Mjeteconer Just perfect...

ChampDavSlim The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Walter Sloane Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

jawneyfloros Plot: In the year 1999 a washed up private eye gets approached by a drug addicted about his kidnapped wife that was found murdered. Review: I really enjoyed this movie for two reasons. Reason number one because it is a fresh take on the classic genre of neo-noir crime thriller. Reason number two because at the heart of the story its about friendship. The direction and screenplay are both incredible. Both the casting and acting are incredible also. All in all I would give this five out of a possible five stars.

sddavis63 "A Walk Among The Tombstones" Is The Perfect Vehicle For Liam Neeson. He plays Matt Scudder - an ex-cop haunted by a troubled and alcoholic past who makes ends meet by working as an unlicensed private detective. He gets hired by a wealthy drug dealer to find the scum who kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered his wife, and as he investigates he discovers that she isn't the only one who's fallen victim to the killers - they've been targeting the wives, girlfriends and daughters of wealthy drug dealers - and in the end the movie focuses on the desperate search for a 14-year old girl who's been taken by them.This movie is dark and suspenseful, and Scudder is a dark, troubled and gritty character. From the very beginning the viewer is drawn in because after only a few minutes we become aware of what's happening to these young women with creepy shots of one of the terrified victims being bound and touched by her captors. It's enough to make you feel sympathy for the victims. You want these guys to be caught. You want justice and/or revenge for what they've done. The movie plays on that. It avoids the temptation to become overly graphic with what's happened to the victims. Just a few shots every now and then make things clear. There's a tense and sombre feel to this from the very beginning and that mood never really goes away.Neeson was superb. This character fit him to a "t." I was basically unfamiliar with the rest of the cast. They all did well enough. But they're not what I would consider big name actors. This was Neeson's movie. He would be the draw - his presence in the cast was why I chose to watch this - and he does not disappoint.There were a couple of things here that didn't work especially well for me. I wasn't entirely clear on how Scudder made the connection between the various killings as quickly as he did, and the character of T.J. - a homeless boy who befriends Scudder and becomes his sort-of partner - seemed extraneous to me. The movie could have worked perfectly well without him and I never really understood the point of his presence. But those are relatively minor quibbles. This is a very good movie with a story and performance from Neeson that are first-rate. (8/10)

mistermoviereview At this point Liam Neeson had cemented himself as our new action hero superstar who proved that beating the air out of bad guys never gets old, if you do it right of course.'A Walk Among the Tombstones' takes our beloved actor down a different path this time with the character of Scudder (Neeson), an ex-cop who clearly has the weight of the past bearing down on him. Working now as a private investigator, Scudder accepts his latest case that gets him involved with some bad people, and some really bad people. From there, you tag along with him as he tries to identify the people who are responsible for the murder of his employer's wife.This might sound like something you have seen before because it is and it isn't. While the movie feels like previous pictures, it still manages to do the same things differently.The film manages to keep you attached with well acted characters, a steady story, that sometimes derails in different directions but quickly collects itself and progresses with the central story, and some really deranged villains that sometimes make you question humanity or the lack of, in this case.To end this review, the film is entertaining with some slow moments here and there, though they are usually integral to the characters or the story itself.Rating: Medium WellMister Movie

Joseph_Gillis The debut novel in Lawrence Block's Matthew Scudder series is arguably the darkest and most unrelentingly bleak of the countless private eye novels I've read, and although I haven't read the novel which this film is an adaptation of, I suspect director Franks has nailed its tone.The subject matter - of the executions by a pair of renegade ex-DEA agents of drug kingpin wives and, in the final case, child - and the graphic nature of the killings might suggest cheap thrills appealing to fans of such as 'Death Wish' and other vigilante-style films, but there's a dark intelligence here, even if the focus might suggest otherwise.Based on the Block novels I have read, it's fair to say that they vary wildly in quality - I would also say that his ex-crime-writing buddy, Donald E. Westlake has a higher strike-rate - but this is one instance where I would urge anybody who has recognised the intelligence at work to seek out the source novel, because I strongly suspect that considerable extra depth and value will be added by Scudder's interior monologues.I won't claim to be a huge Liam Neeson fan but although from my vague recall I suspect the Scudder of the novels is bulkier and more beaten down - perhaps Brian Dennehy at his peak might have been a better fit - Neeson is probably as good a fit as anybody now, given commercial dictates, and he does an adequate job here.I particularly liked the scenes with the park attendant, and the performance and look of the more talkative psycho, Ray. The drug 'trafficker' who hired Scudder had just enough believable 'humanity' about him to make him seem real, and a cut above the stereotype. Dan Stevens' performance was probably as good as anybody's, in the role. I liked the dark look of daytime New York, too: that's how I would have pictured it in 'Sins Of The Fathers', also. The young sometime-assistant was novel, I suppose, but I could have done without his lightness and frequently-tedious street, and classic PI-smarts. Perhaps this was another concession to commerce?I've read elsewhere that this ending fell considerably short of the novel's, which is a particular highlight. Which is a matter of some relief, also, as this ending - apart from the juxtaposed attendant AA recitation - looked just too familiar for me.6 might be too low, but 7 certainly too high. It's functionally done, but just too lean in its 'execution' to be even considered for ranking among the great crime films of the 21st Century. Perhaps a 6.5, or a 6.4 would be fairest rating, mainly for Lawrence Block and his creation.