Is it just me, or is The Untouchables (the Kevin Costner one)the worst piece of crap ever? I kinda had my hopes up before seeing it because of the cast... but i hated it with all my guts...

I'm not a big Kevin Costner fan, but it was alright. It was nothint to jump up and down about, but I thought it was alright. :p

The only thing I hated was the guy that played Frank Nitti.

I think it's a great film, really cool. Not too heavy or anything, but still very interesting, entertaining, and yet again more wonderful music by morricone. That's what I think at least :-)
Ciao!

i agree that its not that great film but IMO its still worth the watch and worth having the dvd in my collection. its in a higher notch from an okay movie. what counts for me best was Bobby's awesome performance . . .

GoodFella

I fuckin' hate-a datta movie, if i see it again i'm-a gonna die!

Seriously, though, it is a piece. For as much as I heard about that film it wasn't half as good as I thought it would be. Probably the only gangster movie that i own that i don't like.

Probably one of the reasons why i hate it so much is because it was such a huge dissapointment for me... c'mon, i see Robert DeNiro, Sean Connery, Andy García and Kevin Costner in the cast and Brian De Palma as director and it turned to be a very cheap film.

Costner's performance is emotionless and almost ridiculous, the worst i've seen by him. I also hated his wife; Elliot Ness was putting her life and their daughter's in danger and all she does is smile and tell him he's a hero... i expected some drama there, not a : "Oh, you are my hero!" bullshit kinda thing.
De Niro as Capone was ok, as usual De Niro, but the character of Capone in this movie is completely square and gets very few exposure in the film. It looks like Capone is just there to say a few good lines when he's on camera.
The scene with the baby cart going down the stairs was a little freaky for me, i didn't like it. A baby in the middle of the line of fire it's not my kind of action. Ness it's supposed to be a hero, and if it wasn't for García's character that baby would have had all his bones broken.
The fistfight between Connery and the other old policeman? Two old guys beating up each other? ...didn't like it.

And last, i think Mob Films are much more interesting when they are written from the Mob's point of view (for example The Godfather, Goodfellas) and not from that of the police. Of course that's just my opinion.

I think on the cover of The Untouchables DVD states that Newsweek wrote "The best Mafia film since The Godfather"... no way, man, not even on the same league...

I for one thought it was not very good. I don't know if it is because I am English and simly don' like the Scot getting Hollywood acclaim, but I don't rate Connery in any role save for James Bond. Don't get me wrong, it is an enjoyable film and very good, giving a great view of prohibition America, but I simply did not like it as much as I thought I would.

Mick

PS> Welcome to the gang, my friend!

I think the reasoning for that is because that is the only other Gangster film made by Paramount in their catalog.

I actually thought that Sean Connery's character was the better of the bunch. Then he got whacked like a dipshit. HOW THE FUCK DOES KEVIN COSTNER OUTLIVE HIM?!!! Anger management sounds good about now...

I liked this movie. I thought Sean Connery was great, admittedly Kevin Costner was a bit 'green and wimpy' but, what the heck. Big names sell films and at that time Costner was 'hot property' I think. Thank god for Sean to save the day
I actually liked Garcia a lot in this, I thought he would have done more/gone further
Someone mentioned they didnt like the scene at the station with the pram going down the stairs, I thought that was quite tenseful (though we knew full well nothing would happen to the baby) but it was indulgent I admit!!
I'd give the film 7/10

FH

Although it isn't one of my all time favorites, I hardly consider "The Untouchables" a piece of crap! I found it entertaining. Wow! Everyone is so harsh on Costner!


TIS

Connery's performance is worth the price of admission. DeNiro was fine, in his too-few scenes.

And they're only reason is probably something dealing with Dances with Wolves beating out Goodfellas for best picture, 1990. :rolleyes:

We're talking about Field of Dreams, JFK, Dances. Fine actor.

And The Untouchables is IMO a great movie. It's a personal fav.

Wasn't there a TV series of the Untouchables? I'll be that was better than the film.

Jimmy,

Yes there was a weekly series of "The Untouchables" which ran in the early 60's,maybe late fifties. It starred Robert Stack (who recently passed away) as Eliot Ness. Although I'm sure to the young viewers it would be really dated, I enjoyed at the time. I'd love to see repeats of it, if for nothing else for the nostaglia.

TIS

Yeah, I knew Robert Stack was Eliot Ness and I may have seen a couple of the original episodes, but didn't they have a remake of the television series in the 90s?

Jimmy,

After I posted, I started thinking and I do believe they did have a remake, but it was so short lived and I never got a chance to see it. I can't even remember who starred in it. Sometimes I don't think they give what could be a decent show half a chance and it gets cancelled. I would have loved to check it out.


TIS

There was a remake in the 90's, William Forsythe sp? was Al Capone. It was OK.

As for the movie I felt that was one of the best performances by Sean Connery ever. It played fast and loose with the truth, but that is Hollywood. Nitti didn't die, he shot himself years later to avoid jail in the Motion Pictures extrotion scandal. And Wilson, who did all the work to get Capone on income tax never worked with Ness.

Ness actually only busted up a few breweries and such and played no role in sending Capone to prison.

I have not seen this movie since it first came out, but remember enjoying it. Now I wonder ...