Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Syl No offense, this movie has lots of problems mostly with the writing. I don't know what exactly happens except that Val Kilmer's character walks around Echo Park in Los Angeles, California with a briefcase. He befriends, Antoine, an African American boy, off from school for the holiday. Val's character makes constant phone calls to his ex-wife Alice (played by Marg Helgenberger); his adult daughter in Florida; Wilmer Valderamma's character; and his girlfriend. I only saw this movie because a favorite actor of mine, Michael Muhney, plays Detective Daniels in the film. It's a small supporting part. The setting of the park in Los Angeles is quite lovely to look at on screen. The film was shot entirely on location in Los Angeles, California and probably on a low budget. I wonder how bad the other screenplays were. While I believe the strongest aspect of the film is the Antoine friendship with Val's character. I still don't know what happened at the end.

Brett Hernan Val Kilmer's own production company was somehow responsible for this film. It is supposedly some kind of drama synthesized with an action film but misses the mark due to the dramatic elements being the most over-used clichés of the 'redeemed con turned family man' genre. Important to note, here in Australia, (where they must take us for idiots), this film has on its cover a picture of Val standing tall against a blood red background and holding two .45 pistols and beside the phrase, 'A Game of Life and Death'. Which bit was of the film was that? Was it the part where the man feeds the ducks? Or was it the fact that the majority of the 'action', (if you can call someone making 28 phone calls 'action') occurring beside a lake which the characters could perilously fall into and perhaps drown? Maybe they might catch something from all the pollution in the water? That might be fatal and constitute elements of 'life and death'. Who knows? The 'action' in this film substantiates to about 15% of the total, if that. I don't mind it being a drama, but it's downright dishonest to palm this off as a gritty edge of your seat 'action' film and then have the majority of the story center around a day in the park, which is what it really is. There were no .45 caliber guns of the type shown on the cover used at any point in this film by the character Val portrays. Perhaps they substituted this imaginatively suggestive cover because they realized pretty quickly after putting it in front of a test audience that if they used a shot of the man feeding the ducks on the cover with Val together with his eight year old on-again-off-again pal smiling in the distance whilst peddle boating across the lake in the sunshine then people might get a whiff and not rent it. Here in Australia that fake cover fully constitutes false advertising as per the 1972 Trade Practises Act section 40 and on Monday I'm going to personally call the Office of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and make a complaint about that as it breaches the law. At one point in the film the blood smudge on Val's cheek switches sides (and during a close up, if you can believe they would miss such a glaring error). (Don't think the blood smear indicates any type of 'action' having occurred either.) They even spelled 'gangster' on the cover with two 'n's! To me this indicates that the production crew and or anyone else involved with this film weren't looking too closely at the final edit. Maybe they couldn't wait to get rid of it. I'm pretty sure no one was looking too closely, and after watching it I will advise anyone, neither should you.

gebe_vlady Definitely a movie worth watching. Val Kilmer is such a complex and an accomplished actor that this movie fits him like a glove. The story itself is an action - crime thriller (where Kilmer is an semi-high profile thief that plans on retiring "en fanfare") interweaved with the drama of his personal life, which he plans on rebuilding by breaking up with his foreign girl-friend and start over with his ex-wife (Marg Helgenberger) and daughter he knows so little. These two plans come together in Echo Park where his last job comes down. The only thing I don't understand is that Antoine kid....his character was a little confusing and I didn't quite get what his role in the movie was. Other than that, acting is great, script is OK i guess, keen on details, overall the movie is very enjoyable...at least for me it was.....

way2grimee After seeing the horrendous 'Conspiracy' I had almost lost faith in kilmer all together. However this movie is a return to form. The little black kid he talks to in the park is a great character and really helps Val along with his own demons.For a low budget flick it works well and the acting is superb, especially the kid, top little actor, I expect to see more from this dude.The plot all be it simple is effective and pretty much the entire movie transpires in echo park. The romance sub-plot works well and didn't feel like it was just thrown in their and overall was a good movie with some tense parts throughout and a great ending.I recommend it to Val Kilmers fans and anyone else for that matter.By no means a Hollywood blockbuster but taking into account a tiny budget, linear setting and some good acting...I give it 8/10 Well worth a look.