44 minutes de terreur

So, there I was, dozing off in bed, about to turn off the TV when this movie starts up, Michael Madsen's eyes on the screen, giving the first monologue about how 90% of cops wind up never shooting their weapon. I was hooked right there.

The first act gives us a summary of a normal week-day's early morning preparation, getting ready for a day on the job, putting on your work clothes, making sure your name tag is straight, revising your weapon: all the things that define you.

The second act is the violence. While the robbers sit in their car outside of a Bank of America waiting for their initial target, the other primary actors are doing their jobs of law enforcement. When the target arrives, it doesn't go where the heavily-armed thieves have thought it would: confused, they decide to rob the bank. Everyday people see them enter and call in the emergency. Chaos ensues. When the duo emerges from the bank, they are met by dozens of police officers. The shootout begins with bullets flying everywhere from AK47 machine guns. The police figure out the two men are wearing body armour as they seem impervious to the return fire. Endless volleys and blood spattering moments as projectiles rip through vehicles, buildings, making targets of anyone and anything. Eventually, the bank robbers are stopped by sheer determination on the part of the LAPD.

The third act is the aftermath: destruction of public property, picking up the used brass casings, a review of the injuries, recognition of the heroism under extreme fire. And a denouément that shows how life just goes back to "normal" afterwards: the bank reopens the day after, life affirmation and dedication. We see in the final scenes a close up again of Michael Madsen describing the events and his reaction, and the camera pulls out to reveal that it is part of a sequence being worked on in an editing bay of one of the television stations that covered the shootout.

This made-for-TV production is absolutely gripping. It is almost a documentary re-enactment, but for small embellishments that hold interest by making the participants human and are dramatization. You may find yourself unable to take your eyes off the screen as it plays out. Madsen, Livingston and van Peebles give us good performances.

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")

Plays off as a "day in the life of" at first, which was a pretty good move, I thought. Kind of "Cops"ish, with periodic interjections from the officers involved in the shootout, which does well to give the viewer the mindset of the people. I had a problem with some of the scenes of the two gunmen alone, making comments back and forth, which we don't really know what they were thinking, or saying, since it isn't like they are available anymore to tell us. But, dramatic license and all, it's hardly anything that Fox can't be forgiven for doing. They did an exceptional job with the firefight. You really get a sense of the sheer chaos that was happening then. The freeze frame cuts for commercial breaks were a nice touch as well, giving you a snapshot of the moment, which as I understand, happens in the mind of people in these types of situations sometimes.

The movie was credible, and nicely done. You don't get the full effect by just watching the action in the last hour. The narrations given, and the scenes from the first hour, help set the tone for what started out as an average work day in Los Angeles, but then sank an entire area into a heated war zone before lunchtime had even come around. Wouldn't have been one I'd have paid money to see, but for a made-for-TV-movie, I've seen a whole lot worse, but more importantly, not many better.

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

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.