Watch Portrait of a Hitman For Free

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Watched this movie last night, didn't expect the production quality to be so poor. Cheaply made, amateurish editing.But man, this storyline/plot is actually really cool...it's got a great deal of potential, I think. But ol' Jack as "JimBuck" - I wrote it that way intentionally, because that's how Jack says it...like it's one word. He doesn't say "My name is Jim Buck" like a regular person, he says "My name is JimBuck," like it's just one word. Hilarious.The only reason I watched this was for Jack Palance, and it was worth watching it to see him. What else, what else...I think that about covers it. A low budget affair from 1977 that could be really engrossing and cool if remade today with a talented writer and director. The storyline is great - built, of course, on an interesting internal conflict (loyalty to a friend/humanity vs obligation to employer) and the required external conflicts (good guys vs the bad guys). Put a smokin' hot chick in there (adds yet another layer to the conflict), and you've got a movie.By the way, if anyone reads this and actually does make a movie out of it, is there any way I can get in on that?jacobnunnally.blogspot.com3/10

According to IMDb, this film wasn't released until 1984, seven years after its completion. When you watch Portrait of a Hit Man (as the title appears on screen), you'll understand why it sat in the can so long. Jack Palance delivers one of his anguished non-performance performances as Jim Buck, a professional gunman (and amateur painter) hired by Max Andreotti (a svelte Rod Steiger) to rub out Dr. Bob Michaels (Bo Svenson). Problem: Jim and Bob are best buds from way back, and Jim is most reluctant to carry out the hit. There's a ton of navel-gazing, some very boring sex scenes, an embarrassing turn from Richard Roundtree as a Jamaican drug dealer, some Asian wisdom offered by Philip Ahn, and even a brief appearance by legendary singing cowboy Herb Jeffries, who wisely chose to hang up his acting spurs after appearing in this film.

i want to write about the paintings used in the movie. They are an integral part of the plot and I guess that being a painter and a hit-man is what constitutes the main character traits. The paintings you see in the house and during the opening of the exhibition at the end of the movie are all the work of the painter Tony Mafia. I think I remember him telling that they were originally in the house of the Nassi family. The portrait of the lady, wasn't done by Tony Mafia. You can easily tell by the style and the brush strokes. Tony didn't want to do that one. In the movie they give credits to him and the other painter. He was kind of proud of that. So I have a question: Why are the credits not here also? The plot works well, since the painting brings the movie to a logical conclusion. Tony like the part were the art critics rant and rave about his work at the opening of the show. He showed me that part a few times.

**Possible Spoilers Ahead**Jack Palance as a talented painter/vicious hit-man? Bo Svenson as a brilliant neurosurgeon? The casting is almost as weird as the plot, in which Palance and Svenson are old friends in love with the same woman and Palance has been hired to murder Svenson. Ann Turkel, Rod Steiger and Richard Roundtree are on hand also. Full of flashbacks, occasionally bloody and entertaining in spite of itself. An amusing companion piece to another Palance wonder-work, ONE MAN JURY.