User reviews

Well if you want to be a jerk... I'll point out that in Pulp Fiction the scene was a little different. The bullets did not miss Samuel L. They went through him. Watch it again and see when he moves to look at the wall behind him. The bullet holes are directly behind where he was standing. And i would be willing to bet Tarrentino did not invent this scene either. He just happened to make it in a popular movie.

I give Montana an EXCELLENT rating because it is not mainstream and some characters are more interesting (i.e. they don't say everything on their mind, so you have to figure them out). I like having to judge characters by observing behavior. There are many better movies with better directors, but this movie reminds me to figure things out on my own. These kind of movies can be much more stimulating. The only mystery in Pulp Fiction was what was in the case... so what.

This is most definitely an over-the-top film, starting off sick and getting progressively sicker and sucking you in during the process. the characters are well-defined and well-realized, especially Philip Seymour Hoffman's smarmy, reptilian Duncan, Robin Tunney's not-as-dumb-or-pathetic-as-she-appears Kitty and Sedgwick's hardboiled-on-the-outside Claire. Of course the film belongs to Stanley Tucci, the film's dying hitman. Another sublime, subtle performance from this extraordinarily talented actor; he actually manages to give this brutal excursion a heart.

Kyra Sedgewick (who? just kidding, Kyra) and Stanley Tucci team up in a more than adequate disorganized crime flick. Although this Bonnie and Clyde team are poignant enough, this one's more about two MVP hit men (hitpersons?) and competent gangland executions than complex character study. But me...I love the kiss-kiss/bang-bang formula and this one's a goody. It kept me on edge throughout this sordid tale of assorted nasty things, i.e.; gambling, greed, nepotism, homicide, loyalty and, finally, love revealed in a death rattling disclosure. I am a reluctant convert to the Stanley Tucci Fan Club but, after having seen his career's range, depth and script judgment over these past years, I'm attending regular chapter meetings and considering taking the secretary's position. This is a good film noir offering with lots of twists and plenty of hemorrhaging from gunshot wounds, fatal and otherwise. If you like this kind of stuff...(well, nobody admits liking gory, testosterone-driven cinematic carnage anymore)...uh..uh.. come to think of it, just in case my oldest daughter reads this, I didn't really like this film that much. It had too much gratuitous violence and too much gun play. Not!!! Two thumbs sideways...

@Lary9

The kind of movie you can´t put in a genre. There´s a mix of violence, comedy and romance. One minute you laugh, then you sit stunned because a hooker has just shot the head off a young kid. Obviously not a big budget movie, but somehow I think that works as an advantage. The actors are great, the direction is great and the script is well written. It is a kind of cozy Pulp Fiction where the scenes are in order. The action scenes are not pumped up to be something they´re not, but are shot in style. Kyra Sedgwick deliveres a great performance and so does the rest of the cast. Worth pointing out is Ethan Embry as the young, annoying, psycho wannabe wiseguy. I give 10 out of 10. RENT THIS MOVIE!!!

Montana is worth seeing, but flawed. It is indeed in the style of Pulp Fiction, without being so tight or erotic. It's at least as casually violent. But that alone doesn't carry it. There's no Uma Thurman here in a leading role.

The basic plot is fine, but not directed quite tightly enough. Sections in the middle drag considerably. Stanley Tucci does carry this film -- but so in a way does Robbin Tunney as Kitty, the gangster's moll. She does a fabulous job with her role -- and adds all the female sex appeal to the film, which is considerable. Tunney's role though is most unfashionable for the 90's -- a seductively submissive gangster's mistress. It becomes clear that the submissiveness is mostly an act, though her "role in life" cannot but remain 90's unfashionable. She proves herself plenty tough and resourceful when taking control is useful or essential to her (i.e. she blows away, and causes to be blown away, at least her share of bad guys.) One of the movie's big problems though is that there's nothing going on between her and the main male character, played by Tucci -- or anyone else on screen. (Actually, if there was between her and anyone, and it got any face time, she'd probably steal the movie completely away from Kyra Sedgwick. As it is, she actually almost does.)

As others here have noted, Tucci's performance is wonderful, but he isn't on screen enough to carry the whole film. He's tough, cool, intense and utterly competent -- and edgily sexually compelling. Tucci's got a signature magnetism, despite his bald, average at best static looks. There's something about his intensity.

The film's key problem is Kyra Sedgwick. She plays a tough as steel hit woman. But she's all business. But she's also about as emotional as steel. There's no erotic thrill to her. She's a cardboard character, without any real emotional vulnerabilities. But for her long curly hair, she's a thoroughly mannish character. I really haven't seen (or anyway remember) her in much else, but here she's thoroughly wooden. Of course because as-tough-as-any-man women are very much the 90's (and late 80's) fashion, this will tend to be overlooked by many.

Men who are the same, and don't show a convincing vulnerable side to a woman they are attracted to, generally aren't very likeable protagonists either (though they can make good villains). If we didn't see the even colder hitman Jean Reno's intense (though initially guarded) affection for the 12 year old Natalie Portman in The Professional (Leon) for example, we wouldn't much care about him and the movie wouldn't have been nearly as powerful. Sedgwick goes through the motions of affection and caring for Tucci, but it doesn't remotely ring emotionally true. There's zero chemistry coming from her. It's actually rather weird, since chemistry DOES seem to be coming off of Tucci towards her big time, just not the other way around. (Makes me suppose she's strictly gay in addition to not being very good. Or was it the direction?)

Anyway, for whatever reason, she simply doesn't work. I could care less what happens to her in this film, much less feel any sexual attraction whatsoever. Which is a big problem, since she's really the central character of the film, who stitches the various other characters together, and gets the most face time.

I sure would like to see Robbin Tunney as the lead character in a good and intelligently erotic movie. She's sizzling hot here, without any nudity (but a lot of lingere). Unfortunately she was given only a limited screen time supporting role, with no one to really erotically interact with. She nonetheless simply exuded sexual chemistry. Unfortunately, that will be overlooked or dismissed by many because of her unfashionable role.

I thought it refreshing to see Kyra Sedgwick in a grittier role. If you can get past the near-incessant violence, it's not an altogether bad movie, with an interesting supporting cast, especially Stanley Tucci in a truly standout performance, the best I've seen of his acting to date, and really makes the film better than it probably deserves. The movie is worth seeing just for his bit. He and Sedgwick have good chemistry as criminal colleagues who love each other. It's also good to see a movie where two women from different corners of the criminal world (the boss's girlfriend and the boss's hitwoman) band together, albeit reluctantly. It's also nice to see the girlfriend, despite the cliche name, with some brain. (Do these last 2 points have anything to do with the movie's female director? I'll bet!) Without Tucci, however, I wouldn't recommend the movie so wholeheartedly.

When I rented "Nothing Personal" (that's what it's called in Australia) I half expected it to be a violent, unfunny version of "The Long Kiss Goodnight". But how I was wrong.

"Nothing Personal" was a funny movie in which the voilence wasn't overplayed and sometimes contributed to the humor. The Scene where the bald guy got shot through the wall reminded me of the scene in "The Big Lebowski" where Jeff Bridges puts the chair on the door to stop people coming in but the door opens the other way. Back to the point. The performances by Kyra Sedgwick, Robbie Coltrane and Robin Tunney, but the standout performance was Stanely Tucci in his role as Nick.

While it won't recieve much attention, "Nothing Personal" was a well made light hearted movie that will do on a rainy day.

I have NEVER heard of this movie but it turned out to be a fun view. Sure, it never made it big but heck, it has a good cast. Even John Ritter delivers the goods as a corrupt informercial man. I liked the way Stanley Tucci delivered the goods as a hitman. He was flawless and very confident everytime he shot that weapon. Kyra S (Kevin Bacon's Wife) was very good as a bold hitwoman. She delivered the goods as a woman who believed in her profession yet had a soft side for Tucci. The main BOSSMAN was played by that one fat wizard from Harry Potter. He was good and very ruthless as well. In once scene he threatened to cut the fingers off of a chinese man with a gardening tool! I would give this movie a 4 or 5 out of 10 but that's it.

It seems nobody could make a crime movie between 1994 and 2000 without being accused of copying Quentin Tarantino. Granted, his movies are great, but scoffing at any movie that has an ensemble cast of decent actors in a story that involves guns and money is just robbing yourself of entertainment. I admit there are a lot of copycat movies out there and some are really crappy, but you have to judge each one on it's own merit. I consider Montana and Things to do in Denver when you're dead to be two great exceptions. They're just too damn fun to watch for me to be so critical of them. Maybe that's just me though. I try to find things that mean something to me in every movie I watch.

I love Tarantino as much as the next guy, but how can you not enjoy Kyra Sedgewick beating and shooting people. You just don't see that everyday.

I'm shocked my fellow IMDBers gave this a 6.8/10. This is close to the worst movie of the year. Kyra Sedgewick tries to save it as a mob hit lady with some forceful acting, but she just seems mostly angry and in a rush to get through the scenes. I like mob movies, but this can't touch even a simple one like Donnie Brasco. It plods along, the violence is silly, the acting looks like some buds tried making their own movie in their living room, and everyone looks like they're waiting to be cued for their lines. The mob boss is a clumsy old joke. Among the worst 5 movies of the year.

I picked up "Montana" on a whim, and was very plesantly surprised by it.

I'll concede that there were some holes in the story, and some of the characters were very flat, but Claire and Nick made a VERY interesting study.

There were enough plot twists that I didn't forsee to keep me surprised, and the main characters were definitely engaging enough to keep my interest.

However, the violence and carnage were definitely worse than was necessary (comparisons to Tarantino seem justified).

I'd give it a 8 - not great, but interesting and engaging.

I had no idea what this movie is about, but a friend came to me once and said "I have a new favorite movie". "What?" I say. "Yes, Pulp Fiction isn't my no.1 anymore. Montana is". This was the only reason i watched this film. I thought it would be good, but it's a huge scam. It's full of uninteresting sequences or of scenes copied from other movies, the dialogue is dull and boring, the acting sucks. The good thing is that it's unpredictable and the ending is also good. But it's full of loose ends and plot holes. If this Leistes girl thinks an avalanche of "f*cks" and a scene copied from Pulp Fiction can make a movie good, well she must think again. (of course i am refering to the scene when 2 guys enter a room and shoot many times at poor Nick, but every bullet misses him). I couldn't give this title more than 4 out of 10.

I came across this movie in the video store and was surprised by the cast. Stanley Tucci, Kyra Sedgewick, Robbie Coltrane in a gangster film? What I experienced was a very funny and interesting film with great performances by Tucci and Sedgewick. I thought the double-cross, mistaken assumptions of some of the characters made for a great plotline and the violence wasn't as bad as some films I've seen. Interesting to see a woman in what is generally a male role and the dialogue was juicy! Great movie. If you liked this then I also recommend Judas Kiss.

Horribly written, jumped quickly without much explanation. People appeared out of no where. All around bad movie...

Didn't expect much when i bought the DVD from a local Store a few days ago, actually the reason i chose this one was simply because there were no better choices. But...turns out i made a right choice.

You can find most elements of a typical gangster movie in this one: betray, love, hatred, friendship and bloody shootout ... but what makes Montana stand out is not the plot alone(Montana does have a well arranged smart plot that keep you surprised), what makes this one different is the STYLE.

The directing style, and the style of those cool actors.

The director makes the movie in a way that seems so real. real characters, real events and real humor. and most importantly, not only the leading characters, but every single one shines in this movie.

I especially liked Claire and her friend nick(sorry i might spell their name wrong), the trust and loyalty between them really impressed me, and...nick's really got style...hehe...he's the absolutely the cool guy. fast, reliable and sometimes he's nice(to Koo's wife, to ... the boss's girl(a hooker), BTW, i have to admit that she's also a fantastic actress)...

and those bad guys also deliver a good performance which in a way enhanced the whole move.

anyway, if you are interested in a different/special gangster movie, Montana is definitely your choice! i give it 9 out of 10!

I like this movie. It's not bad at all as a story of betrayal and new beginnings.The humour is quirky and at times the violence startling, but I enjoyed it sufficiently to obtain a copy for my video library. Jennifer Leitzes' film certainly gets your attention from the very first scene.

This is an action movie. Ammunition consumption is enormous and the products of the gun makers' art send many malevolent bad hats to their doom. Good will to one's fellow man (or woman!) is in short supply in "Montana". The story proceeds with a brisk clarity, something I think is quite refreshing when there are so many movies around relying upon incredible plotting and intrusive style statements.

See this movie too for the sometimes surprising casting. I'm not sure Kyra Sedgwick would have been my first choice to play Claire Kelsky. No matter, her astute, charmless and dangerous sub-boss in the gang is professionally done. Claire is matched in status in the outfit by Nicholas Roth, one of the best character creations I've seen from Stanley Tucci. His lightning fast, well-read and refined killer is a classic. I'm impressed too by John Ritter's chilling Doctor Wexler, what a carnivore!

Robbie Coltrane matches the quality of these performances with his portrayal of the ruthless Boss, the maker of the one big and fatal mistake in the story, i.e. that of failing to recognise in his relationship with Claire Kelsky and Nicholas Roth that loyalty works both ways or not at all. Duncan, the sharp, slippery money man is the excellent creation of Philip Seymore Hoffman. His dialogue with Kitty, the trapped but quietly determined gangster's moll, played by the equally good Robin Tunney, provides one of the key moments in the movie.

The coarse language will offend some viewers, but I found it interesting and stimulating entertainment. So, not for everyone, but see it and hopefully enjoy.

Montana is not a hit, but is a good example of how to make an excellent movie. The plot is 'tantalizer', the actors/tress are level one pro, and the director (Jennifer) is brilliant. I kept glued to the screen all the time, and my dinner went cold...I'd like to see more of Jennifer's work, but it seems this is the only film she did. At least I didn't find more titles at the IMDb. I'll appreciate any hint.

So hard to get hold of the dvd of this movie. In some inexplicable way this movie has been unknown to many. Only 24 reviews on Imdb, mine included, while this movie is equal to the best of Tarantino's work. Honest. "Montana" is an unknown gem, with MAGNIFICENT ACTING PERFORMANCES and BRILLIANT DIALOGUE and a THRILLING, HILARIOUS STORY, which is out of control!

The good: Quirky, fascinating, hilarious at moments, with a SUPERB, out of control, original story. One of a kind. The greatest unknown gangster comedy gem of the entire nineties! I am not kiddin'.

Any bad? The only reason I can think of, which might put off some viewers, is the fact that this story is slowburning and the jokes are not laugh out loud funny, because the acting is done seriously (by a stellar cast). This typically, slow tempo of this movie, is probably more suited for an arthouse audience, but arthouse audiences dont often go watch full blown gangster comedies. I think that's the reason that this nineties gangster's gem remained unknown. I would highly recommend it though!

No really, it's the best contemporary crime flick, deserving a huge cult following. All the characters are SOOOO cool, the shootout scenes are a cut above your average Hong Kong action-minus the slow motions or pyrotechnics. The coolest ones are the two leads, played by Kyra and Stanly, as buddies/love interests. Stanley's awesome as his character blows the baddies off the screen, with his ailments adding more to his cool, calm sense of obliviousness, while Kyra is a true kick-a** chick with a few human qualities which doesn't deter her strengths. Robin Tunney is charming, in a Matthew Perry sort of way. Overall THE COOLEST FLICK EVER. If you're wondering what's with the Gunsmith Cats in my summary, it's because of some wishful thinking that Kyra's character could teach Rally Vincent a thing or two about how to be tough, smart and cool yet feminine.

I wished.

Montana was a great movie! Ethan Embry's role as Jimmy was fantastic. Stanley Tucci also was wonderful at playing his character, Nick. The violence was not as bad as I expected and the story line was very good. Over all, if you like this type of movie, you must see Montana. :P

Stanley Tucci, who I thought was an overrated actor, puts on an impressive performance as well. Sometimes I watch a movie and I wonder why the writers didn't go just a little bit crazier... But this film didn't leave many boring moments (if any) to second-guess the creators. Robin Tunney shows emotions that I didn't know existed, plus she is a true smokeshow of a woman. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

Some movies are dragged down by weak performances, some weak movies are elevated by outstanding acting. This has a little of both pushing in each direction, with the director a little too eager to emulate Tarantino's ghoulish style. Stanley Tucci really puts in a fine performance as a highly intelligent, anal and laconic hit-man. But he's in the movie too little to really save it.

Robbie Coltrane is utterly wasted as the mob boss, all he gets to do is growl a little and swill bourbon. Kyra Sedgewick does her best, but can't quite bring off the hard bitten hit woman (Kathleen Turner succeeded in Prizzi's Honor). She just seems out of place, watching her with a gun is like seeing a person who doesn't smoke trying to hold a cigarette--just looks awkward. In one scene she's digging a very large grave with a pile of dirt almost as big as herself. You can tell, though she's in very good shape, she's never used a shovel in her life and she looks remarkably silly.

The vast quantities of blood that sprays and puddles everywhere gets boring very quickly--as if the director just bought stock in a fake blood corporation and figured to give it some business. Ultimately, not much happens in the movie, there's some blather about a conspiracy to topple the mob boss and missing money, but hardly worth the effort. The humor, such as it is, doesn't quite come off, and the "dishonor among thieves" theme is hardly a revelation. If stupid bloodshed, peppered with weak black humor, rent this -- it's a great example of beating to death a genre that wasn't that strong to begin with.

I just saw Montana for the first time last night. The fact that my weak attention span was insistent that I finish it means I must have liked it at least reasonably well, but on a more conscious level I know this movie is not all that good. I really want to note that if the writing team and/or director stole from any director, it was probably much more Peckinpah than Tarantino. The story gives the violence a kind of nihilistic "this is the way we really are" quality that Tarantino has never addressed (nor does he need to; this is not a value judgement), but is Sam Peckinpah country. I think what kept me at it was outstanding acting all around, no wasted time editing (except for the one or two overly long firefights) and the possibility of new beginnings for very damaged people, which is neither Peckinpah or Tarantino in character. Just one more note, Robbie Coltrane's part does seem underwritten; one really irritating flaw in the movie.

Gotta get back to tying the rebar. L