Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

2freensel I saw this movie before reading any reviews, and I thought it was very funny. I was very surprised to see the overwhelmingly negative reviews this film received from critics.

Orla Zuniga It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

BA_Harrison Crime in New York is rampant, the city teeming with switchblade-wielding, gun-toting thugs. Innocent people aren't even safe in their homes. After his wife is fatally beaten and daughter sexually assaulted in his apartment, architect Paul Kersey (Charles Bronson) packs his .32 and goes looking for trouble, determined to wipe the scum off the streets.Michael Winner's cathartic revenge drama delivers vicarious thrills for anyone who has ever felt outraged yet helpless about crime and disorder. In reality, vigilantism is, of course, a bad idea (as is the right to bear arms, in my opinion), but when Paul Kersey decides to fight back against the rising tide of crime, one can't help but feel a sense of empowerment, making the film a whole lot of fun for armchair avengers such as myself.Winner handles the action matter of factly, with little sense of style, but Bronson's powerful performance ensures that the film is thoroughly engrossing throughout. So successful was the film at resonating with its audience that it spawned four sequels and, just recently, was remade by Eli Roth with Bruce Willis taking on the Bronson role.8.5 out of 10, rounded up to 9 for an early appearance from Jeff Goldblum as one of the loathsome hoodlums who attack Kersey's family.

Paul Magne Haakonsen I do remember watching "Death Wish" back in my childhood in the 1980s, and remembering that Charles Bronson seemed to be a cool guy in the movie. Then I got a chance to revisit the franchise many, many years later and of course I did sit down to watch the movies again.I have to honestly state that this is a very slow paced movie. "Death Wish" is based on a very good concept though, and it had lots of potential for taking the character Paul Kersey and evolve on him. And I said it had potential to do so, but it failed to do so.The blood in the "Death Wish" movie was painstakingly and obviously just brightly colored paint, as it looked so fake it would even make a blind person go "wait a minute!"It had a very predictable storyline, and you knew the outcome of the movie from the very beginning, which was a shame because director and writer Michael Winner didn't offer much to challenge the intellect of the audience.It was fun to see a young Jeff Goldblum as a hoodlum in this movie.Why this movie spawned a 2018 remake is beyond me, because it is adequate enough as it was.

mrushkoski Filmed in 1974, Death Wish was a good movie for its time. The cinematography was sub par and the plot was decent however the lesson it's trying to teach us is sublime! The main character's wife has been murdered and he decides to do something about it as a vigilante. He begins going out and posing as an easy target for criminals only to shoot them dead when he's provoked. Criminals can't do anything to stop him and through the majority of the film neither can the cops. The lesson we learn in 1974, just before the end of the Vietnam war that has divided americans young and old, is that a happy medium is needed in order to move forward as a nation. The older generations sense or law and order is still relevant however it needs to be more flexible, whereas the younger generations free spirited way of life is immoral and must have some type of boundaries.

Leofwine_draca Michael Winner's gritty slice of vigilante cinema has finally been released here after twenty-five years of unavailability. Like most films of the period that were "banned" as such, seen today this is relatively tame viewing material which has had its effect lessened by what has come since. Nonetheless, Winner's film is still pretty good viewing, a movie that actually has something to say about modern society and man's place in it. It's a film that gave me food for thought, in any case. Unlike the later THE EXTERMINATOR and even DEATH WISH II, this is a film that tones down the sensationalism to concentrate on the morals behind the story.Firstly, the movie is not as unpleasant as I had imagined. The build-up to the actual attack on the wife and daughter is worse than the event itself, and thankfully Winner skims over the gory details (or maybe they've just been cut out). Bronson's subsequent vigilante crimes on the dark streets of New York are staged well, with crisp photography giving the film a realistic, gritty edge to it. They're also invariably exciting, and without any unnecessary stylish trimmings; Bronson shoots people with an aim to kill, and that's it. There are no over-the-top gun battles a la John Woo; here it's straightforward cold-blooded murder, shot in a matter-of-fact way.Bronson here is actually very good as the grieving husband and father who takes justice in the only way he knows how; the script gives him unusual characterisation which makes you feel for him. For instance, he doesn't just go out and start killing people; it's a gradual process, and scenes of Bronson being physically sick after shooting a man in the stomach remind us that he is human after all. The supporting cast are uniformly great, and watch out for a very young-looking Jeff Goldblum in his first film role as a thug.So, not only is this a very slick thriller, it's also a film with important things to say. Winner is definitely behind Bronson in his actions, and shows the police as the manipulated buffoons that they really are, although he is sure to show both sides of the coin. No doubt the viewer will find himself siding with Bronson over his actions also. An essential slice of the hard-edged world of the '70s, this movie would have been unthinkable back in the peace-loving '60s.