Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Thehibikiew Not even bad in a good way

Sameeha Pugh It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Yash Wade Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

Robert Levy (levybob) The premise of the film - a victim's family-member takes revenge - has been done and done better: think Charles Bronson. What makes this film different is that we have a woman in the Bronson role. Not merely a woman but the pixie-like Sally Field. She goers from pixie to prize-fighter in no time, from never having held a gun to scoring high in her test-shoot in no time as well. Ed Harris truly did phone in his role as her husband. Keifer Sutherland, however, is quite good as the perpetrator / rapist / killer; there is something all too real in the way his lip curls into a snarl. The last 15 minutes of the film are positively awful; as though its intent was to fool the viewer. A waste.

Raul Faust You know, as a law school student just about to become a lawyer, I'm much aware of the problems that making justice by yourself can cause to a whole society. That being said, I imagined this movie would try to justify the unjustifiable, but it surprisingly goes in a different direction. The victim's mother becomes obsessive after her daughter gets murdered, but the film never wants to show that she could just murder the bad guy and get easily away with murder. That proves this movie isn't cheesy or formulaic, as I was expecting. The family portrayed in here is very believable and likable, thanks to a great performance made by the three of them-- with highlights to Sally Field, who had an unintentionally funny scene when she swears at the sheriff. Also, directing is professional, doing just like many suspenseful thrillers from the nineties have done. The plot is coherent and well developed, allowing the spectator to understand why the characters were doing what they did, leaving almost no space for doubts. Kiefer Sutherland surely had no hard time on portraying such character, given he did a lot of psychos in the past. All in all, "Eye for an Eye" proves to be a mature film that many of you might enjoy. Recommended.

kai ringler I thought Kiefer Sutherland did a wonderful job with the movie first off, his acting skills are hard to match by anyone,, how many actors today can bounce back and forth between movies and TV just like that.. Sally Field.. wow what happened to her since Coal Miner's Daughter. she did very good to in the role of the mother trying to get vengeance on her daughter being raped,, in the initial opening scene,, the teenage daughter is on the phone with mom,, and she get's raped and mom hear's the entire rape,start to finish, due to a technicality our rapist is set free, and free to rape and kill again. he starts stalking different prey this time, while our raging mother is trying to find our rapist and bring him to either justice or death.. these kind of movies have been overdone and watered down in the past 30 years. but this one seems to me to have a little more staying power.. I think that will be because of Kiefer's high profile,, 24,, and an amazing performance by Sally Field,, the Coal Miner's Daughter.

cppguy Sometimes it's more interesting to review the reviews than review the movie. There's nothing technically wrong with this movie. Production values are fine. The acting is fine. Anyone rating this a 1 is an incompetent reviewer. 1-star reviews so far rant that Ed Harris ruined the movie and at the same time wonder why Super Ed was saddled with such a horrible supporting cast. Maybe reviewers should be allowed to vote 4-6 until they prove competency.Back to the movie. So far, I have yet to see a movie with Sally Field where she doesn't shine. While her movies may not be perfect, she's a superb actress. Like Tom Hanks, she generally picks winners to be in (funny they starred in at least 2 movies together). I'm also developing a liking for Joe Montegna. I see him in a lot of films and he brings a nice competency to supporting roles. Same for Ed Harris. I like Kiefer Sutherland in his various movies and he does a fine job (even if slightly over the top here) of being creepy.So let's talk film content. Revenge films are intriguing in many ways. To an extent, that concept is an easy way to develop conflict for the viewer. However, it's much harder to come up with a reason for the vengeance. "The Sting" took revenge to high art. "Eye for an Eye" is not high art, so no 10 from me for the film. A 7 will have to do. Others have compared this to the better known "Death Wish," but I think this was better produced and had better flow. Aspects of the movie are predictable, but I've seen many a good movie that was predictable.Summary: if you're scanning Netflix or Blockbuster for an unseen movie with decent action and dialog that moves at a good pace, "Eye for an Eye" isn't revenge on the level of "M," "The Sting," or "Gran Torino" but it's a decent watch... especially if you like the acting talents of Field, Sutherland, Harris and Montegna. If you like action/revenge films, pop some popcorn, curl up with someone special and enjoy.