In the Line of Fire

Rating:
Summary: Trying to stop an assasin
Review: "In the Line of Fire" stars Clint Eastwood as Frank Horrigan, an aging Secret Service agent who becomes involved in a cat and mouse chase with an insane but brilliantly trained assasin (John Malkovitch) who has vowed to murder the President. The emotional intensity comes from the fact that in November 1963 Horrigan was not able to save Kennedy from being killed. Eastwood plays Horrigan the way you have come to expect him to, sort of an older, slower version of Dirty Harry. Except that he is haunted by depression because of the Kennedy assaination. But now he must get over the doubt and depression to catch a new killer. And about this new killer; he calls himself Booth (do you all get it?) He is played by the excellent method actor Malkovitch. He dosn't have a lot to say, so you do not get any depth of character about him. All we ever find out is through other sources; like his former employers at NSA. Apperently he is a disgruntled employee. Why, we don't really know. So, how is a depressed aging Secret Service agent to find this near perfect killer? Well, he has friends who are helping him along. One is his young, green partner, played by Dylan McDermott; he is shacky but ultimatly dependable. The other is a new love interest, played by Rene Russo. I hate to say this, but she is the movies only flaw. She is decades younger than Eastwood, and she is supposed to be a credible romantic interest? I am sorry, I don't think so. As for the suspence, I loved it, it was wound up tight like a good watch. It is a little over two hours long but it nbever feels it. In many ways it reminds me of Fred Zimmerman's 1973 intrigue classic "The Day of the Jackal" becuase both movies have to do with watching both good guys and bad moving closer to the day of death; although this movie, under Wolfgang Perterson, is much faster paced. I whole heartedly recomend this movie.

Rating:
Summary: Riviting suspenseful cat and mouse game.
Review: Agent Horrigan, brilliantly played by Eastwood, is haunted by memories of the past in dealing with the present. John Malkovich is just perfect as the creepy, calculating, menacing, smart, would be assassin of the President. He takes a preverse pleasure in putting Horrigan in a cat and mouse game trying to figure out who he is, and where he's going to commit the act.

You are literaly put in the middle of the game. You really feel like you are with Horrigan as he's chasing Malkovich. Rene Russo is good as his partner who can't really appreciate the ghosts that are haunting Horrigan.

This is a taunt, fast paced thrill ride that doesn't let up until the ending.

Rating:
Summary: A Good Suspense Thriller Despite Gaps In Plot
Review: Wolfgang Petersen's (Das Boot; Air Force One; Troy) suspense thriller dealing with an old Secret Service agent's race against time to stop a deranged assassin from killing the President. An above-par suspense film in which its fallacies in plot are overcome by a decent screenplay and great acting.

Secret Service agent Horrigan (Clint Eastwood) is an old-timer who's riddled with guilt after failing to stop JFKs assassination. He soon goes on a race against time with the help of a fellow agent (Renee Russo) after JFKs elusive and psychotic assassin (John Malkovich) resurfaces to do a job on the current president. Will they stop him in time?

The brilliant acting skills of John Malkovich as the demented assassin makes this movie. His portrayal of an assassin who sees his victims as hunting trophies keeps the audience in suspense. The acting of Clint Eastwood and Renee Russo is also quite good. The film does have several gaps in logic which, fortunately, are not too intrusive so as to undermine the whole plot. First, Clint Eastwood's character is an impossibility. The Secret Service agents assigned as bodyguards to the President and other public officials are an elite group within the Secret Service itself: the Service's primary function being the enforcement of federal counterfeiting laws. Those agents who are chosen to protect the President work only for two years at most and are then rotated back to regular duties. As with all law-enforcement agencies, the Secret Service has a mandatory retiring age that is much lower than that of other types of employment. Clint Eastwood's character is much too old to be a Secret Service agent and, even if we were to accept the far-fetched notion that he could serve that long, he would still have been rotated by 1963 anyway. Even if that weren't the case, no Secret Service agent whose assignment was assassinated would be kept on a protection detail: certainly not for 30 more years. Another reality gap is the assassin's polymer pistol. Altough accuracy wouldn't be too important at point-blank range, a barrel made out of even the strongest polymers would immediately melt or explode as the first bullet reaches the muzzle: even with our technology today, a gun barrel has to be composed of a sufficiently heat-resistant metal to fire a bullet traveling at least 500 feet/second safely and accurately.

Despite some gaps in realism, the film stands above average due to John Malkovich's impeccable acting. The performances of Renee Russo and Clint Eastwood were quite good as well. This is a good film to rent or own.

Rating:
Summary: The only Eastwood movie I own
Review: Believe it or not, this was the first Clint Eastwood movie I bought and only the second I?ve seen (the first was ?Blood Work?). So consequently I cannot compare this to a ?Dirty Harry? or any of Eastwood?s older works. I can however say it was a good movie. It is at times rather predictable and follows the example of most other cop vs. killer films, but that?s okay. The acting by Clint and particularly John Malkovich makes up for any lack of originality. That?s not to say there?s no innovation within ?In The Line Of Fire?. There certainly is. Even in their supporting roles, both Rene Russo and Dylan McDermott (aka Will from NBC?s Will & Grace) prove to be at the top of their games. All in all, if you can get past the conventionalism and the random spots of predictability, you?re bound to enjoy the show.

Eastwood plays the role of Frank Horrigan, who?s an older, obnoxious Secret Service agent who, years ago, was unable to prevent JFK from being shot. So when a ?wet-boy? posses a great threat to the current President, Frank?s past is brought back to light courtesy of the self-proclaimed Booth (played brilliantly by John Malkovich). Booth is a very scary character. And it?s not until partway into the movie that we see his face clearly. He is a smart, flawless exhibitioner who has a profound obsession with President?s deaths. Most others in the office ignore the threats and leave Frank as though he?s an old fuddy-duddy past his prime. But Eastwood knows, claiming right from the start: ?I know things about people?. What Booth does is lead Frank and other agents through a series of set-up clues that keep them close; though not too close. Because Booth singles out Frank, the two are able to form an excellent on screen double act. They may not be working together, but they interact with each other just so perfectly. That aspect of the movie was hands down the best element. Along with the aforementioned quote, a few others give Eastwood that appeal that would most likely do for this movie what the ?...punk? quote did for ?Dirty Harry?. And even Malkovich chimes in with a most-memorable quotation: ?all we have is the game?. And the game continues all the way till the very end, when we see if Eastwood?s instincts were right all along. Aside from all the great acting and an exalting story, there were a couple of ugly spots in the movie. The first that comes to mind is the romance scenes between Eastwood and Rene Russo. The bedroom scene was predominantly unlikable, but Eastwood finished it off with a hilariously unforgettable line. I won?t spoil it for you. Also, the special effects were nothing to write home about; a part at the end actually made me laugh. But in the end, the greatness of the movie outweighs the few poor spots.

If you are a Clint Eastwood fan I?m sure you already own this movie. If you?re a budding Eastwood fan born after his time, I can?t tell you ?In The Line Of Fire? is better than any other Eastwood classics. But, again, I can tell you it?s worth watching. The character of Frank Horrigan is played perfectly by Eastwood. And John Malkovich drops in the best performance of his career as the lofty but likable Booth. There is not a moment of this movie that?s not entertaining (romance bits excluded), and the thrills just keep on pilling up. On a more serious note, when you?re watching this movie, it?s frightening to think there?s no one like a Frank Horrigan out there who?d protect the President with such pride. I picked this up for a buck at the Half-Price Book Store; for that price I couldn?t pass it up. And I don?t recommend you pass it up either.