Genres

Visitors Review

David 2013-05-17 06:02:05

Interesting!

Saw this last night and suprisingly quite enjoyed it. A good story withlotsof intrigue and suspence, descent performances and a clever twist at theendleft me satisfied. Kevin Costner impressed me in the lead role whichseemedto be tailer made for him and Gene Hackman who I rate highly as an actorproduced his usual committed performance so overall worth alook.Rating: 7/10

Michael Neumann 2013-05-16 11:10:32

lackluster remake

Transplanting the plot of 1947's 'The Big Clock' from its newspapersetting to the netherworld of Washington politics was a good idea, butfor all its nerve-wracking paranoia the remake isn't half asentertaining as the original. Kevin Costner (rarely out of hisglistening white uniform) portrays a Pentagon naval officer assigned bythe Secretary of Defense to investigate the murder of the Secretary'smistress (who was Costner's lover as well), and complications ariseafter the bewildered officer begins to find all the evidence pointingto himself as the primary suspect. It's all an elaborate frame-up, ofcourse, but because the true identity of the killer is never inquestion the film has to rely instead on routine (and often gratuitous)doses of violence and sex to hold the viewer's interest (and bring thestory up to date from its original 1947 setting). Costner plays arefreshingly fallible hero, and the government corruption sub-plot iscertainly topical, but the illogical and unnecessary epilogue comesclose to spoiling the rest of the film, by adding one plot twist toomany to an already cluttered scenario.

jmorrison-2 2013-05-16 21:55:16

Terrible

For one thing, to me Costner looks like a teenaged boy trying to actlike a seasoned Naval Officer. No military Officer I ever knew acted inthe way he did. Also, if you know anything about the Pentagon, you knowthat the Security Guards really run that place. I have been to thepentagon, and every one of those guys is over 6"2", and at least 200lbs. If you go chasing guys through the halls, they are going to putyou IN the wall, and THEN ask what you're doing. I guess that's thepoint, though. Most people don't know what the pentagon is really like. Where were the Washington DC Metro Police? There's no way they wouldnot have run their own investigation into the death of Sean Young. Werethey just going to leave this investigation to the Secretary ofDefense's office? A uniformed naval officer being chased by 2 guys insuits through the halls of the pentagon? Through Washington DC streets?And not a Metro cop in sight? Not a single Washington DC policeman inthe entire movie? How did these guys ever think they were going to pull this whole "Yuri"thing off?This movie was terribly unbelievable from beginning to end. A terribleperformance by Costner.

2013-05-16 07:22:23

Government thriller

The opening hour of this film seems out of place in this thriller. It starts of as quite a boreing romance and then becomes a highly ironic tail of murder, reputations at stake and cover-ups. A typical 80s film this is not without the random views of skyscrapers and washed out colouring, however Kevin Costner shines in this and the sequences towards the end as the pressure mounts are nerve racking. The twist at the end really takes you by surprise although I would need to see it again to fully understand it.

anonymous 2013-05-13 20:31:23

Under-rated tension filled political thriller

This is an extremely under-rated film. While being a political thriller,itshould really be viewed as one of the great suspense/chase thrillers ofthe80's. The casting of Gene Hackman adds an elevated sense of authority tothewhole movie, and he puts in his usual professional efforts as thepoliticianwho knows there could be no way out. Actually, it is Costner who ends uphaving no way out, having been implicated in a death, and he has to workagainst the clock to prove what's really going on.This is the first Costner film I had seen, and the crackling script isreally brought to life by the director, who builds up an extreme sense oftension as the clock ticks away. Although some people will cite the finaleas being somewhat telegraphed, it doesn't really detract from the rest ofthe film, which on many levels appears to be more intelligent than itactually is - a complete opposite to most movies of thisgenre.The film will hold your attention throughout, and the Costner characteractsas a precursor to his later effort in the equally superbJFK.8/10.

2013-05-12 21:47:17

Good spy movie!

This review is from: No Way Out (DVD) Saw this movie year ago...really had me on the edge of my seat! Keven Costner in my opinion did a really good job in this exciting movie!!If you haven't seen this one, you really need to buy this one!

Rye. 2013-05-05 13:44:13

Donaldson and Costner both delivers credibly!

Murderous intrigue takes the spotlight in this sleuthed puzzled film noir remake of The Big Clock [1948], based on the Kenneth Fearing novel. Lieutenant Commander Tom Farrell [Kevin Costner] is excited at his new job, working under the Secretary of Defense David Brice [Gene Hackman]. Farrell placid life is turned upside down, when his girlfriend Susan Atwell [Sean Young] is tragically murdered. As the determined Naval Officer takes it upon himself to investigate the crime, astonishing evidence surfaces that questions the shady involvement of Scott Pritchard [Will Patton], a valued worker to Brice and trusted individual to Farrell. A creative remake to a classic suspense tale, that offers enticing plot twists yet fundamentally sticking to the adapted novel. New Zealand director Roger Donaldson critically acclaimed project is compactly structured with exceptional set direction in the recreation of offices and work area in the United States Defense. Wonderful performances from a credible cast, though dually significant is Kevin Costner intense portrayal of his panic driven character.

2013-05-05 02:20:04

Nail biting stuff!!

Even though this movie is getting on in years, I watched it for the first time recently and found it to be a thoroughly entertaining, suspenseful movie. One sits there hoping there WILL be a way out...

vostf 2013-04-26 05:35:59

Another noir story with 80s lighting

Main assets, in my preference order, are:- the outdated blurry 80s style -- not a definite period, ugly colors,funny hairdos, cold war sci-fi...;- the cast (Kostner, Hackman, Sean Young);- the finale, adapted from The Big Clock.As with Joe Eszterhas' scripts (starting with Jagged Edge, released1985), the storyline is a treat on first viewing. You really think it'sa darn good movie. On second viewing I'd say it's pretty slow, nothingmuch builds up before we're getting really close to the Grand Finale.For instance the love story is only a way to delay the start anddoesn't help the story to pick up. Love? Jealousy? Secret service? Coldwar? Conspiracy? It's a strange mixture only made watchable by a verygood cast.As for the comparison with The Big Clock let's say it falls into thegeneral case of mismatching a noir story with a sunny pastel 80sambiance. Basically, as with the D.O.A. remake starring Dennis Quaid,this appears to be a photography issue. Not the DP's fault. No producerwould have thought of making a wide audience flick with noir-stylelighting in the 80s. But the way the Grand Finale is handled is atfault too. In addition to the erratic rhythm, we can blame that one onthe director. How would such a theoretically rivetingly suspensefulclimax work in a setting that's not made to look labyrinthine andclaustrophobic? That is the biggest flaw of the movie. Had RogerDonaldson (Australian-born, as James Farrow who directed the original)done it right he could have ended this movie on a high mark. Instead,No Way Out goes on with a uselessly dull epilogue that further cripplesthe movie.In my opinion, only worth watching if you're interested by some of theabove. Beyond this analytical aspect it's only a very forgettablemovie.

2013-04-25 16:22:35

Don't do the twist

U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander Tom Farrell (Kevin Costner) is assigned to work at the Pentagon under Secretary of Defense David Brice (Gene Hackman). Brice does not know, although Farrell does, that both of them are sexually involved with Susan Atwell (Sean Young, and terrible). When Brice accidentally kills the woman in a jealous rage, his assistant, Scott Pritchard (Will Patton, who is very good), convinces him to take over the investigation under the pretext of national security in order to divert suspicion away from Brice and onto "Yuri", a Soviet double-agent who has supposedly infiltrated the DOD, and who may or may not even exist. A Polaroid photo taken from the crime scene contains an image of a man that will require complex computer analysis to be made visible; assuming the image to be Susan's other lover, Brice and Pritchard plan to implicate whomever it turns out to be as "Yuri", closing the case. Knowing this, and that the photo is of him, and also having deduced that Brice is the actual killer, Farrell works frantically to forestall development of the photo while he gathers evidence to tie Brice to the killing (while, of course, pretending to continue the search for Yuri).The best thing about the movie is that it doesn't have the loud, pumped-up and thrusting (commonly referred to as "pulse-pounding") feel of most government thrillers; the conspiratorial plots and counter-plots are conceived and executed in a ragged and panicked, improvisatory, almost blundering way, and on both sides seem to be forever about to teeter and fall apart. (Even the assassins don't come across as ruthless killer-androids, as is usually the case in this genre, but more like bumbling schoolyard bullies). Pritchard is the one character who actually sees himself as a coolly, arch-Machiavellian string-puller, and it is rather to amusing to watch as this facade crumbles under the pressure of an unexpected crisis.Kevin Costner gives one of his best performances; as in Bull Durham, he is peerless in his ability to express indecision and fear without compromising his essential masculine charisma. (And he isn't afraid to look silly; at one point his character, desperately wound-up, attempts to bark out an authoritative command that instead comes out as a scared shriek).I'm sure there are a lot of people who think the plot twist at the end is very clever, simply because they didn't see it coming. But it doesn't take much to achieve that; you just have come up with an arbitrary reversal that doesn't connect with the rest of the film (even after it's revealed). A good twist, it should not need to be over-stressed, is one that resolves a central mystery in the plot in a surprising way; e.g. you don't know for sure who the murderer is, you think it's probably "A" but it turns out be "B", who seemed like such a good guy. The trouble with that approach is that since the audience has been puzzling over the murderer's identity all along they might figure it out for themselves. The twist in No Way Out solves that problem by answering a question nobody was asking; so, yes, it's a surprise, but it also has no kick.

Blaine 2013-04-18 02:59:00

Best Movie of 1987 or the sleeper of 1987?

Having worked 2 years in a video rental store, I've seen a-lot of movies. Back in the early 1990's my job depended on recommending them accurately. "No Way Out" (1987)(rated 'R') is perhaps one of the very best taunt dramas of all time. My criteria for rating a movie depends on acting quality, the photography and sound quality, the sense of immersion the plot creates (ie the quality of the story beginning to end), and whether or not I was bored at any point in the movie. Although I recall one sentence that is bearly adudible at a critical juncture, this movie has my highest overall score for any drama/thriller in the late 1980's. It's plot builds at a constant pace that never falters. The ending is memorable but does not ruin the film for multiple viewings later. The cliche' is 'that the drama builds to a peak, well in this film the drama continues to the vary end. A wedge shape rather than a peaked roof is a better comparison. Comparable films in quality include "Rear Window" (1954),"Psycho" (1960), "The Manchurian Candidate"(1962), "Black Rain"(1989), "Dead Again" (1991), "Shattered" (1991), and "The Bourne Identity" (2002). Unfortunately, it is a often overlooked 'classic'. I have never had anyone (an adult) I recommended it to who did not like this movie.

2013-04-17 09:54:32

As far a supense films go. This is the best I have ever seen

I saw this film when it first came out, since than no other movie has compared to the twist and turns this movie has. It is the type of movie you wish you could see for the first time all over again. It will keep you on the edge of your seat.

astoryweaver 2013-04-13 01:31:54

Great Movie

This movie is an E-ticket ride from beginning to end. It's a thrill aminute. When I first saw this movie, I was blown away by the uniqueending.I highly recommend this movie to anyone who truly appreciates the workofKevin Costner. He's extraordinary in this film.

lizziebeth-1 2013-04-12 07:27:48

Garland's scope is astounding; the film that launched Costner's career--for good reason.(9/10)

20yrs ago Kiwi Director Roger Donaldson was already at the top of hisgame, as were a young, lean and athletic Kevin Costner, and MaceNeufeld, future uber-producer of technothrillers. Costner is thereforeperfectly cast in this political melodrama/ spy thriller by IleneStarger as Commander Tom Farrell of ONI (Office of "Naval Int", not"Navel lint"). The movie is based primarily on Kenneth Fearing's bookThe Big Clock, NOT the 1947 Charles Laughton film, as Leonard Maltinclaims. Only the Pentagon net scene was remade from that.Writer/Producer Robert Garland's screenplay straddles an amazing scope,moving from Washington intrigue to sexy melodrama-by-way-of navaladventure and technothriller(!). Unfortunately, it's bookended by a spymolehunt for a "Yuri" in the Pentagon, so its twist ending is a strainthat the rest does little to support. It's unlikely that Garlandbotched his screenplay adaptation of his own story; he--orDonaldson--simply didn't seed enough inconsistencies. This resulted ina seemingly ludicrous ending.A similar device was used far more successfully in The SixthSense(1999), where the reinterpretation was better-justified evenemotionally, so audiences were intrigued and touched by their"perspective shift", rather than annoyed.Thankfully NWO features two overwhelmingly attractive leads. NeitherCostner, dapper and athletic even as he dramatically bleeds into hisNavy whites, nor Sean Young, all busty-gold-lame as a jaded chippysleeping her way to the top, ever looked so good. Their scenes togetherground (or is it "grind"?) the movie in considerable honesty under allthe Washington decadence. They sizzle through NWO's infamous"Washington monument" scene.Costner is arguably the best he's ever been as the vulnerable navalhero perpetually embarrassed by his "exotic" lover. In fact, hischaracter's charisma probably derails the ending. For her part, SeanYoung (Blade Runner(1982)) is his match as Susan Atwell, the bitchycynic who to her own surprise rediscovers her innocence by falling inlove with him. Sadly, she's an object of lust for more than one man,and the other one kills her in a fit of jealousy.Her killer is Defence Secretary David Brice (Gene Hackman, adhering tothe Hollywood aphorism that there are only two kinds of movies: oneswith Gene Hackman, and ones without). Brice just happens to beFarrell's new boss at the Pentagon.The plot really takes off once it falls to Farrell, as Pentagon liaisonto the CIA, to pin the murder on "Yuri", the supposed mole that Bricecalls "the CIA's wet dream". For Brice, the "molehunt" convenientlysteers the murder investigation away from himself."Yuri" is a thinly-veiled reference to an actual 1960s molehuntinitiated by the real-life Yuri Nosenko. Since the real mole was neverfound, many think that it really was just "the CIA's wet dream". Thisdeep background hints at why NWO goes so awry at the end; althoughFarrell's hurried call from the public phonebooths IS to his handler.This is the only seeding Garland granted us for the mole plot. The"when you passed the bag of underwear, Moscow wasn't amused" line nearthe end is already too late--we consider Farreell one of us, and nogoing back.Brice and his searingly obsessed, corrupt lackey Pritchard(Patton) cookup this bogus manhunt, blithely forcing Farrell to seize control theinvestigation, officially conducted by the Pentagon's CriminalInvestigations Division, even as evidence points increasingly toFarrell himself. The judiciously impartial-looking Jason Bernard ispitch-perfect as the CID's Major Donovan, as he clues-in to the wildgoose-chase.The screenplay successfully paints Commander Farrell as independent,apolitical, and well-liked by everyone not trying to ingratiatethemselves with his boss. Unfortunately, it's this very Americanlikability that guarantees we'll deny his possible guilt as a plant.Farrell's friends include the Pentagon's chief computer programmer, SamHesselman (the avuncular, rotund George Dzundza stuck in a wheelchair),whose tragic demise here is as much a viewer's bodyblow as Art Evans'was in Metro(1997). It's heartbreaking watching Sam draw the wrongconclusion about Farrell--or more accurately, about Pritchard.As Pritchard, Will Patton looms oppressively. He made a strongimpression on Costner as well, who 10yrs later starred opposite him(even more confrontationally) in The Postman(1997).There are a couple of real-life ironies, though. The two goons"associated with Special Forces" whom Farrell and the movie are sodistrustful of are supposed to be "Iran-Contra" hit men. This Reaganitescandal plays nicely into NWO's revisionism about a supposed Communistmole. It just succeeds too well.The other is the presence of Fred Dalton Thompson, who 20yrs later isrunning for President! Thompson (Hunt for Red October(1990)), pastreal-life Special Counsel to the Senate Select Committee onIntelligence(!) ventured into acting and became an instant hit, mostlyin technothrillers. He's again wryly memorable here as the CIA Directorto whom Farrell addresses his bloodied evidence.While Garland took care of the storytelling CONsistencies (there's theflaw), the director's attention to the acting detail is staggering. Healways uses the takes with the happiest accidents, and the mostunmasked reaction-shot closeups, including when his actors blush (watchPatton fulminate), retch (Costner), and retort tetchily (his dimplesvirtually speak for him when Jason Bernard says "I was about to send mymen").The only production element that for my money fails is the openingcredits' font design. It's what passed for 1980s computer "wow", but itjarrs badly against Maurice Jarre's hauntingly eerie original score.No Way Out(1987) found a smart, sassy yet cynical 1980s tone thanks toRoger Donaldson and a certain future Tom Clancy uber-producer.Neufeld's son also stints as co-Producer with the fabulous LauraZiskin, having negotiated partial access for shooting inside thePentagon.It's a shame that the movie's poorly-seeded ending was allowed to throwus into denial. It forces the movie to bite off more than even thissuperpower plot could chew.(9/10)

heliotropetwo 2013-04-09 05:51:44

Let's make the whole movie a flashback

Try watching this one without the first and last scenes. It's like theydidn't give Kostner that part of the script until he finished the restof the movie. The result is fine if you have no memory, but if youshould dare to think about what you've seen, you find one huge andunacceptable flaw: The character you see acted is not the one the moviewants you to take with you when you go.It isn't so much that the big surprise isn't fun, it's that there's toomuch good acting before this huge surprise happens to let you acceptthe humongous surprise as anything but an effort to con the audienceinto thinking they've seen a smart movie. Alas, it isn't a smart movie,it's a pretty good movie with a stupid device.I'm reminded of the efforts to save a movie by inserting a narrator.Here it seems to me they've tried to goose up a pretty good movie byusing a big surprise. It's a cheat.

2013-04-08 16:35:11

Mediocre Cold War Thriller with an Agenda. The Writers Should Have Done Better.

"No Way Out" (1987) is the second film inspired by Kenneth Fearing's 1947 novel "The Big Clock". A 1948 crime thriller, directed by John Farrow, was based on the novel. "No Way Out" borrows the plot and plugs it into a Cold War espionage thriller. Naval officer Lt. Commander Tom Farrow (Kevin Costner) begins an affair with Susan Atwell (Sean Young), mistress of Secretary of Defense David Brice (Gene Hackman). This puts him in a difficult spot when Brice hires Farrow to liaise between his office and the intelligence community, to gather information on a submarine project that Brice wants to derail. When Brice accidentally kills Susan in a fit of jealously, his General Counsel Scott Pritchard (Will Patton) wants to cover it up by pinning the murder on a hypothetical Soviet mole in the Pentagon whom the CIA has dubbed "Yuri". And he wants Tom to lead the investigation.The title of the film refers to Farrow being trapped inside the Pentagon. Tom Farrow's name may be an homage to John Farrow's earlier film. In any case, the characters are drawn weakly, and their behavior tends not to make sense. Both Farrow and Brice play along with Pritchard's lunacy, when any sane person with two brain cells to rub together would go straight to the FBI instead of involving himself in innumerable crimes on account of an accident. Pritchard drags a hotel bellboy from Annapolis to identify the elusive Yuri. The bellboy walks around the Pentagon in the colonial regalia that he wears to work. Why? What would you think of a man who eats bugs off of your car for no particular reason? That's Farrell. There's a lot of weird stuff here. The film runs longer than it should due to superfluous scenes near the beginning, as well.Gene Hackman doesn't have enough to work with. David Brice isn't interesting until the last scene he's in, unfortunately. Farrell, whom we understand to be in a complicated position by the end of the film, does not seem to be a complicated man. His personality and intellect are dull. Pritchard is a strong character but so insane that he is comical -and completely without credibility. He hires some former special forces who worked with the Contras to murder anyone who gets in his way. A twist at the end comes out of nowhere...and goes nowhere. But thrillers are supposed to thrill, and "No Way Out" gets credit for using a closed space, the Pentagon, to create suspense. On the whole, the film seems intended to stoke paranoia during the Reagan administration. It posits that a high level spy within the Defense Department is possible, and it questions the sanity and ethics of those in the DoD who want to cut pork projects.

J. Wellington Peevis 2013-04-06 18:01:58

Horroshow!

Fast paced thriller that may be one of the quickest 2 hours of cinemafilmed. Costner plays a Navy commander assigned to a high level post intheDOD, where he, and the Sec. of Defense become embroiled in amurder/scandal.The bulk of the film chronicles the Departments Under Secretary's attemptsto quash the problem. Extremely well done from all aspects. Costner isgood,yes, you heard right, Costner is good. He actually gives acting a shothereand is believable and engaging. The rest of the cast is equally fine. I'msoused to slamming Costner's performances that i now find i have nothingfurther to add. See this one and enjoy the ride.

2013-04-06 08:16:06

Works on every level

This review is from: No Way Out (DVD) If you are looking for a film that truly manages to raise the level of tension time after time, this one is for you. It is easy to forget that at this time Costner was the hottest actor in the world and that would continue for a few years, when he churned out hit after hit. Those films, like Bull Durham and Dancing With Wolves are fine films, without question, but I feel that this one is his finest. He is a master of action and suspense, going through a range of emotions and it reminds me of what a quality actor Costner once was.What I loved about it was the unexpected. I cannot recall a single film that so effectively fooled me. Sure, there are things that, if you look at logically, you question, but I didn't care at all at the time because I was so immersed in the story.The supporting cast is filled with terrific actors, most especially Gene Hackman, who is one of the all-time greats, and Sean Young. It is also easy to forget how hot she was at this time and this movie showcases why.Should be given a proper blu ray treatment with all the special features. It is a great great film, one of the best of the 80s.By the way, I am reviewing the all region dvd. It has Korean writing on the case and that concerned me but all I had to do was turn those subtitles off. It does not have English subtitles, and I don't know if the CC works with this, so any deaf customers may want to know that.

Mr_Vai 2013-04-02 05:32:27

An Underrated Masterpiece !

I don't think I can ever remember a movie quite like this. It has hooksin it that are so refreshing and unexpected. It has performances thatare just brilliant. Moreover, it is a movie in which Kevin Costnerlooks at his most natural best. The story basically revolves aroundCostner's character trying to discover who killed his lover, before heis framed for it. Of course, he is trying to do this in a closed offPentagon building while eyewitnesses are being brought in just to pointout him. Of course, you have side stories going on everywhere. I don'twant to give away any of the little switches or the big one. I willjust say, that if you want to see a well done thriller, this is it.Great movie!

pc95 2013-04-01 17:57:14

OK Storyline, Horrible Music, miffed ending

One of Kevin Costner's earlier leading roles movie, "No Way Out",directed by Roger Donaldson features some fairly good acting andsuspense in spots including Gene Hackman. However the movie's setup andperformance by Sean Young is goofy at best. The soundtrack cutovermusic is nothing short of awful. Standing out in the movie is WillPatton who plays slithering and deception very well in his character.While not really an action movie, the romance between Young and Costnerseems fake and inauthentic. Granted to some "high tech" 24 yr oldeffects and software doesn't help the movie feeling dated. (majorspoiler) And if you're like me you might be scratching your head at theending. Still there are much worse movies than "No Way Out".