Ready or Not
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
Got more questions about news letters?
Already have an account? Log in here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We encourage our community to report abusive content and/ or spam. Our team will review flagged items and determine whether or not they meet our community guidelines.
Please choose best explanation for why you are flagging this review.
Thank you for your submission. This post has been submitted for our review.
Sincerely, The Rotten Tomatoes Team
A great cast and a dull script make for a blah film.
This has to be the worst movie Paul made(after becoming a "star."). Slow, slow, SLOW; uninteresting, weak story, etc. What a waste of talent!
Great movie, great stereotypical Detective movie with one fatal flaw. The Flaw? Paul New man was 20 years too old to be in it! He looked every day of his 74 years old, at the time, and should have been in his 60's, maybe, as a retired cop with friends still on the force.
Director Robert Benton is a director who has my number. I've loved every film he's ever written or directed, from undeniable classics like "Bonnie & Cylde" to smaller films like "Bad Company" (the 1972 western, not the Chris Rock movie) or even imperfect misfires like his Hitchcock homage "Still of the Night" are still enjoyable. With "Twilight" (the throwback detective film, not the sparking vampire romance), Benton along with co-writer Richard Russo have made a love letter to detective films of of the 50s and 60s. Paul Newman plays a bagman type of character who takes care of dirty jobs for rich actor friend/employers, Susan Sarandon and Gene Hackman. The film opens with Newman taking Sarandon and Hackman's daughter, Reese Witherspoon, back from Mexico, unwillingly, where she's shacked up with a sleazy boyfriend, Liev Schreiber. From there, like many detective stories, it starts with a simple task of dropping off some blackmail money, but leads down a trail of murder, double crosses, and most interestingly the opening up of old wounds. The past looms large around all of the characters in this film, from Newman's ex-partner, Stockard Channing, to old cop buddy, James Garner (which is a bit like Harper and Jim Rockford teaming up, which is awesome!), to other supporting roles by Giancarlo Esposito, Margo Martindale, John Spencer, M. Emmet Walsh, Clint Howard, and Jack Wallace. Overall, I'm not sure this film will appeal to those less familiar with 50s and 60s detective films like "Kiss Me Deadly," "Harper" or "Marlow" but for those who are fans of these films, "Twilight" is an absolute treat.
The movie begins with a legitimately topless Reese and then there's some other stuff that happens with some great actors involved. The movie itself is poop though.
Fans of the performers and the genre will find a movie worth seeing once. Fans of the performers or the genre will find something for a brief drought. On its own merits though, it sits under a long list of superior examples of everything offered.
Not the sparkly vampire Twilight, thank goodness!
I've seen this movie before in one way or another, just not with this lights out cast. It's New man's feature as thecworld-weary, hard-liuch shams. All of the other stock characters are played by A-list stars, including Reese Witherspoon and Liiev Schreiber as a young actress and her young clinically stupid boyfriend.
Most of the cast under-performed with respect to their ability, IMO. Hackman, Garner, and Martindale put in solid efforts, with Hackman being the best.
This film kind of depresses me, as it was an opportunity to make a fairly strong Noir with a mature cast, yet really comes up short when assessed in it's entirety.
This was a pretty good neo-noir thriller filled with greed and deception. As usual, Paul Newman nails it.