Good movie but grossly overrated

best movie i've ever seen.

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

"Mad Dog and Glory" is a movie that opens pretty well, but runs out of plot about halfway in. Even worse than that: it also runs out of jokes, which is a problem when you're making a comedy. The second half of the movie is mostly a straight-forward romantic story between Robert De Niro and Uma Thurman, and it just isn't that interesting. The acting is obviously good, but the characters are just bland. And generally romantic movies get all their power from predictability, but here you really just groan at how stilted it all is. A surprisingly convincing Bill Murray features in a crime subplot that shows some promise, but in the end barely anything is done with it. "Mad Dog and Glory" is just full of missed opportunities, it had chances at being a lot of different things but chose the lamest route. Worth it for De Niro, but barely.

"My wife thinks Cooking and F**king are places in China." – Bill Murray"Mad Dog and Glory" finds actor Robert De Niro plays a lonely police photographer. Introverted and alienated, he spends his days photographing corpses, the poor guy having long abandoned the hope of romantic connection.One night De Niro saves the life of a mafia boss, played by the wonderfully cast Bill Murray. To show his gratitude, Murray loans De Niro a young woman for one week. A couple dates, a little sex, some female companionship...surely a week with the girl will square off all debts. But no, De Niro falls in love with the girl and insists that Murray allow her to live with him permanently.Of course, Murray won't allow this. He's a tough gangster! A macho man! He owns this woman! She's a symbol of his masculinity, of his power! How dare De Niro presume himself to be worthy of possessing such a precious object?!The film then becomes a pretty slick feminist tract, director John McNaughton deliberate in his portrayal of both Murray and De Niro as snivelling wimps. Murray – a comedic actor who is possibly the last person one thinks of when casting an Italian gangster – goes to therapy, is sensitive, talks to his psychologist about his problems and spends more time doing stand up comedy for his mafia buddies, than taking care of mob business. He's an emasculated man, symbolic of a kind of decaying patriarchy that clings desperately to out dated codes of masculinity.Meanwhile, De Niro – a tough guy actor renowned for his gangster roles - plays a shy photographer who relies on his buddies to fight for him, avoids confrontation, is awkward around women and is happiest when taking photographs. In other words, the gangster is a big softie who uses macho codes in order to hide his sensitivity and feign power, whilst the police photographer is a big softie who relies on the power and macho codes of the gangster to overcome his sensitivity and acquire the token woman. The film ends with De Niro and Murray (both effeminate losers) literally having an old-fashioned fistfight, the winner of which will take possession of the girl. But when the fight is over, both men learn to back off and let her make her own decisions. Murray gives the girl away, no longer wishing to control her, and De Niro likewise sets her free. Of course she nevertheless chooses to live with De Niro, swayed by the sight of him battling bravely for her love. The film's message: patriarchal codes have consequences, and women like guys who fight for their rights, rather than those who fight to oppress them. They want both the sensitive artist (photographer/stand up comic) and the tough brute, which I guess means that women are downright greedy.Beyond these musings, director John McNaughton has fun highlighting the conflicts and contradictions of macho posturing, but the whole idea of a lonely guy rescuing and falling in love with a hooker with a "heart of gold" is such a male fantasy that it subverts the whole thing (think Tarantino's "True Romance", or the countless childish stories in which heroes rescue big-breasted damsels in distress). It's like promoting female empowerment so that women can stay home and give you good sex. 7.9/10 – Regardless of how muddled its meterosexual message is, Bill Murray's deadpan performance makes this film special. Dinero would try his hand at comedy throughout his career, but aside from De Palma's "Hi, Mom!" he's always looked uncomfortable. By the late 90's he'd simply equate comedy with pulling silly faces.Worth one viewing.

This is quite simply one of the most unique, uplifting, and relatable films I have ever or will ever see.It is the story of Wayne, the Mad Dog (Robert DeNiro), who is an unfulfilled and lonely police officer. He is a timid but talented man who spends his free time yearning for love, but simultaneously unsure of who and where he can find it. Abrupt changes occur in his life upon inadvertently saving the life of a ruthless gangster, Milo (Bill Murray). The reward from Milo is Glory (Uma Thurman), to stay with Wayne for one week. Wayne and Glory fall in love and when the time comes to return Glory to the gangster, a classic struggle ensues.There are so many layers to the movie, and it is showcased by both strong dialogue, including Wayne's partner, (David Caruso), very high quality acting from all characters involved, and a moving story with the theme of love - believable, poignant, and relatable. Relatable in the sense that the main character Wayne shares traits that normal everyday people can actually relate to, which is a testament to the acting by Robert DeNiro, who often plays a dominant and at times unbelievably intelligent "tough guy". Here, Wayne is so mild-mannered that his friends and colleagues at the station refer to him as Mad Dog, which is an ironic name until he really does become his true self... MAD DOG, empowered by Glory.And then the same can be said of Bill Murray, who is very believable as a ruthless gangster where he is typically known as a goofball and comedian. He proved his dramatic range as a powerful, demoralizing, and overbearing protagonist to DeNiro, which is completely opposite of what one would expect, but it just works so well here that it's indescribable.Add Uma Thurman (Glory) into the mix, and it's easy to understand that a man can only be pushed so far... There is one thing in this world truly worth fighting for, and as a last resort whenever possible.I'd recommend this movie to anyone who's ever been lonely or unsure of the future and what they do with their lives. 8.5 out of 10.

Most things in Mad Dog and Glory work. The film uses humour, a love story, cross casting and a scrape of suspense well and at various different intervals. What doesn't work are the overall frustrations that bog the film down. The premise is so simple, watching it might make you think you've seen it a hundred times before but that doesn't detract too much. De Niro plays a role that I hadn't seen him play before and must admit, I didn't think he had it in him following other such performances like Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Ronin where he played various different roles with various different aims. Here he pulls off the nervous, shy photographer whom just goes about his business and although it takes some getting used to, it's a pleasant surprise.He can be contrasted with Bill Murray's character of Frank Milo who is a criminal/mob boss that is saved by De Niro's character following a gun point robbery. What's clever about this fact is that Murray is playing the character De Niro normally plays and vice-versa. Throughout the film, the script is consistent. Mad Dog (De Niro) gets to confess some jokes to Milo since he also works as a stand up comic; something we're more familiar to Bill Murray doing, and the awkward exchanges between Mad Dog and Glory (Thurman) also evoke some emotions.Uma Thurman is just about 'put-upable' in this film. Her character is right on that fine-line you get that separates 'likeable' and 'annoying' in a very distinct way. Once more, the overall treatment of the female characters also stands out in a rather obvious way. At the bars, it's all women who run around serving the men who sit there and enjoy themselves; the character of Glory, as I've said, has a dopey, annoying voice and is someone whom is to phone Milo on instructions. Glory isn't very smart either and when, nearer the end in a heated exchange between Mad Dog and Milo, Milo yells 'You love her? I OWN her!' it's really made to seem like the screenwriter has something against the female side of our species.Although the film is pretty much consistent throughout in its subject matter with Mad Dog and Glory spending enough time with one another to begin to like each other, Frank Milo remaining a constant, background friend and foe alike; it falters towards the end when certain characters try to raise money and the ending is such a horrible, happy, un-realistic ending – it actually leaves a bad taste in the mouth when the feeling should be very different. Sure, I was happy for the characters involved but it was too generic. Reading up on it, I found that there were two endings meaning that even the makers were undecided.Regarding Uma Thurman, this is a film of hers I feel I never would have seen had it not been for some dedicated searching and I was certainly very surprised when the sex scenes with De Niro came along since I'd always assumed she'd done Dangerous Liasons in 1988 and then nothing until 1994's Pulp Fiction which then, kick-started what was a series of successful, well known films. The reason for my surprise is that I never hear anyone mention this film as one of either Thurman's or De Niro's best. It's true that it's far from great but the sheer surprise at realising both had done this film in their careers is enough to realise and to respect the acting talent involved. From now on, when people speak of Uma Thurman or Robert De Niro, this is a film of their's I will bring up and probably recommend.