Wow! Such a good movie.

An absolute waste of money

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Question : Did the mistresses of ministers in Washington ever get taken to a inaugural balls after the sixties were over ? ? Because that seems like the most unprofessional thing to do ever. Mix in a flimsy espionage plot , stupid scenario's wherein people are keeping things that could destroy them in plain sight and what do you get ? No way out! No way out : A terribly over budgeted , poorly written snooze fest that as a bonus shows early versions of things we would later see done much better in the Jack Ryan films only without any of the existing international aspects of it , or any good character building moments , or James Earl Jones, or Alec Baldwin/ Harrison Ford , or anything remotely exciting really. No this is actually none of that when you watch it now that the once exciting technological aspects of it are both outdated and cliché. I have heard that this picture is a remake of a film made in 1948, If that is the case it would a lot more sense in my opinion. Although some then impressive tech is featured , It is basically a string of human errors on the part of the conspirators that exposes them. And the mistress being at the inaugural ball would have been less of a issue when there was less of a focus on affairs like these form the press , and less ways it could be recorded. But in 1987 the usage of limousines to pick up your mistress seems tenfolds more decadent than it would have done in 1948 . I suggest you watch that version , because this film's depiction of Washington intrigues was outdated even then. It also perfectly explains why Sean Young's character doesn't seem to have much of a professional career ahead and moves around the Washington social circuit without being involved in politics or government. This would make sense in the forties , it does not in the late eighties ( or at least it's painful to watch now ).Costner's Naval officer is a characterless Mary Stu in every single way h doesn't have much to play with , but when he does get to be angry or something his acting style often doesn't match the style of other actors in the scene. Gene Hackman in the same year he reprises his role as Lex Luthor in the now infamous superman IV once again plays a supposed genius ( they out right have people call him that actually ) but comes across more as a emotionally unstable autistic man at times, and frankly the character just turns into a big child towards the end. It's just pathetic to watch ; his character makes such weird mistakes and takes such ridiculous risks you can't take him seriously anymore.The chemistry between Costner and Young reminds me of twilight a lot. The script was apparently filled with looks that are supposed to convey 'a silent understanding' or something like that , but it never works!Hackman is seemingly over compensating for basically every poor delivery and stale look of all scenes he isn't in and he just turns into a caricature of a good actor near the end. Also the blatantly homosexual women fearing adviser having a clear crush on Hackman's character is incredibly sickening to watch as the character progresses. You know how in Django Unchained you are intrigued by the complicated relationship between Mr.Candy and Stephen ? well its nothing like that. It's just really sad. As a whole i would call this film overrated and Arcadian.

Saw No Way Out the other night for the first time in over 20 years. It happened to be on TV and my wife, who has never seen it, and I decided to sit down and watch it after I told how good it was.For the first 15/20 minutes I wondered if I had been remembering the same film. Those first 15 minutes or so make you think that you are watching some straight to video 1980's cheap thriller. But once you get past that first wee while, it kicks in and you get swept along with it.There is the twist, and as others have suggested, it does seem a bit rushed. It's as if they didn't quite know how to end the film or ran out of time and/or money.Costner, Hackman and Young give good performances. The likes of George Dzundza and Fred Dalton Thompson give their usual solid support. Will Patton does tend to over do it slightly.Never the less, if you haven't seen it, and want a decent thriller to pass a couple of hours, you could do a lot worse than catch No Way Out.

This is how me and my wife felt while watching this movie. As if the nerdiest kid have got with the cover up plot, and they have decided to follow it. Actually if the whole setup was switched to the kinder garden instead of the Pentagon, whole thing would be looking much better. Only, instead of the murder, they should have to come up with something like a disappearance of a chewing gum, by the most popular kid. And to cover up, his nerdy friend had devised a master plan. Something like that. I think it would be much funnier and credible that way.Other than that, the production values are good. Actors are good as well, maybe except of Gene Hackman from whom I expected more.Ah, well, a disappointment.

It's a suspense thriller with the odd burst of action (though watching Costner run, doesn't really do it for me).Confused and stupid in places. The best device in the movie - the suspenseful claustrophobia - could have been worked more. The idea of having eyewitnesses parade up and down the Pentagon to flush out a spy was wholly silly. The ending, though totally disjointed, actually elevated the film and Costner's character. Despite the film's length nothing really happens. It's brainless.Only a few scenes have stuck in my mind. Sean Young's partial nudity and the eighties synthesizer soundtrack (Maurice Jarre) were the highlights of ultimately a very dull but surprisingly watch-able film.