my motivation saying something that makes no sense at all either in terms of my character or the movie at this point?" You can imagine the writer twisting out yet another line of drivel, sitting back and saying, "Damn I'm good." And the director saying, "Look, I know it doesn't make any sense, but try to act like you feel it, okay? You *are* getting a paycheck for this, after all."

This film is a strong candidate to the Ten Worst films in Movie History list.(There are a lot of them running at this time) I quit after seeing thirty minutes of it. It's pretty dangerous seeing such a piece of wasted footage like this. Stupidity is highly contagious as everybody should know.

It could have been a good movie. The premise is interesting, and Pare is a good actor that holds his lines well. Unfortunately, everything about the cinematography was mediocre. The movie was based on a "tour" of strip clubs, and for the amount of depravity shown, there is surprisingly little skin, something that detracts from the allure. The film is filled with guns that hold unlimited ammo and with guys that can shoot 40 bullets from 2 meters away and never hit you. I saw it and enjoyed the action scenes, but I won't see it a second time.

First of all let me tell you that the person who wrote the Synopsis for Blockbuster didn't see the movie. There are reviewers who look at the movie but don't actually see it, but this person could not have even been in the room. The plot is only remotely related to the description. I will tell you up front that it is badly scripted. There are six really bad lines by the first shoot out. Also the guy Robby (Pare') calls "Seven" should be "Eight" as he killed "Seven", seconds before, unless you don't count the head scum. So, some of the dialog is pretty lame. The action is not. Sela is the stepmother, not the brother although I may be guilty of making a too subtle distinction here. Her eyes being different colors (which they don't appear to be on my 159 inch screen) are symbolic of the sexual confusion she lives with what with having been thru a sex change operation. This isn't Raymond Chandler folks but it works for me. The action is good. The skin show is good. The lesbian thing is played only for one shot at humor & I guess a way for Sela to get her hooks into Pam Grier's police character. An interesting side note: it looks like the uncle is played by the same guy in the exact same way as the uncle in Dark City. It worked beautifully in Dark City; not so well here. It is definitely a man's movie. I would rate it as a truly entertaining B movie. By the way the title has nothing to do with the story but that is typical of mystery & action films. Only occasionally do titles mean anything. And give Michael Pare' a break guys, he says his lines with a straight face & shoots people. What more can one ask from a former Canadian male model. drss1942 December 08,2006

A labor to watch. Michael Pare has sunk to new lows by accepting a role in this film which offers a cliched script and overwrought acting. The audience can see the supposed twists and turns coming from a mile away. Pare is in definite need of a management switch in order to get his career back on track and doing the quality of work we all know he's capable of.