It is remarkable to me how much affection and revulsion this watchable, incomplete misfire of a film can inspire, here among the Comments and elsewhere; I haven't seen more than a few minutes of it for several years, but did see it in a theater in its original run. Kathleen Turner as VIW is too much a flirt to conform to Sara Paretsky's portrait of her detective, but otherwise gives a decent performance that, better than the script, gets across Warshawski's toughness, wit and unwillingness to suffer fools any more than she has to. The film, as someone else noted, would've done well to be a more faithful adaptation of one of the early novels, rather than pulling bits from several and then letting the plot go completely slack by the last third. But there are nice touches, here and there; Wayne Knight was born to play the petty thug and childhood schoolmate of Warshawski. But the hastiness and corner-cutting of the production is unfortunately evident. One wonders if a second film, with a better script and crew, might've been quite good.
Add a Review
-
Uriah4327 February 2014"V.I. Warshawski" (Kathleen Turner) is a private detective who is hired by a former hockey player named "Bernard 'Boom Boom' Grafalk" (Stephen Meadows) to investigate some deals involving his two brothers. When her client is murdered she not only inherits the murder case but temporarily gets Bernard's 13 year-old daughter "Kat" (Angela Goethals) as well. Throw in a shady mob figure by the name of "Smeissen" (Wayne Knight), a fatherly cop "Lt. Mallory" (Charles Durning) and a two-timing newspaper journalist named "Murray" (Jay O. Sanders) and what develops is a good action movie with plenty of humor along the way. Now, while this movie certainly has some faults what I liked best about it was the performance of Kathleen Turner who I thought did quite well in spite of some weak dialogue and a couple of rather obvious and predictable scenes. She also had some great legs. In any case, I enjoyed the movie and I rate it as slightly above average.
-
In the 1980's Kathleen Turner was a tremendous star. Several of her films were huge box-office hits:"Romancing the Stone"(1984), "Jewel of the Nile"(1986), "Peggy Sue Got Married"(Best Actress Oscar nomination,1986), and "The War of the Roses"(1989). Critics loved her in John Huston's "Prizzi's Honor"(1985) and "The Accidental Tourist"(1987). Her sexy voice helped make "Who Framed Roger Rabbit"(1988) an enormous blockbuster. And who can forget her star-making performance that made her quite the sex-symbol in "Body Heat"(1981). When "V.I. Warshawski" came out Turner was still at her peak. The huge success of "War of the Roses" made her the #1 female star at US BoxOffices in early 1990. But "V.I." opened to disastrous reviews. She is actually very good in it but the script is so mediocre and the direction is so flat. She is given nothing to work with but her vibrant personality and sultry looks keep it together. The film ended up pulling in only 12 million in the US. This disaster immediately derailed Turner's career. Male stars like Bruce Willis and Nicolas Cage can star in one flop after another pulling in huge salaries but it does not matter as long as they get an occasional blockbuster. But take a huge Female star like Turner- give her one colossal dud and she is more or less finished in Hollywood. Turner's career never recovered. A few more mediocre duds followed then her looks went so now she is stuck in supporting roles that make it hard to believe she was once among the greatest of female stars. Maybe she can make a comeback as a star character actress. WHo knows.
-
mike70428 July 2001I keep thinking the other people who have commented on this movie saw a different movie than I did. I totally enjoyed it, Kathleen Turner delivers a wisecrack better than anyone and her mocking laugh in the bathtub scene is too much! She shows her vulnerable side yet you know that V.I. can take care of herself when she has to. The foul mouthed little girl made me cringe a little with her first words in the movie. The chemistry between V.I. and the girl works for me. Randy Edleman's music for the movie really delivers as well. My test of a film really centers on the characters. If I like the characters and care about them that's usually enough. This film has a story which is more than I can say for other more popular films. I would give it 4 stars out of 5.
-
twray1974-4-42242021 November 2012I'm coming at this as a fan of Kathleen Turner, the V.I. Warshawski series and of my home city of Chicago. This movie simply blew it.
The casting, at least, was perfect. Turner is perfectly cast as V.I. The voice, the look, the attitude, everything. She perfectly captures the character. Even the rest of the casting is good. Jay O. Sanders perfectly fits Murray (A red-headed Elliot Gould according the books) and Dennehy is Bobby Mallory.
The problem is script and direction. They took bits and pieces from at least four different books and threw them together, badly. They watered down V.I. (tho Turner did a hell of a job of working through it). The movie loses its way at the end. It's just a mess. The directing was half-hearted. And they never got much of the character of Chicago, which is a major part of V.I. herself.
This could have been a great movie. V.I. is one of the great unsung female characters in mystery fiction. Chicago is one of the great cities of the world. And the stories in the series are full and complex. And this movie wasn't any of it.
It's good for the hardcore Kathleen Turner fans. She is the best part of this movie and manages to get the character to show through the bad dialog. But this movie could have been so much more. Hopefully a good adaption could be done at some point. -
gridoon202410 July 2009This movie does have some things going for it; above all, the performances of Kathleen Turner and Angela Goethals. Turner fits the profile of her character and is believably tough, sarcastic and funny, while Goethals is one of the best teen actresses I've seen in a while, with a sharp timing that matches Turner; those two make an enjoyable team. And yet something holds the movie back from being anything more than a passable diversion - maybe it's the plot, which is interesting for the most part but gets a little too far-fetched at the end (without spoiling anything, I couldn't easily accept that "person A" was so intent on killing "person B"), or maybe it's the direction, which doesn't have enough style and doesn't make much use of the Chicago locations (apart from a boat chase). It's kind of a shame that this movie didn't get any sequels - they had the right actress for the part, all they needed was a better vehicle for her. ** out of 4.
-
SnoopyStyle1 September 2015Vicky V.I. Warshawski (Kathleen Turner) is a brassy private investigator in Chicago. She meets ex-hockey player Boom-Boom Grafalk at a bar. She is surprised when he brings his daughter Kat (Angela Goethals) to babysit. Next he's killed in a suspicious accident. V.I. promises Kat to solve her father's death. With the help of reporter Murray (Jay O. Sanders), they investigate the death and the sale of the family dockside property and business.
I like Kathleen Turner as this character. She fits the character quite well and her relationship with little tough-talking Kat is endearing. It's too bad that this is such a badly made movie. The action is done poorly. Director Jeff Kanew does a poor job overall. -
robert_kirschten11 June 2011As a native of Chicago, I can't say enough about how beautifully the city was photographed in this movie. As for the film itself, the story kept moving at an engaging pace as detective V.I. Warshawski "follows the money" and solves the murder of a former pro hockey player. Turner is aggressive, sexy, sultry, and vulnerable in this role. Maybe more street-smart, Chicago toughness in her delivery. The writing, overall, was adequate. Warshawski's general observations about the stupidity and gullibility of men tasted to me like watered-down feminism on a piece of stale, Chicago deep-dish pizza after a while. I wasn't often convinced that the female detective was a physical threat to the male villains. The ending with a double-opponent elimination was OK but I would like to have seen her action skills equal those of Bruce Willis for true equality to prevail. After all, the key to this action genre is the ability of the detective to overcome overwhelming physical and mental opposition. A pleasant, movie-of-the-week kind of yarn, though better. And that beautiful city!
-
Mr-Fusion7 February 2016You look at the marketing material for "V.I. Warshawski" and see Kathleen Turner wielding a gun and those killer legs, and you're bound to be disappointed by the end result: a mediocre P.I. movie. This reminded me of "One for the Money", a detective movie for women, which doesn't have to be a bad thing, but there's no spark. I think it's mostly that she's stuck taking care of this kid, and it doesn't help that the case isn't interesting. I can't hate this movie, because, even though it takes its dear sweet time getting the ball rolling, Warshawski becomes the administer of ass-beatings instead of the recipient. And it's not bad from then on.
But just know that you're not getting the sex-symbol Kathleen Turner in the actual movie. You're getting the by-the-numbers-single-woman-who-lives-on-junk-food version of a big city sleuth. You would think Lifetime made this.
5/10 -
Dog-River30 April 2021I honestly don't understand the low rating. I totally enjoyed this movie. Kathleen Turner and Jay O. Sanders were especially great in this. It has a good story and a decent amount of action scenes. I'd suggest people ignore the low rating and give it a shot for themselves.
-
amck10 July 2000I saw this movie ONCE, in 1991 when it was released, and it stunk so bad that 9 years later I STILL remember it and am returning to have my revenge. Particularly cringeworthy are the opening shots where Turner is talking to some butcher about various problems with males, or her boyfriend, or whatever, while the background is literally a curtain of hanging sausages. Not a little too blatant on the symbolism there. Then after listening to V I complain about being ogled while jogging, the camera rests lovingly on her bare, pumping legs while she is, um well, out jogging -- allowing the audience to condemn lowbrow sexuality one moment and indulge in it the next. Finally, the director found it necessary to show all the disgusting closeup details of V I's elderly refrigerator contents, after Turner's carefully filmed gasp of repulsion upon opening the door, not even trusting the audience enough to let them imagine it for themselves.
All in all, an irritating waste of Kathleen Turner's talents and my time. I haven't given this the full and eloquent blasting it deserves and has received from other IMDb commenters, but it WAS 9 years ago and time blessedly blunts the details.
As an addendum, let me say that while reviewer Marinelle K. Szenasy (see below) may have liked the film, she's totally off base in attributing its critical panning to men's "fear" of VI's character. I get very tired of crappily-constructed female characters being excused on the basis of offending male biases. It is possible for tough female characters to be both well written and appealing-- see e.g. Pulp Fiction -- and I applaud those whenever they appear. Sorry, Ms. Szenasy, you'll have to come up with a better excuse than that for this dreck.
A 2 on the star-o-meter. -
leigh287027 March 2005For the time this movie was released, it really is a solid film. One I stop and watch anytime I catch it on cable. I like Kathleen Turner as Vic and see her as Vic when I read Paretsky's Blacklist (2004) and Indemity Only (1982). Paretsky is such a skilled writer that I read all 332 pages of Indemity Only completely in one Saturday. This would have been a good vehicle/series for Ms. Turner if the movie had followed the novels closer. They should have hired Paretsky to write the screen play.
The screenwriters, Edward Taylor, David Aaron Cohen, & Nick Thiel, I believe are responsible for this film being unsuccessful at the box office. It appears they did not read the books or believe themselves that a women could be a private investigator. Paretsky gave them a well rounded, gritty, thorough character. The screenwriters tried to make it a comedy/action film and dishonored Paretsky in their representation of her character. The screen play should have been written as an action/thriller along the lines of Patriot Games (1992), an action/crime like the Italian Job (2003), or a mystery along the lines of the Thomas Crown affair (1999). All have comedic moments in them and would be better genres for the V.I. Warshawki novels.
Maybe if Ms. Turner is up to it she could revive the character or perhaps Charlize Theron would take a shot at it. -
donlhumphries4 August 2000I quite like this movie, as it's a good detective yarn and Kathleen Turner gives her usual professional performance - in this case as tough female private-eye, V.I.Warshawski. For some odd reason the film reminds me of "The Maltese Falcon"; but anyway it holds one's interest. There's plenty of action, and what does V.I. need in order to hire her? "Money, and a Just Cause". Score: 7 out of 10.
-
toll-826 January 2012I had a problem with this film right from the start. It is a problem that I would not have noticed if I had watched it in 1991 when it was released, but being four years old at the time there was not much chance that I had watched it. Watching it in 2012 however may be a problem for some people and it is a problem that will have your mind wandering from the so called plot and onto something else entirely. Those 'some' people though would have to be Friends fans and that is because Kathleen Turner, the lead of this movie, plays Chandler Bing's Dad, yes Dad, in the hit US comedy show. This to me was a major issue as I just couldn't take the actress seriously. When she kissed her on-off boyfriend I couldn't help but think it was two men kissing. Not that it would be an issue if it was two men but I couldn't take the character of VI Warshawski seriously.
Before I dig a hole with the stereotype of Mr Kathleen Turner, sorry Mrs Kathleen Turner, I will mention that she is also the voice of Jessica Rabbit from Who Framed Roger Rabbit? This created another problem because she has a really sexy voice. If I closed my eyes I could hear a sexy, long legged, red headed cartoon with huge breasts and when I opened my eyes I would see Chandler Bing's Father. This was a confusing time for me.
I'll move on with the film, it isn't good. In fact it is so poorly directed and written that it would have been better doing the Jessica Rabbit, Chandler Bing's Dad cross character, as it would have made this film much more interesting. It was corny and cheesy and most of the acting was absolutely dreadful which made lines that possibly weren't intended on being corny even more corny.
The film is about Private Investigator Vicky Warshawski. She meets a man in a bar and later on that night he turns up at her door asking her to look after his daughter. Is that normal behaviour towards someone you've just met? She agrees, he goes off, is murdered and Warshawski intends on solving the mystery. She involves the daughter and they head off on a girl beats man mission. Every line is a comment to chauvinistic men. 'Us girls should stick together', that kind of poor dialogue.
The plot is a complete wash over and everything is just far too easy. There is no investigating what so ever and the first clue they receive seems to be the only one they need, as the case was obvious from the very first minute. I thought an investigation film needed to keep the viewer in the dark and spring an unbelievable surprise right at the end. Obviously not. The action scenes are dull. A boat chase where nothing happens and a final shoot out which just sucks.
The only good thing from the film was the array of actors that you will see in films and programmes of today. We have a scientist from The Day After Tomorrow, a cop from Dog Day Afternoon, the small stupid pirate from Pirates Of The Caribbean, the caretaker of the building in Friends and Wayne Knight, the man who gets spat in the face by a dinosaur in Jurassic Park. There is also a cameo from the Ghostbusters's building, I'm sure of it.
At least this review has come to something. It has reminded us of all the other decent films out there that are a hundred times better than this one. I seem to have mentioned more films unrelated to this one than I have the one I'm reviewing. By all accounts Warshawski was a series of detective novels that portrayed the character completely differently to how she is portrayed by the film makers. Perhaps it could have been a better film if some reading of the novels had been done, but that clearly hadn't happened. I'll sum up V.I. Warshawski in three words; don't bother watching.
1 / 5
Tolli Check out more reviews at: www.tolli-movieworld.blogspot.com Follow me @Tolli04 -
dream-warrior200120 January 2003V.I. Warshawski is my all-time favorite movie, and I don't know why people keep butchering it so bad. It's an intriguing mystery that pulls you in and doesn't let you go until the end.
Kathleen Turner shines as detective Victoria Warshawksi whom is hired by the 13 year old girl, Kat, she is babysitting to find out who murdered her father. With suspects at every corner, Vic doesn't know who to trust and who not to. Kat joins forces with Vic in a more helpful approach to the situation, getting information that Vic can't obtain herself eliminating suspects and narrowing it down to one. The ending will blow your mind, as it isn't expected.
Filmed on Chicago's waterfront, V.I. Warshawski delivers the goods for intrigue, mystery, and top notch action! If you haven't seen it, give it a chance. It's worth the 1.99 rental price - don't listen to anyone who says this movie unbearable to watch because it's an outstanding film and one of Kathleen Turner's best. -
generationofswine9 July 2019Well, kudos need to go to Kathleen Turner for actually trying. She makes it a bearable film by force of personality alone.
However none of the jokes really landed. The dialogue is horrible, the direction is flat and looks a lot like a single camera sitcom.
Basically, it's just Kathleen Turner trying her best to salvage a bad film with nothing really going for it. She brought her A-Game to it and that should be recognized, however it's not something worth watching, despite her best efforts. -
iwatcheverything22 September 2003I didn't really like this film. Where was all the action? I mean it was supposed to be an action film with a little mystery behind it right? The mystery part was okay but after just a few minutes you knew who the bad guy was.
After seeing the man from Sienfeld and 3rd Rock from the sun do some very funny characters, seeing him try to be the hard hitting gangster in this film was hard to believe. He did okay with the role it was just trying to see him as a bad man was not very easy. As for Kathlene Turner, she did the best with the role as she could. She is still a great actress but took on a bad role.
This film is way on the bottom of my list. I wish it could have been so much better but OH WELL. -
V.I. Warshawski is set in Chicago where female private detective V.I. Warshawski (Kathleen Turner) meets ex-hockey player Bernard 'Boom-Boom' Grafalk (Stephen Meadows), they quickly fall for each other & as a favour Warshawski agrees to look after Bernard's 13 year old daughter Kat (Angela Goethals) while he confronts his two brothers about dodgy business dealings at their shipping yard. Later that night at the docks a tug boat explodes & Bernard caught in the blast is killed, Kat hires Warshawski to find out who killed her father. Warshawski starts with Bernard's brother's & business partners Trumble (Charles McCaughan) & Horton (Frederick Coffin), soon Warshawski is feeling heat from the local police & the local mobsters as someone doesn't want her to find out the truth...
Directed by Jeff Kanew this simplistic comedy thriller based on the V.I. Warshawski novels by Sara Paretsky really is as bad as everyone says, in fact this has to be one of the worst big budget Hollywood thrillers of all time & lets face it there's some strong competition out there. The script apparently took three people to write it, Edward Taylor, David Aaron Cohen along with Nick Thiel & one has to say that for such a by-the-numbers unimaginative film that amazes me. With the collective thoughts of three screenwriters why did V.I. Warshawski turn out to be so bad? Who knows, who cares. The plot is no more complicated or clever than a simple murder mystery in which the killers motive is no more original or imaginative that money, it really is as simple as that. There are no twists, there are no clever red herrings or subplots & the whole story is just the most dumbed down collection of thriller clichés you can think of. I was waiting for some sort of clever twist, some amazing plot development but this film has less intelligence & fewer surprises than the average Scooby-Doo episode. Then of course there's the unbearably unfunny & frankly embarrassing attempts at comedy, from the expected comedy relief bad guy & his goons to someone constantly mispronouncing Warshawski's name to all the sexual innuendo fuelled jokes ('she can handle my hose anytime' or 'your a female dick' sums up the sophistication of, or rather lack of, this film) which are so unfunny it hurts. The one-liners aren't funny, the dialogue isn't funny, the zero dimensional character's aren't funny & to top everything off there's a hugely annoying & irritating child actor just to grate on your nerves even more & make you hate yourself for watching it. There's no two ways about it & there's no nice way to put it, V.I. Warshawski is quite possibly the worst crime thriller I have ever seen, period.
Director Kanew turns in an alright looking film, it's competently made but not exactly stylish & the whole one action scene is very flat & unexciting. Basically it's two boats speeding along a river with Warshawski & Kat in one & a couple of bad guy's in the other, that's it, that's the films big action moment. Two boats on a river that never meet or touch. Lame. You know something, I am really struggling to find anything positive to say about this film, I really am. I suppose if you find Kathleen Turner sexy you might like this otherwise I suggest you give it a wide berth. This flopped big time at the box-office when originally released which was probably down to bad word of mouth, the fact it was crap & most people not even being able to pronounce the title V.I. Warshawski let alone know what it meant. According to the IMDb Turner did her own stunts & ended up breaking her nose while shooting this & the producer Jeff Lurie currently owns the Philedelphia Eagles.
Technically the film is reasonably well made but lacks any style & is instantly forgettable on all counts. Although set in Chicago the film was shot partly in Chicago & Los Angeles. The acting is pretty poor all round, Turner was in it for the money probably & felt a big Hollywood action film might do her career some good...
V.I. Warshawski is a truly awful film, I really don't know how else to describe this dreadfully unfunny thriller that tries to be clever & funny but just ends up anything but. A turkey. Big Style. -
jztzt19 June 2013V.I. Warshawski is essentially a macho film with the exception of the sex of the lead character. Kathleen Turner portrays the titular character, a tough-talking and independent Chicago private detective. Not only does she solve a case in the film, she gets herself into a lot of violent confrontations as well, from people who constantly want to foil her investigative findings concerning the inheritance of a shipping industry. Incredibly, Turner is able to stand toe-to-toe with her male counterparts. She is impressively gruff, tough, seasoned, and weary.
There are good and bad elements in the film. As written, the characters' mannerisms and dialogues are too mannered, cute, and artificial. Everyone seems to be wisecracking, yelling, and acting tough all the time. I know that's a common fixture of characters of the detective genre, but it's just too much and too insincere. Some of the characters are quirky but they aren't three-dimensional. There's no shortage of stock, sleazy, and mean spirited characters. I don't care deeply for the characters. They are merely pawns and not fully fleshed out. The film is heavy on dialogue and plot but it could have benefited from more heartfelt and intimate moments, such as exploring the characters' relationships with one another and exploring the inner depths of characters. We rarely glimpse beneath the characters' tough superficial layer and wisecracks. At times, the dialogue is stilted and awkward. There are a lot of feeble attempts at humor and one liners that are quite crude, lame, and inappropriate. The mystery isn't as intriguing or sophisticated as it should be. It's easy to figure out where the story is going as there aren't much surprises. The villains aren't very threatening either. By the end of the film, I still have questions that are left unanswered. I do however, enjoy Turner's gradual rapport with Kat (the young actress overplays the part though), the daughter of a murdered hockey player and who seems to be the key to solving the mystery.
At times, the film does display a quirky sense of humor that works, as evident in certain jokes and sight gags. There are also some interesting and high energy set pieces. However, some of these scenes detract from the main plot and have a juvenile mentality to them.
Whereas other films have been successful and intriguing in their takes on the film noir and detective genre (e.g. Night Moves, Chinatown), V.I. Warshawski is not inspired. -
amurphy223 March 2006Now I know that reading a book is much better than a movie, but this was the pits! Somehow a smart, independent woman, who would be not found for five minutes in high heels was seen as a sex symbol. Turner was a good idea for the part, but it was played all wrong! Also, Warshawski takes on the corporate part of Chicago, not some hockey player and her stupid kid! If Turner played Warshawski correctly, she would have thrown that little brat on the street. Thay also made Mr. Contraas, her neighbor into a "dirty old man" who fit every sterotype of a Mexican immigrant!Anyway, if you want thrills, read the book instead! This movie was really bad!
-
SanteeFats9 February 2014It is my personal opinion that this film would have rated a lot higher if the main character had been a man and not a woman. V.I. Warshawski is a private eye in Chicago who is left with a thirteen year old girl who is the inheritor of a potentially vast estate with the murder of her father. Investigating why the father was killed leads to several interesting discoveries. One of the uncles is trying to kill the girl to get the estate. The mother of the girl, after shooting her husband, the uncle, turns out to be just as greedy and she is willing to kill her own daughter to get the loot. V.I. ends up having to kill the mother to save the daughter. Boy can the P.I. take a punch from Wayne Knight. Knight is some kind of union scum but V.I. gets even for the beating. I enjoyed this movie and found it to be pretty good entertainment.
-
bkoganbing8 September 2018Kathleen Turner stars as private detective V.I. Warshawski and friends call her Vickie. Clients and foes have all kinds of other things and she earns the praises and the brickbats.
I always have thought of Kathleen Turner in the 80s as one of those throwback stars to the golden age of the studio system. She always carried herself that way. She exudes glamor, maybe a little too much glamor to be quite right for a female action star.
Nevertheless she does what she can in the title role and this plot has her ditching her old tried and true boyfriend Jay O. Sanders and hooking up with Stephen Meadows. Meadows is a father and actually wants Turner to be a kind of babysitter for his precocious daughter Angela Goethals. Not exactly her line of work, but the money is good and she likes Meadows.
It becomes a case and a security job when Meadows is killed in a boat explosion. Goethals is convinced this is no accident and Turner stays on the case.
This is one strange family, Meadows wife and Goethals mother Nancy Paul divorced him and married Meadows brother Charles McCaughan. But you won't know how strange until the very end. The young girl is lucky that Turner has her back.
It's not a bad film, but the moviegoing public just couldn't see Kathleen Turner as an action hero. -
I have just seen Kathleen Turnjer in "V.I. Warshawski" for the third time and, for the third time, am at a total loss to understand the panning/overall rating of 4.3 awarded to it by previous reviewers. I think the movie DOES reflect a lot of the Paretsky original novels and think Turner does a good job in portraying "the dick from the dock" in a manner which combines both respect for the literary character and the kind of gritty, down-to-earth film noir genre which the film obviously pays its debts to. This latter aspect is particularly apparent in the DIALOGUE, much of which my wife and I found hysterical and easily on a par with such remakes of Chandler as the "Farewell, My Lovely" version of the 1970s with Robert Mitchum and Charlotte Rampling. Like the letter, "V.I." is not going to be rated as "The Maltese Falcon" or "The Big Sleep" of the 1990s, but I still think it is a sound, entertaining and engaging piece of work, which does not deserve the reviews mentioned above. Now that we are past the "Blow 'em up / SFX-dominated" fayre of "Die Hard 27"or whatever, is it time for a follow-up to what was, in my view, sadly, Turner's sole donning of the red glitter shoes of V.I. with another actress in the role?
-
Hastur27 September 1998Don't blame Kathleen Turner or Sara Paretsky for this tragedy. This is a case of a book that went to movie and was savaged in the process.
Turner does her best to make this disgusting script believable. What were the writers on when they wrote it?
Sara Paretsky's V.I. Warshawski, a raven haired, Italian/Polish Chicago detective was wasted in this flop. The writers, or should I say butchers, took the characters from three separate Paretsky books, threw them into one story, and used the plot from a separate Paretsky novel.
Barely watchable, one can only pray that Warshawski will get another chance on the screen someday. -
daisukereds17 October 2023An IMBD score of 4.9!? Now that's surprising! Considering I enjoyed it very much.
It's rough, has an attitude and a big mouth. Like a good detective movie should be. And while the dialogue is always on point, I think I was more impressed by the interactions between all the characters and the subtle storytelling already there when the movie starts. Specially with the lousy ex-boyfriend reporter. Meaning, it feels like it was thought out, even if it is simplistic. I feel like it has enough quality to try and milk it with a TV show or at least a sequel.
The plot is generic, but has exciting developments and excellent pacing. Doesn't really have much action, but is made well enough to warrant a recommendation.