Jack Reacher

It's hard to expect anything from a film with such a trivially simple title, ordinary marketing, and average posters. But the opposite is true. It is incredibly cleverly shot within its genre, and you have to praise the director's inventiveness and cleverness. Tom Cruise is more than just an ordinary protagonist, unlike Jason Bourne or Daniel Craig’s Bond (I love all three), but while those are followers of dynamic editing, raw directing, camera filters, and kinetic action, Jack Reacher takes it easy, with thoughtfulness and full-contact fights without any enhancements – it’s beautifully slow and hypnotic. One of the best crime films in recent years, brilliantly cast and stylistically stunning. Some shots deserve a “Hall of Fame” award, and the sound design deserves an Oscar. (2013-01-11)

This was great! It’s a fantastic genre film, which sprinkles one cliché after another in such a cadence that I snorted with joy for two hours. The film works in every conceivable way, from the (un)predictable story, the fitting music, and the hero’s catchphrases, to a few scenes that want to be quoted time after time (the opening, the bathroom, the chase, and even the rainy ending). This isn’t going to be the only movie theater screening. (2013-01-02)

I’m really not surprised that Tom wanted to play Reacher, even though a 7-foot muscleman would have suited the part better. In any case, he plays marvelously (as if he were making fun of it all in some places), this type of guy suits him. A precisely built up story, emphasis on dialogs and hilarious one-liners. McQuarrie’s firm hand safely delivers One Shot to the desired destination. A little too slowly, unfortunately and there probably won’t be a sequel. Shame. - You think? - All the time. You should try it. (2013-04-19)

With a few exceptions, I generally don't like these types of movies. This film is shot professionally and has a good cast, so it gives the impression of a solid genre spectacle, but one it cannot fulfill. The director seems to have no clear idea of which genre he wants to be part of. Even a top-notch crime thriller would not be ashamed of the opening scene of the assassination, and the film initially appears serious and repeatedly returns to this expression. But while the murders may look brutal, suddenly a serious scene is followed by shots from a crazy grotesque, and in my opinion, this change of tone does not work at all for the film. Genre hybrids sometimes work and they can be charming, even irresistible. Unfortunately, Jack Reacher isn't one of these in my opinion. The ending is also predictable and completely undermines the feeling of the scenes that were done well. Overall impression: 25%. (2016-01-28)

I can’t remember seeing a movie which was be so likable, while at the same time undermining itself so much. The “good honest" thriller style of the 90’s has gone out of fashion, so every attempt to revive it is nice to see. Reacher has the advantage that despite being serious it doesn’t take itself too seriously which is even more admirable if we take into account the casting of Cruise who is certainly not the right person for the role of charismatic guys reeking of testosterone. Also worth mentioning is the cool directing (and that’s not just because of the opening eight minute taciturn sequence) and the emphasis on action scenes which aren’t over the top and involving cheating using CGI effects. Against that, it’s needlessly long. Not that there are unnecessary scenes, but many are longer that they should be and would be more suitable in the cut scenes section on the DVD/Blu-ray. Then there is the predictability of the plot which shifts the meaning of that word onto a completely new level (and it’s nothing to do with the fact that, for some weird reason, we know from the opening scene that this time Barr is innocent). The “who and how" is clear from the very beginning and very soon the “why" becomes apparent too, but the characters find out only after a good seventy minutes. And the biggest mistake you can make is to hire a (non)actor with one of the most charismatic voices on the planet for the role of arch villain, and then to use him as no more than an extra and in just two scenes. Otherwise I was satisfied and hopefully for number two the authors will learn from their mistakes. (2013-04-09)