Watch Point Blank For Free

How sad is this?

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Lee Marvin was great at not acting. In every movie, he stands there silently watching all the other actors until eventually he does something (usually very slowly). Rumor has it that Keanu Reeves studied his method religiously.Marvin plays a dead guy -- no, a dying guy -- no, a guy who almost died -- even the director said he didn't know and didn't care. Anyway, Marvin gets double-crossed by his buddy; so Marvin spends his time either bumbling his way into unintentional deaths or watching other people murder people. One highlight is when the hit-man is ordered to kill Marvin and instead kills the very guy who ordered the hit. The hit-man can pick off a moving target at great distance, but apparently he had trouble seeing Marvin pushing his boss out into the open and he had trouble seeing that his boss was not Marvin. Until later. Then he reported to the next higher boss that he killed his boss because he was there instead of Marvin. Good reasoning.And Angie is great at -- well, at being a model who gets a few lines. Her character learns that her sister just died due to Marvin scaring the holy heck out of her. So she leaves her sister to rot on the floor and goes off with Marvin. She gets to wear a few garish outfits and towards the end, for no apparent reason, she goes berserk on Marvin and then sleeps with him.The bad guys are a trip. "We don't have cash. We use checks. We can't get you your money. Only the accountant writes checks." That's what they keep telling Marvin, and apparently, it's not their concern whether Marvin kills them. They just know that they don't have cash.They threw out the script. They only liked the main character. I don't think they wrote a replacement script. I imagine each day on the set, they told Marvin to stand over there and don't say anything because that's mostly what he did.Marvin can't carry a movie. He can be great as a supporting character with his one-dimensional non-acting, but that's all. Dickinson certainly can't carry a movie. She is eye candy and nothing more. This is supposed to be an action movie, and she is the second lead playing against a guy who doesn't act, emote or move any facial muscles. That's much too much for her. She would be better as the second banana's love interest.Marvins stands and stares. Dickinson has boobs. The director had no script. That's about all.Strangely enough, because this was done like a rushed high school art project, people look for great meaning in its obvious deficiencies. No, it's not avant-garde or highly stylized. It's a bad or non-existent script with exceptionally bad editing. Is he dead? Is he alive? Is he dying? Nobody knows because (not to beat a dead horse) they didn't have a script.

Point Blank is a major disappointment. The movie is based on the book "The Hunter" written by Donald Edwin Westlake under the pseudonym Richard Stark.I have watched the movie Point Blank several times over the years.I have read virtually every novel (all sixteen novels) Richard Stark wrote in the Parker series. I have read most of these novels at least four times.I think Donald Westlake should have been most unhappy with the script for this movie.The main character in Point Blank, Walker, is a far cry from Parker in the novels. I am sure that Lee Marvin followed the script in the movie as Lee Marvin is a professional. I can not say the script writers were even close to professionals in my opinion.Why do script writers have to change so much when writing a script for a movie based on a book~?My enjoyment of Point Blank is greatly diminished by what in my opinion is the total failure of the script writers to function as competent professionals.Overall I have to give the movie a 3. This is only because I am a big fan of Lee Marvin and Angie Dickinson. Otherwise I would give the movie a 0, zero rating.

Based upon the superior pulp fiction book, The Hunter by the fabulous Donald E Westlake, writing as Richard Stark under which name he never put a foot wrong; how could anything go wrong? Well, it doesn't, apart from substituting the better name of 'Parker', this is just as sure fire a winner as the book. Lee Marvin is amazingly good. Quite, cool almost statuesque and then devastatingly quick and sure footed. The thrills here are not in looking out for the safety of Parker/Walker but in seeing how he will, inevitably, outwit them. A joy to watch, director Boorman always has an eye on the visuals and whilst this might not quite have the charm of Italian thrillers and gialli of the time that says more about the differences between Italian and US interior design for the exteriors are most imaginatively shot. Similarly US fashion cannot quite match the Italians but the most effective Angie Dickinson does wear at least a couple of very fetching costumes.

Point Blank is the movie Playback's predecessor. Porter for Walker! Gibson for Marvin! The premise of the story is exact. Marvin gets robbed, left for dead and wants his money back. The Porter/Walker characters are excellent, as harden robbers who are all so professional. The mechanics of the both stories are exciting to watch. Regrettably Point Blank has lulls. Angie Dickinson's character slows and or drags the story. The 60's flashbacks direction kills the tempo. Payback has better double cross side stories. The Chinese mob, and dirty cops side stories brought Payback to a higher level than Point Blank's side story. John Vernon aka Mal Reese character is good, but the Gregg Henry, Val Resnick, character put slime to a new art form. Point Blank had a statement ending and come across dull!