Rampart

Good movie!

source: Rampart

I'm in the camp that wonders why they didn't get around to an ending, and also would rather go to the movies to be entertained. Yes, Woody does a fine job of playing the crooked cop, but it's still a waste of time. I don't know how one reports the 'goofs' that I read about many movies so here's one: This movie is set in 1999. In the scene late in the movie where Woody's 2 daughters visit him in the hotel, he asks if they want a soda. "I'm good," they respond, which is a rather recent slang way of saying "no." Or am I so out of sync I didn't notice this phrase being used until just a couple years ago? I don't recall anybody saying that in 1999, although by then, the Valley Girls, like had spread, like, their way of talking like all over the country.

I gave it 5 but it could have gotten a 6 if the ending was better. The film was OK. I couldn't connect with the character, although Woody Harelson played him very well. The camera-work was well done including a scene in an office where it's spinning around and moving to the side of people as they talk. It could've been a lot better. I was getting into it then it kind of went downhill, then it shot back up and went back down again. It wasn't consistent in keeping me interested about what was happening to the character and it came to a point where I didn't really care. But it shot back up and I became interested again. The ending was lazy. I didn't particularly like it. It built up this whole character and shows him being cast out by his family and then ....POOF.... just, gone. Finished. It was decent but I wouldn't really recommend it to people. Although, if people have doubts about Woody Harelson they should defiantly see it. He's very good in it, as he is in everything.

Had high hopes for this movie, lots of actors I like, a setting and genre I like and James Ellroy involved in the writing - bring it on! Any hopes of a movie reaching for L.A. Confidential levels of greatness were unfortunately short lived. Whereas that movie had a fantastic script, great direction and brilliant performances, Rampart's only saving grace is Woody Harrelson's fine performance which is the only thing that keeps the movie watchable after the first 30 minutes or so. The other actors are all fine but they're not given much to do. The subplots go mainly unresolved, as, astonishingly, does the main plot - the movie just ends and you're left to decide how things turn out for yourself - fine if that's your thing but not what the majority of movie-goers want. Skip this and just watch the magnificent L.A. Confidential again, I wish I had.

Woody is a complicated cop that serves a hard side of town - but he starts to get himself in trouble with his cavalier ways. More of a character study than a story.

SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!!!!!!! I HAVE HAD MORE FUN AND BEEN KEPT IN MORE SUSPENSE WATCHING PAINT DRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. if you would love to waste 2 hours of your life like i did,,be my guest. woody sucks in this film,he spends 2 hours smoking cigarette's and messing around. there is very little dialogue that leads to a story of any kind,and the ending has no ending. you get to see 3 minutes of steve buscemi. 5 minutes of sigourney weaver. 2 minutes of ice cube. all these actors have little to say and offer nothing to this film. they used these actors by name to sell a CRAPPY WASTE OF TIME MOVIE! all the critics need a reality check and some medications,this film would even put an insomniac to sleep. do yourself a favour,scratch your finger nails down a chalkboard,you will be more entertained.

This is a difficult film to get into, but stick with it and you'll be hooked. Rampart is a character study, following a corrupt cop with a twisted personal life as the net closes around him and he becomes increasingly paranoid. Hard hitting and at times uncomfortable, watching Officer Brown (Woody Harrelson) self destruct is morbidly fascinating. Harrelson deserves an Academy Award for his performance; he mesmerises with natural charisma and gives the character an all too believable psychotic edge. Other notable performances are Sigourney Weaver as Confrey and (amazingly) Ice Cube as Timkins. Bobby Bukowski does a fantastic job with the cinematography, using a range of shots and low key effects to maximise the key moments in the plot. The open ending is a bit of a let down, a wrapping up of the story would have been preferable. However, this is still the best movie I've seen for a while.

Interesting cop movie that never really develops a plot. Woody Harrelson is a great actor but his talent was wasted here.

The movie starring Woody Harrelson (well, there are rarely scenes without his presence) and Ned Beatty, Ben Foster, Sigourney Weaver, Steve Buscemi in supporting roles should ensure a catchy experience - but the reality is different. Well, it is no flop, but the main reason - as I see it - was that the makers opted for "film for art's sake" or "indie" movie: trembling cameras and close-ups, tardy run, limited amount of action, reasoning on moral issues. But as most of actors and the topic approach are characteristic to so-called mainstream movies, then the result is "as is" - nothing special. The ending is even a disappointment. But as mentioned, actors are great, and admirers of Harrelson would not be disappointed.