Add a Review

  • Finding Steve McQueen is a love story disguised as a bank robbery movie. This is a Baby Driver wannabe, without the great production, direction and dialogue. If you've never heard of Travis Fimmel before, well, this film won't leave a lasting impression of him with you either. Finding Steve McQueen has 24 Producers, so if the tempo or mood or anything else seems uneven-there you go. Everything starts out exciting as a bank heist film, but then it flips to a love story and by the 1 hour marks it's ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz. The soundtrack is fantastic, so this is the movie you play in the background while doing something else, like surfing the internet.
  • I thought this was a delightful little film. I liked the structure and the way the story unfolds. Anyone who lived through Watergate will also appreciate the time. I loved that we had an appearance by Deep Throat in his official capacity as Deputy Director of the FBI. I also loved seeing Forrest Whitaker as the dogged FBI agent
  • From the beginning, I wanted to dislike this movie. The lead just didn't strike me as very interesting to start. But like the simple plot and easy to digest acting, he gets better as the movie moves on. The ending was simple and endearing. Nah, it's not that amazing or groundbreaking in the least but it's fun and well paced.
  • Highly fictionalized account of an actual bank robbery that occurred in California, 1972. The main character (Harry Barber), one of the robbers, is a young man who sees himself cut from the same cloth as the actor, Steve McQueen. Despite often having a 'deer in headlights' look about him, Harry unfolds a detailed tale of the robbery some years later to his girlfriend, Molly. The main theme of the heist centers on stealing President Nixon's slush fund money that supposedly is hidden in a safety deposit box with the bank. FBI agents Lambert and Felt (of Nixonian fame as deep cover contact, Deep Throat) are hot on the trail of the heist crew. Both the love story and the heist are an enjoyable watch.
  • jimmyjoe58316 March 2019
    This movie is a good date flick, by a guys standard. Girls will probably enjoy it as well. Travis Fimmel is ok as the leading man but it appeared to me that he is still learning his craft. He is more than capably supported by a great group of actors to help him carry this movie. William Fichtner, Forest Whitaker, John Finn and Molly McQueen are engaging and fun to watch. Louis Lombardi steals every scene he utters dialogue in and Rhys Coiro eerily channels Hal Linden. If this movie didn't have the Nixon/True story angle I don't think it would be as captivating.
  • A well written and executed caper picture. Many laughs, lots of intrigue and an obvious lack of gratuitous violence. Well worth seeing.
  • This movie has a great cast, with deep themes and views based on the time period. Enjoyed every bit.. much better then some higher budget flicks which drags you across the concrete after 2 hours...
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The performances in this movie were great for the most part, and it was definitely a decent caper film. However, the movie was sold on the premise we were going to get the real scoop on the hitherto unreported story of how in 1972 mobsters scored $30 million in dirty slush fund money stashed by Nixon CREEPS in safety deposit boxes in California National Bank. This turned out to be as disappointing as watching Geraldo open Al Capone's vault.

    The performances by the two Aussies, Travis Fimmel (Harry Barber) and Tasmanian angel Rachael Tayler (Molly Murphy) were great. They were sincere, likeable, and they had good romantic chemistry. This movie had kind of a "my escape from the mob" theme, and you couldn't help but to root for Harry and Molly to get away and live happily ever after.

    The mobster performances were also very good. William Fichtner (crew leader Enzo) gave a good performance, as usual, and watching the gang members interact was enjoyable, although some of the gang members sounded a little more Brooklyn than Youngstown, Ohio.

    Forest Whitaker is always enjoyable to watch, but it seemed like his character was there primarily to insert a couple of "facts" into the film. Such as (1) that there seemed to be an awful lot of high-level federal interest in this robbery, and (2) that CREEP member Chuck Coulson had a baseball card collection in one of the safety deposit boxes. Now, I have no idea if these are true, but these are interesting facts. Even taken as true, however, they show little more evidence of a secret $30 million Nixon stash than an average CNN broadcast provides actual evidence of Trump-Russia collusion. No $30 million stash was ever found, and no amount vulgar anti-Nixon rants expressed by several of the characters in this movie changes this fact.

    Tell Geraldo to go back home. This one's empty too.
  • "Finding Steve McQueen" actually has nothing really to do with actor Steve McQueen but is still quite entertaining and funny for a B movie.

    In this crime comedy based on a true story, a gang of thieves attempt to steal millions from Richard Nixon's secret fund.

    Overall a good film with some smart humour and fun twists. William Fitchner ("Crash") gives a stellar and hilarious performance, he kills his role. I did find that "Finding Steve McQueen" was too dragged out and felt long even at 90-minutes. It's crazy to think that this is a true story and considered the biggest heist in America. It's worth a watch.

    See it at home or skip it.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Light spoilers due to based on a real person/story but no serious plot points.

    While it's not gonna bust any genres and the only somewhat interesting filmmaking thing about it is it's timeline jumps due to it being told in flashbacks... (which are done coherently, but it's not actually interesting, it's the only thing i could stretch to say it was interesting in a film making sense..)

    But Travis Fimmel is good as the likable awkward lead.. it's weird seeing him with hair on his head and none on his face from Vikings, lol.. I gotta say, he's got amazing eyes. heh.

    really the only thing going for this movie is the cast, and really, the supporting cast at that, the two romantic leads do well enough but it's the support cast that really shine.. but it's enough to make the film a light fun watch on a saturday afternoon..

    it's a middle of the road film all around but just edges out on this side of ok.. I enjoyed watching it even tho it really didn't do anything.. it's a "cute" little breezy period piece with a light heist bit thrown in.. it's all loosely based on a real thing and person, Harry Barber.. who was part of a heist in the early 70's who had a whole town and it's sheriff do a letter writing campaign on his behalf to attest to his good character..

    so, don't expect much but it does have it's charms.. charming, that's a good one word review. Forest Whitaker is wasted here but Fitchner does his best Fitchner.. it's just light fun but can easily be skipped..
  • soundoflight10 August 2019
    What a strange little movie. It's almost three separate movies in one. The first is about a bank heist, the second is about a sappy romance, and the third is about a politically charged police investigation. Out of the three, only the heist portion has any merit and even that is pretty thin. It's mostly a study in how to create flat, 1-dimensional characters that nobody cares about. The political parts were dull and this Nixon stuff has been re-hashed a million times before. The romance part seems like it was written by a 12 year old boy who's never touched a girl (and in turn, that's how the lead actor plays the part, which was unintentionally the most amusing part of the film). For the most part, I would call the performance "cringe-worthy." The female lead was only remarkable for how much she appears to be a clone of Nicole Kidman (where DO they find these people?). There was so much awesome music in that era, but we get the b-list of the b-list here. You could see everything coming a mile away, partially because they structured the story in a way that intentionally gave away spoilers. Kind of a bizarre approach to filmmaking.

    I watched this only because I like heist films set in that time period. There was more sport back then - now technology has made large scale robberies practically impossible. Do not waste your time with this and instead check out "Thief (1981)."
  • symat-7828329 March 2019
    Warning: Spoilers
    So there are no car chase (sorry one), no big explosion (oops, there is one actually), no hot steamy erotic scene (none, really), no bloodshed (not a drop), no body count (not even a broken arm). It's funny, entertaining, good soundtrack, a couple of scenes could have been slightly shorter. All in all, if it's not going to make its way to the Oscar, it certainly made its way to my heart.
  • ScottDWhalen13 April 2019
    Didn't expect this to be based off a true story.. Funny & actually not bad at all. Always that one simple mistake to ruin a good job that was "almost" well done. They had the right mindset to get the what they wanted, but to put it to action is just straight wrong.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This is inspired by a 1972 California bank heist by some guys in Ohio. The story is told as a flashback from a 1980 Deerwood, Pa. restaurant. In fact, it is a double flashback and chronology seemed unimportant to the story. The bank contained "Nixon's milk money" deposited by Charles Colson. Since the money was "dirty" they figured no one would come after them. They assigned 100 agents to the case.

    The characters were interesting and the dialogue remained light. I enjoyed the film in spite of the gross inaccuracies.

    Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.
  • Everyone loves a good genre film and the heist film is certainly one of Hollywood's favorite charms. A craft as revered as William Goldman and Elmore Leonard. As cool as a Tarantino-curated soundtrack. And why not? Those stories feed into inherent impulses. An underdog sticking it to The Man. The Anybody gambling for a life as a Somebody. Thieving out of sport. Or need. At times, crime does not pay in the glitzy cinematic world. That unlikely hero fails. And falls. Worlds are destroyed. Irreparable harm befalls both innocents and the not-so. Other times? Ah, other times everything simply works out.

    Based on the startlingly-real but mostly-unreported 1972 United California Bank Robbery, the film Finding Steve McQueen narrates one of the largest bank robberies in US history. Much like the quiet nature of the actual robbery, this underdog film suffered a criminal VOD release instead of well-deserving theatrical accolades.

    Screenwriter and Southern California News Group reporter Keith Sharon broke the story of Harry Barber - bank robber, getaway man, and Steve McQueen idol - in his Stealing Nixon's Millions expose, later serialized in his true crime podcast Crime Beat. Barber, along with professional-criminal Enzo Rotella (a delightful William Fichtner who brings a meal of prosciutto and provolone along with his SAG credentials) and a crew from Youngstown, Ohio, steal away to Laguna Niguel, CA where, apparently, President Richard Nixon stashed over $30 million; election money absconded from the Dairy Farmers' Association. The robbery was a success but the story, much like this film, went mostly unheard.

    The film, directed by Mark Steven Johnson, cleverly jumps around in time setting Harry's new small-town life against the daring heist, and the FBI's manhunt, led by a French horn-playing Forest Whitaker. Johnson fashions a more comedic look at the heist genre. More Old Man & The Gun; less Reservoir Dogs. And the style works. Travis Fimmel plays out Barber with equal parts McQueen fetishism and wide-eyed "What, me worry?" enthusiasm. Fimmel sells the role. Barber not only wins the heart of Molly Murphy (Rachael Taylor), but his aw-shucks honesty makes him that perfect Anybody. One that deserves to be a Somebody.

    Finding Steve McQueen is a fun ride complete with an 8-track's worth of 70s pop-culture references and music. The film weaves to the genre beats yet for all of its real-life incredibleness, doesn't pop those points to their best. Perhaps it's the honesty of the tale, or too much silliness, but the film ultimately downplays the usual genre tropes and regrettably eliminates the amped-up thrill, taming the crime, and restricting the heat between Barber and Murphy.

    Unusual, ridiculous, honest, fun, Finding Steve McQueen is an entertaining heist flick that successfully steals the time and deserves a happy ending.
  • me-389-32551930 October 2019
    I am a fan of Steve McQueen and Travis carries of his persona really well. A nice little movie with an interesting storyline given its factual basis.

    That said, it lacked depth and character development of everyone except Travis. Never really got going.
  • First you have to know this movie has nothing to do with Steve McQueen.But it's not bad, very watchable ,with nice acting.
  • If You like early 70s (it's amotsphere), heist movies with loveable characters and slower tempo with finely/shot tuned scenes, You're totally gonna adore this movie. Especially the characters of two brothers. I thoroughly enjoyed how Harry treated his younger (and really simple, yet still devoted and loving) brother. I really enjoyed this movie, like no other in a very, very long time.
  • jan-matej13 April 2019
    What a waste of time this was...Awful acting, terrible directing, shallow story...i mean; do your job people for crying out loud. I don't understand how can a guy who played Ragnar Lothbrok gets a pass on that specific style of acting for anything else. Is that really his only MO, because i can't imagine seeing him no other role anytime soon.
  • pmama6913 January 2020
    How on earth did this get good reviews?? It's slow dull and boring. Nothing to see here, move along. The only good thing about the film is it's quite short, so it's over sooner. Done bother is my advice
  • Do not pay money to go watch Finding Steve McQueen. Went to the screening at the LAFS last night with Seth. You would be highly disappointed if you watch this movie and expect a decent film. The movie was made to flop. A token person of color with hardly any lines, Forest Whitaker, I can't understand why he would agree to participate in the making of the film besides a paycheck. A poorly told story with a main character who is beyond awkward and during the Q&A with the "star" cast (minus Forest Whitaker) was a circle jerk instead of a critique talked about the 5 million dollar film being "low budget". Just terrible. Boring, poorly executed, blatantly made for a dead/dying generation. Garbage. IMHO. Skip this flick.
  • Acting is just okay. The story is slow and a little bit messy. No action at all. Cime part is dull and even the romance part is dull, both very boring parts. At the end it is a dull and boring movie with a bad written script/story.

    They could have made it really nice, but in my eyes it is just short of a total dissaster.

    Not recommended.
  • I love heistmovies, and had some expectations,upon the 1972 flick that featured steve mcqueen, a film that is mentioned a lot, and the main carachter of this movie are a spitting image of.. but i was very disapointed, especially about the story,and excecution of the plot that are excuitesly shallow and un interesting, especially the second half.

    the acting is good enough,and so are the action, but elsewhere it seems like the director and producers have had high hopes that the actors should overperform on a bad script, but they were wrong.the actors does what they are told and paid for,and then the conclusion is done.

    the grumpy old man can recommend, but would rather point a finger to the film nokas, much better and also a true story....
  • Easygoer1020 March 2019
    To even mention Steve McQueen, "The King of Cool", in the title of this film is a joke. It is a woeful, pretentious pile of rubbish. I couldnt stand more than 30 minutes of it. Pass this trash up.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This film start with a police officer "Howard" taking off a chopper and a robber "Harry" talking to his girlfriend "Molly" in a restaurant scene! As turnout, this film is about criminal life of Harry disguise as Steve McQueen! The car chasing scene of Harry and the police actually quite dope! The cursing word in the entire film is the only intensity in the film! The flirting scene of Harry and Molly at the beginning quite laughable but felt boring, overuse and childish along the way! The robbery scene not have a single gun shooting scene! Just a tiny explosion! At the end, Harry walk out the restaurant and caught by the police with no struggle at all! That's it! Another disappointed crime film!
An error has occured. Please try again.