Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

rodrig58 William Devane, the actor from "Family Plot" (1976), directed by Alfred Hitchcock, "Marathon Man"(1976), directed by John Schlesinger, and Tommy Lee Jones, the actor from "JFK"(1991), directed by Oliver Stone, "The Fugitive"(1993), directed by Andrew Davis, "No Country for Old Men"(2007), directed by Ethan Coen, Joel Coen. What do you want more for a film to be good? A good story signed Paul Schrader and a bunch of other good actors as Linda Haynes, Luke Askew, Cassie Yates, etc. I really would have liked to have in my real life a reliable friend as Johnny Vohden, the character played by Tommy Lee Jones. As I would have liked to have a girlfriend like Linda Forchet, the character played by Linda Haynes. But, real life is a little bit different, you can't find reliable people in it, all betray you sooner or later...

Wizard-8 Some people don't like "Rolling Thunder" very much, and while I can sort of see their viewpoint with some aspects of the movie, at the same time I can see some really good things. The movie is indeed very dark and downbeat, and there aren't any characters that we can totally sympathize with; even the main character played by William Devane has a few unlikable aspects. The pacing will also be a turnoff for some viewers. While I was never bored by the movie, I could see why some viewers will be wondering why the central character doesn't get down to business a lot quicker. And there is the fact that all the Vietnam vet characters in the movie are portrayed to be big losers and with diseased minds, a stereotype I am quite tired of seeing.But despite the movie not being perfect, there is enough good stuff here to make it worth a look. The acting (particularly Devane and Tommy Lee Jones) is very good, the action and violence still pack a pretty good punch more than three decades later, and Devane's character has some quirks that make his character interesting to study. While I wouldn't call this movie a classic, I do think it has enough to offer viewers who are up for a movie that doesn't have a slam-bang pace and is not wall to wall action.

punishmentpark When I saw Paul Schrader credited for the original story, but not the final screenplay, I became as much enthusiastic as I grew suspicious. But I didn't get that right, because he díd co-write the screenplay... Reading his criticism (Imdb trivia) puts me in the right again, since the studio changed a lot of his original ideas; his script was simply reworked without his consent.I must say I liked this film anyway, but I am still hoping to find the book some time. The character Rane is not a racist as he would have been according to Schrader, but in this version he is still fascinating; quiet, letting things happen, but still one can sense there is a lot going on with him. I'm glad William Devane got the role instead of Kris Kristofferson, because he adds sympathy to the character and I'm not sure how well this would have worked with Kristofferson.The story is another matter. As said before, the criticism on the Vietnam War and the racist character that Rane was intended to be, are nowhere to be found. Rane is a hero, but 'dead' as he states himself and it is really hard to get a grip on him, ór the story. In the end, the only thing he wants is revenge for his murdered son, and there is still the camaraderie between him and his army buddy Vohden. In between, Rane hooks up with blonde bombshell Linda, who tries to get through to him. But between his broken family life - which is ultimately taken away from him by a merciless gang - and his new status a hero who is totally out of place, there is nothing left...A violent, nihilistic finale ensues, and I can only try to imagine what Schrader's intentions and input could have done better for this strange, but certainly not bad result.7 out of 10.

rzajac Some good writing, occasionally soaring. Good acting, generally good story management. A few editing lapses.Watched it because of Tarantino; found a couple of influences, such as the POW thing, and Tarantino borrowed a great many-on-one fight sequence concept for Kill Bill; the moment when an impaled person functions as a kind of shield to keep other assailants at bay.Interesting study in violence. Also (as T. said) not half bad character study. Being careful not to spoil, there's a surprising plot/character fillip about 2/3 through the story. A very clever way to keep the tone of the story high, and keep us on our toes.All told, worth watching as a kind of period artifact; it displays rudiments of a higher level of story quality in a low-budget flick.