Twilightfa
Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.
Ogosmith
Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.
Ava-Grace Willis
Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.
Wizard-8
"Tough Guys Don't Dance" is one of the strangest movies I have seen for quite some time - and I've watched a LOT of movies! Technically the movie is sound, with good photography and well chosen location. But everything else is bizarre. All the characters in the movie speak oddly, unlike the people you usually encounter in various aspects of your life. The acting is also over the top at times, perhaps to compliment the strange dialogue. Those facts may turn off some viewers early, but I had to admit that those attributes to me made the movie compelling - for the first third or so. After that point, the movie starts to become very confusing. There are some things that are never explained, like the hero's new tattoo and his dog suddenly appearing in a scene. (Was the movie's length cut down in the editing room?) Still, I admit that the movie is probably unlike any other cinematic experience you've had, so more adventurous and patient viewers may find it very rewarding. And I have to also admit it's a heck of a lot better than Norman Mailer's earlier movie "Wild 90"!
stephen_thanabalan_fans
Was Pulitzer Prize winner (twice!!) Norman Mailer wise in not attempting another Director/Writer film role and sticking to non-fiction work like post WWII 'Armies of the Night' or anti-war themes after this flick? Well, considering he has yet to Direct and write filmography since, I'd guess he knew his own answer to that question. For me and Stephen Thanabalan in film class, it's unsurprising given that this film is almost an unintentionally black humored outing with a cloying cast and a satiating fustian plot in a pointless beach side dansant in the acrid Provincetown cold. The film basically confounded itself and failed to capitalize on what was essentially a decent macabre tale that fettered Arthur Penn/ of greed, debauchery and betrayal- ingredients of what might have been a decent film-noir if coherently edited and as such, cannot count itself so. The film's main problem: it lacks class. In all departments- acting; macho-romantic-80s soft focus camera-work; acting (even hiring Isabella Rossellini couldn't save this one); plot twists; acting.Oddly enough, there was something crabby and yet alluring about this awful Norman Mailer outing by the beach as the waves crashed onshore. It dealt pretty much with subject matter Quentin Tarantino might have on an average film day: coke; porn starlets; depressed lead character on a vigilante road; warped sheriff; tattooist bums; gold-diggers; crooked priest; characters taking a crack at the rich; playboys shooting each other in the head (literally too!) and you get the idea. It could have been crazed film-noir but in the end it was just cheesily pretentious melodramatics- only thing is somehow I did not switch it off to see how low a man of Mailer's reputation would let it sink.
dj_bassett
Outside of some nice location shooting in and around Provincetown, this is just awful, incompetently made from start to finish. Ryan O'Neal, in one long lugubrious flashback, tries to explain to his Dad why there's severed heads in his basement and a tattoo on his arm. The problem all started, you see, when he answered a SCREW ad.....Bad acting, ranging from stiff and wooden (O'Neal, Rosselini) to over the top (Tierney, who nevertheless gets a couple of good lines in, and Hauser, hamming it up as a semi-psychotic sheriff). Prose as purple as all get-out, probably inevitable when you consider Mailer's involvement. Incompetently put together, mostly told in flashback for reasons I can't understand, other than Mailer couldn't figure out a better way to get the information in. A story that doesn't make a lick of sense, although future scholars of Mailer will have to see this to see all of Mailer's issues dramatized: mostly women as either whores or maternal mothers who entrap you and faux Hemingway macho romanticism. Laugh out-loud funny at some points, although I'm not sure if it has enough brio to recommend it to fans of bad movies, as not a lot really happens, all in all.Better just to avoid it.
akhilles84
This is a hard film to stomach.It has a lot of intense,extreme scenes of sex,violence and obscurity.Ryan O'Neal could have done better.Wings Hauser outshines all in his role of sadistic,sex crazy chauvinist police officer.Who at the end turns insane.And thats what he isnt alone in.There are even more obscure characters here,like southern reverend Big Stoop and his "friendly" ex-wife Patty.They create a spiral of sex and intrigues which ends in suicide of the first and death of the other.All in all,a movie every sado-masochist would love to own.For normal people-a torturingly mad 2 hour experience.
