Point Blank (1998) User Reviews

"Oh, the horror...the horror...."

[innocuous · 4/10 · 27 May 2008]

There are actually a couple reasons to watch this movie. The first is that, while it's mindless and mind-numbing, there's actually a story and you do become involved enough to want to find out how the story ends. Second, you may actually enjoy picking out the "dumb things" and the totally improbable or impossible.

Of course, there is also the weird fascination of watching Mickey Rourke (at a mere 41 years of age) totally over-the-top with steroids and immediately after one of his face lifts. It was only 12 years earlier that Cimino's "Year of the Dragon" was released, but it seems like it was a lifetime to Mickey. (To be fair, the early 1990s were not kind to him.) YotD was not one of Mickey's best movies, but the contrast between the Mickey of 1985 and the Mickey of 1998 is almost too much to be believed.

Danny Trejo is, as always, fun to watch. Kevin Gage turns in a surprisingly good performance in what is probably the most difficult role in the movie.

I normally don't pay a lot of attention to editing in a movie (unless it's just really bad) but this movie is one of the most obviously-poorly-edited movies I've ever seen. It could be a poster-child for bad movie editing. I'm going to be generous and guess that the editor did not have enough film to work with or that the director failed to block and cover shots as he should have. But with that aside, this movie is worthwhile if only to show your friends or your date what bad editing looks like.

Four stars awarded for having some entertainment value, even if no artistic value. After all, you could have wasted your time on a J. R. Bookwalter film.

What was Rourke Thinking?

[tarbosh22000 · 3/10 · 26 March 2004]

This is one bad film. With clumsy editing, terrible performances and rip-offs galore! One of the major missteps is the editing. Rourke's character Rudy is a supposed "Karate Master" but when he does a roundhouse kick to a guy it first cuts to the foot then jaggedly cuts to Rourke killing him. This is Rourke's monotone years, where you need subtitles to hear what's he's saying. If you somehow hear the wretched dialogue he's reciting, mute the TV. It is better without the sound anyway. Danny Trejo gets shot like 15 times (twice in the HEAD!) and he's wearing a motorcycle jacket! Just don't watch this film unless you're having a party and everybody is drunk.

For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com

Awful direction and editing

[Leofwine_draca · 3/10 · 2 September 2019]

POINT BLANK is a what-were-they-thinking rip-off of DIE HARD, set in a shopping mall where a bunch of customers are taken hostage by a group of prisoners who have just staged a jail break. What follows is plenty of low rent action courtesy of muscle-man Mickey Rourke, who seems to be out of his skull in this movie and has very little dialogue as a result. Expect overacting villains and some of the worst direction I've ever witnessed, B-movie or otherwise; this is chock-full of very bad editing which renders the action scenes laughable and a general lack of sense and cohesion. Danny Trejo turns up and plays EXACTLY the same character as he did in CON AIR, and the sad thing is that with decent direction this could have been a treat for action fans.

Good in a hangover, otherwise terrible.

[juhakoo · 16 June 2002]

This is a very bad movie.

The actors seem to be on drugs, the action scenes are unspeakably clumsy and the plot virtually non-existent. There is a lot of sadistic and unnecessary violence featuring weird slow-motion scenes, which could be intended to cover up Mickey Rourke's slow, bulky moves. There are also terrible sentimental scenes where the convicts tell their life stories in a weepy voice.

Above all this nonsense a lot of boring guitar music plays in the background. In one scene, where a dying man goes nuts with a Gatling gun while thinking about his wife, the music choice is "Silent Night"... It is almost too absurd to speak of.

All in all, this movie is a horrible shame to everybody involved. But even the worst movie can be good in an appropriate situation: Watch this in good company when having a hangover, and there is no end to the joy. This could also be good when drunk, but I couldn't forgive myself if I rented this a second time.

Mickey Rourke, this is your life.

[stephen niz · 1/10 · 21 July 2000]

A bunch of escaped criminals take over a shopping centre. One of them is a genuinely nice guy, so his well-meaning brother Rudy Ray (Mickey Rourke) infiltrates the shopping centre to save him. Still reading? If you were expecting a good film, you've got the wrong POINT BLANK. It's terrible - plain and simple.

It was Greil Marcus, talking about Rod Stewart, who famously declared: `rarely has anyone betrayed his talent so completely'. Of course, the phrase could be aptly used to describe Mickey Rourke. The finest actor of the 1980's (Angel Heart, Barfly, Prayer for the Dying, White Sands, Rumble Fish, 9 1/2 Weeks) always lives up to expectations. Unfortunately, expectations of Mickey Rourke are not what they once were. A string of embarrassing pictures led to a self-imposed retirement. On return, his fortunes have not improved.

If this reads like a career obituary, that's not the intention. Fingers crossed that a Soderbergh, Tarantino or Ferrara can resurrect his fallen star. Anything - absolutely anything - to spare us any more films as bad as POINT BLANK. It's a juvenile action romp, so gleeful in its stupid, sadistic violence it's almost unbearable to watch - and certainly impossible to enjoy.

If it hurt Mickey to have his scenes removed from Terrance Malick's THIN RED LINE, or even DOUBLE TEAM, it seems his role has been reduced here too. He fades in and out of the action - perhaps he's trying to hide in the background. Either way, the results are inevitable, and nobody - least of all Rourke - could care less.

It's not just that it's been done a million times better. The shoddy logic of the filmmakers is inane beyond comprehension. (a) The crime kingpin decides to sedate a frenzied psycho-rapist by giving him a whole brick of cocaine to snort. (b) After tormenting a female hostage, she then willingly performs a private sex-show for the pervert. (c) After the striptease he takes her out on the balcony and shoots her in full view of the surrounding cops. (d) He achieves the incredible feat of actually snorting the whole brick of cocaine in ninety minutes.

That's just one incident that doesn't bear close scrutiny. The writer and director clearly revel in sex/drugs indulgence, and it comes out just as dubious as one would expect. There's dramatic license, but then there's a police force that idly watches as hostages are randomly executed.

And let me assure you my vote of one for this film is no knee-jerk reaction. I tried - and failed - to watch it twice. But much like Mickey Rourke in the ring, his audience has a habit of coming back and suffering again and again.

AVOID!!!

[abooboo-2 · 2/10 · 4 January 2001]

May not be the sorriest I've ever seen, but it's very very close. It's certainly the worst I've watched in a good while, and keep in mind that I've seen "The Haunting". I am totally serious when I state that the title must be the filmmakers' admission that the film has no 'point', that it is literally an entertainment 'blank' or void.

A bunch of hardened convicts break out of captivity and immediately take 8 or so hostages (business must be down) at a local mall? Then they hunker down and wait for their ruthless, business-guy ringleader to figure out what demands they're going to make as Local and Federal law enforcement surround the place? And one of the cons starts indiscriminately blowing away hostages as another con's former Marine (or something) brother shows up to dispatch the villains one by one Die Hard style? WHAT? HUH? WHAT? Who wrote this? Escaped cons would never do that. They would never ever ever do something like that. It is one of the most moronic concepts I've ever heard of. For starters, there would be like 40-50 points of access which they could not possibly guard. And why would they ever put their trust in someone (though he bankrolled their breakout) who they all despise and they know is stringing them along? Doesn't work. Can't do it. Better come up with something else, Mr. Screenwriter. He, like the ridiculous characters in this movie, boxes himself in and tries to blast his way out, with predictable results.

Even given this premise's painful absurdity, the film could at least deliver on all of the routine but fairly dependable and mildly diverting staples of this genre, like say the way the ones starring Charles Bronson and I don't know, Michael Dudikoff do. But it fails badly when it even tries to do that little, as the action sequences are so gratuitously illogical and disconnected to narrative (what little there is) you will cry. And only two of the hostages are even given close-ups (a pretty girl in a mini-skirt and a slutty girl with a drug habit) so it seems like there's about 5 hostages or so, instead of the hundreds you'd think would be roaming the mall at the time of the takeover. Plus, there's lots of inertia in this movie, lots of standing around, as if the actors had to constantly be reminded that yes, they were taking part in the filming of a motion picture and that, don't worry, everything will come together in the editing room. (Uh, not quite.)

As if that weren't bad enough; self-pitying, disinterested Mickey Rourke is the putative star. The film is quite unspeakably ghastly on its own, to be sure, but Rourke's involvement is very much like dropping a ten ton elephant on an already sinking ship. He gives another one of those deadening, lobotomized non-performances that he first patented with that "Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man" bomb about ten years ago. He shuffles and mutters his way through the debacle as if he'd lost some bet to the producers when drunk and had no choice. (Though he must've made them agree, I suppose wisely, that his participation was contingent on his not having to speak more than 50 words of dialogue.)

Rourke is an actor who at some point evidently decided that the drama and spectacle of his own strange life far surpassed that of any movie he could possibly be in. Every movie like this he does seems like a cry for help, just another installment in his sorry, self-conscious saga of self- (and career) destruction. Amazing when you consider how surprisingly good and professional he is in a fine made for TNT movie he appeared in around this time called "Thicker Than Blood".

Every film, no matter how bad, must have a central theme, and this one's seems to be that "It's bad to hurt innocent people". (At least, Rourke's character mentions something along those lines a few times.) Anyway, I think that's something we can all agree on.

So why make this film?

Mickey the Terrible

[frankwhat · 2/10 · 15 November 2004]

All I can say for this one is man did it suck! If the encyclopedia ever did an entry on how not to make a movie it could incorporate a load of information on this one alone. Well at least this established that even with Mickey Rourke's former ability to act well back in the 80's he can not be an action movie star. He does have a great build now but it's so obvious he took steroids...I mean the guy was rail thin back in the day and now he's gigantic. Plus his face looked horrible as if it were going to melt right off. I don't know if it was plastic surgery that went haywire or just occurred from a lifetime of neglect. I'm glad someone else also saw the copying of the scene from "Leon: the Professional" (towards the end and done much worse) because that drove me nuts. It's just like it compiled all these scenes from other successes and converted them so they'd be entirely unbelievable. The supporting cast was just so awful that I'm not going to even start on them because I'd literally be going on for much too long a time. Even with the low expectations I went in with prior to viewing this film I still came out shortchanged. It blew!

Final Acquittance:

Movies: NOOOOOO!

DVD Purchase: I'd buy it just to have the pleasure of smashing it across my knee.

Rental: I was sorry I did.

A poor man's version of Die Hard

[Cinemaniac1984 · 1/10 · 7 February 2015]

To sum up my entire review of Point Blank, this is a poor man's version of Die Hard. In fact, amongst the many various Die Hard blueprints, Point Blank is certainly one of the worst movies. Point Blank is basically Die Hard in a Shopping Mall. Not a bad idea, but this movie fails miserably.

Point Blank is about a group of convicts who have broken out of prison led by Howard played by Paul Ben-Victor (The Wire, Entourage). Amongst the convicts include Wallace played by Danny Trejo (Heat, Con Air, Machete) and Howard Ray played by Kevin Gage (famously known as Waingro from Heat and other roles such as Blow and G.I. Jane). The convicts take over a shopping mall in Fort Worth, Texas and take many of the shoppers hostage as well as leaving behind a large bloodshed. It's up to an ex-cop turned mercenary Rudy Ray played by Mickey Rourke (Angel Heart, Nine 1/2 Weeks) who is a poor clone of John McClane, to save the hostages from the murderous convicts as well as save his misfit brother Howard Ray from being killed.

As I said before, this is certainly a poor version of Die Hard and amongst the brutal violence and unnecessary nonsensical scenes, this movie is terrible. I gave this movie a chance but upon seeing this movie, I realised far too late that I had made a big mistake in hiring this direct to video rubbish. I just lost interest in how the movie ended as it just got worse as the movie continued on.

There are better action movies out there, and there are certainly superior versions of Die Hard out there. Avoid this movie.

1/10.

* OUT OF FIVE

[bronsonskull72 · 2/10 · 13 July 2003]

Mickey Rourke stars as Rudy Ray a soldier who breaches a group of terrorist's stronghold (This time a mall being held hostage) to save his brother and thwart the terrorists in this mind numbingly awful movie that is so dumb it doesn't even have a sturdy handle on the lame plot. No redeeming value.

not as horrid as it's made out to be (almost reached guilty pleasure status)

[movieman_kev · 7/10 · 22 April 2007]

Gay Howard, a prisoner convicted of white-collar crimes masterminds a prison break while his fellow prisoners are being transported. They succeed and hole up in a local mall where they take hostages and try to make demands of the police who surround the place. Unfortunately for the criminals a former mercenary and all-round tough guy, Rudy Ray (Mickey Rourke) is after them, in no small part because his brother is one of the escaped prisoners. Check your brain at the door for this one, folks. It's all about explosions and lots of gunfire. None of it makes much sense under scrutiny and the films ever so slightly homophobic (I referred to Howard as 'gay Howard' earlier in the review as the film makes it abundantly clear). The action is good, if utterly ridiculous and the film apes from MUCH better films (Die Hard, Leon, etcetera), but fans of Rourke or Danny Trejo (who is suitably over-the-top as the 'crazy' villain) will enjoy this flick. Just don't expect anything more than a fun little weightless diversion. It feels more like an '80's film than one for the late '90's though.

My B-movie grade: B-

A Bruce Willis rip-off!

[cat-76 · 3/10 · 24 May 1999]

This movie would only appeal to someone who likes counting dead bodies. Poorly acted and with an extremely unlikely plot. A Bruce Willis Die Hard clone that does not work with Mickey Rourke!

a guilty pleasure

[wigz · 10/10 · 8 October 1999]

Anyone who has followed Rourke's career lately has to be pleased that this flick was made.Yes,the movie rips off countless other action films but who cares when you've got the pumped-up Rourke whooping ass in the middle of all the cliches.Danny Trejo gives a very creepy supporting performance and I really enjoyed the score as well.I bought this movie after renting it and have screened it for several friends,all of whom immensely enjoyed it.A must for true Mickey fans.This title,as well as Bullet,hold a special place in my film library.

Con Air rip-off?

[Tics · 7/10 · 26 January 1999]

Ok, one more prisoners-escapee movie, and not to forget, Danny Trejo is in it, the guy who played Johnny-23 in Con Air. A pretty good B-movie about a former cop,soldier,mercenary that is going to stop a couple of bad guys that is holding people hostage (Die Hard). Trejo is once again a rapist,murderer and total sick-o. Got some good action, the end is the coolest. And don't I detect some Leon-the professional here also.

For a B-movie it is very good, for a Con/Hard rip-off it doesn't even come close. What happened to Mickey Rourke's career?

Why Mickey Why?

[King 80z · 1/10 · 11 December 2001]

This is the worst movie Rourke ever made. I am a huge 80z Rourke fan but this is just pathetic. Not because it is a rip off of other movies. Not because it is a stupid B-movie. Not even because Rourke has destroyed his looks. It is awful because Mickey actually thought he was giving a good performance. This is the standard he now sets for himself. That's just sad. Is this really the same guy who was in Diner?

Just a Bad Film

[rpm_371 · 20 May 2006]

The film was shot at Seminary South, a semi-closed mall in Ft. Worth,Tx, likely the cheapest location they could find. That was the primary reason I watched this film, being a local.

Letdown? That's an understatement. After hearing the local preproduction hype I was hoping for more than an outlaw version of Walker, Texas Ranger.

Sadly, I was forced to watch just that.

The writing's bad, the acting is poor and the production values are pure B-grade. But, Mickey looks like he has been spending lots of time at the gym.

marginal B movie

[Bob7 · 3/10 · 22 June 1999]

I had to agree with reviewer "Tics" in Sweden, this is pretty marginal stuff, way below Con Air and the Die Hards. I gave it a 3, which means I was sorry I wasted the rental money. And yes, Mickey Rourke's career is really disappearing ... and my wife can't stand him, that can't help :-) The whole movie was just too lame and weak.

Rubbish. Plain and simple rubbish.

[imseeg · 2/10 · 8 June 2020]

It's complete and utter rubbish.

Not any good? No. Well, Mickey Rourke does look tough and a few other supporting actors arent bad either, but....come on, this is below B-movie levels, this is beyond laughably bad, it's it's it's TERRiBLE RUBBISH

The bad: the direction is rubbish. This movie is below the quality of any cheap action tv movie. One cliche after another. I tried, I really tried, but there is a limit to the amount of rubbish I can bear to see...

The "story": Mickey Rourke (hitman) infiltrates into an out of control prison to rescue his brother (LOL). Basically it's "Die Hard in a Prison", only without the jokes, without any suspense, without any good acting etc...

Absolutely terrible.

[rphanley · 3/10 · 22 November 2020]

I can't believe Mickey Rourke signed up for this one. The plot is terrible and same with the acting. I'm pretty sure every shot was done in one take. Danny Trejo was the best thing about this movie. Who finances this kind of stuff and thinks it's a good investment lol??

Good crap

[PimpinAinttEasy · 5/10 · 14 November 2019]

Its crap. but some of the crap is good. one way to look at this is it involves a great actor systematically and deliberately ruining his once promising career. but then, this is better than some BEN AFFLECK heist movie crap. the film has a stellar cast - MICKEY ROURKE, DANNY TREJO, FREDRICK FORREST, KEVIN GAGE (vaingro in HEAT). the first 30 minutes is prety good b movie action and dialogs. but the film falls apart after a couple of needless molestation scenes. TREJO is awesome though. he really steals the show with a great dying dialog. watch this movie if you like dialogs like:

"there are cobwebs over my nutsack"

"the last time i ever used this thing was in kuwait"

"how about i do a blowjob with your brains over the wall?

the background score is very good. reminded me of GUNS N ROSES.

(5/10)

Awful, derivative sleaze

[salemthecat-08583 · 3/10 · 31 January 2024]

I stumbled upon this movie when it randomly flashed into my mind as a vague recollection from my teenage years. It was one of those films my mom would occasionally rent on VHS along with other rental fodder such as 'Metro' with Eddie Murphy and 'Skeletons' with Ron Silver, which I recently watched to revisit those nostalgic memories. While neither of those films were exceptional, they provided decent enough entertainment for a lazy afternoon, so I was looking forward to revisiting yet another one of those rentals with 'Point Blank.'

Unfortunately, this movie turned out to be a completely different experience. While it indeed stands out, it's for all the wrong reasons - its mediocrity, derivative action, and lackluster writing. I can't help but feel sorry for the talented cast, including Mickey Rourke, Kevin Gage (Waingro from Heat), and the always reliable Danny Trejo. Despite their efforts, they're trapped in a film with a dreadful script that borders on nonsensical. The story unfolds in a way that defies logic, making it challenging to suspend disbelief. Characters act without rhyme or reason, seemingly guided only by the director's desire to showcase violent, sleazy, or "cool" scenes-though I'm using that last descriptor loosely, as I find it hard to believe that anyone except the director believed anything that happened in this film to be cool.

Speaking of sleaze, the movie is really mean-spirited, to the point where it's uncomfortable to watch. I'm not a meek person and I do enjoy a good action flick with lots of violence and nudity, but this really isn't the movie that utilizes its gratuitous elements to skillfully deliver visceral entertainment, and instead just makes you feel like taking a shower after watching it. Especially in every scene that involves Trejo. His portrayal of an unhinged maniac, constantly indulging in cocaine, assaulting women, and indiscriminately shooting hostages, will only make you question what kind of a person the director is to think that this would be even remotely entertatining, not to mention confusing to anyone with two brain cells to rub together. Imagine a hostage situation where law enforcement turns a blind eye to such atrocities, opting to send in a John McClane-wannabe to shoot up the place instead. Truly dazzling display of logic right there.

Speaking of John McClane, Point Blank shamelessly borrows ideas from other, more successful action flicks. The premise feels like Con Air in a shopping mall with a sprinkling of Die Hard. And if that wasn't enough, the director even throws in a scene lifted directly from Leon: The Professional, but without the emotional weight or connection to the characters. It comes across as cringeworthy rather than impactful.

The dynamic between Rourke and Gage, portrayed as brothers on opposite sides of the law, only added to my confusion. Their relationship veers from Rourke trying to talk his brother down, to then shooting at him during an action scene, to finally embracing him in his arms as they profess brotherly love. Not only did I feel absolutely no emotion towards any of those characters, but again, the writing and direction are just pure nonsense, and I don't even know what I'm supposed to feel during those scenes.

I'm done. And I haven't even talked about the music, which is eaqual parts hilarious and baffling. You get the idea. It's a horrible movie. I'd only recommend watching it with a bunch of friends just to laugh at how bad it is. The absurdity of the plot could easily rival Samurai Cop, but the difference is that Point Blank was at least shot and acted more competently. Everything else, though, from cheesy music, to tedious plot and nonsensical writing, to poor editing, this was easily one of the worst major studio films I've ever seen.

YOOO!

[jbas007 · 7/10 · 5 December 2019]

Danny Trejo shoves his face into a gigantic pile of coke in front of a naked dancing chick. This added two stars to my rating.

Die hard at point blank range

[Barclayandrew · 8/10 · 22 June 2003]

Well, this isnt so much of a B-movie version of Die Hard, but a tongue in cheek parody of that whole action movie genre, and an achingly funny one at that. It's all here, slow motion fight scenes, big explosion's, and the slightly insane crime boss. Mickey Rourke grunts his way through the tough guy script with a bone dry delivery that make's you certain he's talking this whole thing seriously. Everything's over the top, the acting, the stunts, and Bruce Lee like battle's, an instant underground classic.

Shoots into the stratosphere of ridiculousness

[NateWatchesCoolMovies · 6/10 · 15 August 2016]

Point Blank takes a big, silly macho whack at the trashy action genre, and gives fans of such lowbrow, cheese saturated stuff a huge sloppy kiss. It's so ridiculous you have to laugh, but you're laughing with it because it sheepishly knows what an outlandish hoot it is, which is somewhat reassuring in this territory, because a lot of them play it dead straight and are oblivious to their own vapid density. Not this baby. It wears it's stupidity loud and proud, and there's many a moment that will have you howling. Mickey Rourke was in the height of his juicing heyday here, and he looks like Buffalo Bill covered the incredible Hulk in the tanned leather of some poor broad (should have put the lotion in the basket like he told you). He plays Rudy Ray, an ex special ops turned farmhand of few words and lots of action. Rudy's brother (Wainegro himself, Kevin Gage) is mixed up with a nasty bunch of escaped convicts who have hidden out in a rural strip mall and taken multiple hostages. Rudy is summoned by the local Sheriff (Fredric Forrest), and with the resolute blessing of his crusty father (the immortal James Gammon) proceeds to go redneck John McClane on these whackos and basically tear the place apart. Gage is the leader of the pack, but the most dangerous one by far is a coked up, homicidal Danny Trejo, who terrorizes a poor female captive and basically empties clips at anything that moves. Throw in Michael Wright as a seriously intense war vet with a rocky past (he has a monologue that dips between scary and campy quite a bit) and Paul Ben Victor displaying acting so far over the top it'll make your eyes and ears bleed, and you've got one inane B movie crew ready to fulfill your every schlocky need. It's funny because there's an 'emotional' scene near the end where Rourke and Gage go brother to brother and it's supposed to be touching. The writing is so godawful, and the music so beyond ludicrous, but the two of them are such good actors that they end up completely selling it without even trying, like they couldn't turn in bad work if they wanted to. It's basically Die Hard in the sticks, with Rourke instead of Willis, a mall instead of a skyscraper, and you know... the fact that it's obviously not a good movie. It's a hell of a lot of fun though, if you're in the mood to get silly with it.

great action movie!!!

[Teen_guy_us · 2 January 2003]

This movie is so great and has alot of action!!!!! Why do all you idiot non-action fans hate this?!!! I think it is the best movie as a matter of fact, I am going to dub it or buy it for my movie collection! The hostage plot was so cool because some of the criminals actually didn't mean to be harmful and most were really mean!!! Alot of action and I recommend it to people who love action! Don't listen to those stupid people asses who don't know what they are talking about!!! They are the ones who like stupid movies and hate good ones like this!!!! Point Blank rules!!!!!!!

Was a Good "B" Movie

[americanbamf · 10/10 · 26 October 2007]

for this Movie to be a B type Movie i thought was was actually pretty good . i mean it had a good cast ,plot , and Decent acting to be a B Movie . i don't see why the Haters of this movie didn't like it bc it was worth the watch . and i for one cant see why its rated so low on IMDb bc it was a good movie and i enjoyed every minute of the movie .if you like Mickey Rourke , Trejo , or Frederic Forrest then you will like this movie . imo i think this is one of Mickey's Best Movies . i would say don't Listen to everything you hear(i.e Read ,hear or see ) bout things Especially Movies in General bc Critics have been known to be wrong b4 so watch this movie and judge for yourself . yo will not be disappointed .