Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Console best movie i've ever seen.

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.

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

philosopherjack During his rather brief but glorious heyday, Arthur Penn seemed incapable of generating a merely functional scene; his work was at once thrillingly intimate and engaged and yet full of weighted, often melancholy implication. His work has the quality of a cinematic barometer - at its most vivid in the sixties; silent for much of the misbegotten seventies and then disillusioned and wayward; and then never fully himself from the eighties onward, as if America had lost its power to stimulate. Target is no doubt one of his least-cherished films, although by some measures (the more conventional ones) it's among his most proficient - it's seamlessly plotted, compellingly paced and entirely on top of its action scenes, especially the car chases. Gene Hackman's Walter Lloyd is a small-town lumber yard owner, so boring he won't even accompany his wife on a European vacation, until she disappears and he heads over with his son (Matt Dillon) in search of her: the first dead body shows up at the baggage claim, heralding Walter's past identity as a CIA Cold War super-operative, the detritus of which now provides a resurgent threat. Hackman is surely in tune with the broader idea, that however much the 80's might have seemed like a time of settling and resignation, nothing had been resolved; the surface might still crack both for worse (undermining all concepts of stability and predictability) and for better (Walter's resurrection of his buried self, and the consequent rewrite of his relationship with his son, portends a healthier and more vibrant future for the family). It's no surprise of course that the peril turns out to be caused by rot within the system, by duplicity and weak character. I suppose the degree to which you think the climactic fire symbolizes a broader possibility of cleansing might depend on how optimistic you felt at the time about peak-Reaganism. But it seems certain that the younger Penn would have found stranger and groovier patterns in the flames.

LCShackley I'm a sucker for espionage movies filmed on location in Europe, so I was positively inclined toward this film, which I had never heard of before it cropped up on cable this week. I'm not sure how I missed it back in 1985, because I'm a Hackman fan and usually like movies of this type.This is an OK film, but not a great one. The locations are superb, and there are enough car chases to keep guys like me happy. The basic idea of the film (family of man with secret past must pay for his actions) is all right, too, but it plays out in a rather clunky way. (The story, by the way, was written by Leonard Stern, the executive producer of the GET SMART TV show, and the co-inventor of "Mad Libs".) Hackman is the best part of the picture. Josef Sommer is also good, but is basically playing the same role he played in WITNESS (also in 1985). He could phone in a part like this. What drags this movie down is the thoroughly annoying Matt Dillon subplot. I'm not sure if it's just Dillon the actor that bothers me, or his character. The screenwriters try to turn this film into a family drama, where the father is reconciled to his son while they search for the kidnapped mother. But the son is SO stupid and annoying, that if I were Gene Hackman, I'd let the KGB put Dillon in a cement overcoat and toss him in the Baltic. IMHO, this would have been a better film with Hackman searching by himself (along with his former lover, perhaps, who is a more interesting character than Dillon).The closing climactic scene drags on WAY too long. The tension is gone long before it's over, and the fade-out shot of the cuddly family is trite. (If you think about it, they're still in a LOT of trouble at that point, probably more than an hour before!) A much better film with a similar plot (and good locations) is the Harrison Ford vehicle FRANTIC. For spy fans, TARGET is worth watching once, but won't bear repeating.

Scarecrow-88 Ex-CIA agent, now operating a hardware business in Dallas, Texas, Walter Lloyd(Gene Hackman) finds that his wife Donna(Gayle Hunnicutt)has been kidnapped during her trip in Paris and must find her. Estranged son Chris(Matt Dillon)insists on joining him as they help keep each other stay alive in the midst of gunmen, working for mysterious sources,trying to kill them. His former partner Taber(Josef Sommer), now the head CIA man in Paris seems only too willing to help an old pal out. Clay(Guy Boyd)is Taber's right hand man trying to find out who would wish to kidnap Donna. The film follows Walter and Chris on their Euro journey often escaping certain peril in some rousing action sequences and near-death escapes. The one responsible for kidnapping Donna might be seeking revenge towards Walter for a CIA operation titled "Operation:Clean Sweep" which led to a family being slaughtered of one Cold War target that got away.Popcorn espionage thriller following Hackman and Dillon I thought was entertaining even if I didn't believe what the plot was selling for a minute. Syrupy bonding sequences between Hackman and Dillon just don't seem to work. Hackman, always the versatile actor, plays the role of hero with ease. The climax when it's revealed who was really behind the slaughter of a family..the one Hackman's Walter is being held accountable for..doesn't hold up well. I do not think the one responsible for such an act, carried out the way it was, would make himself look so guilty at such an inopportune time. Crackerjack bomb-diffusing sequence at the end is quite suspenseful, though.

bob_bear How a talent like Gene Hackman ever got involved with this tripe I do not know. 1985 - not exactly a golden year for movies - maybe he just needed a job.The action is driven by an initial kidnapping and the plot turns on a series of twists that don't just stretch the bounds of possibility they snap it! How come everyone seems to know when Hackman will be arriving in a new city and are duly waiting for him, for example? And not once but repeatedly.Indeed, the basic premise of the movie insults the intelligence.Hackman's character argues that the person kidnapped will be kept alive until the kidnappers have their hands on him. Why does he think that? WHY??? It doesn't make ANY sense!! Especially, in the given circumstances.Add to this, the corny dialogue, Matt Dillon playing the dumbo (again!), and an actor who turns out to be the corrupt official/bad guy in every film I've ever seen him in (so no surprise twist there!) and you get a film that should have been thrown out at the development stage.