Montana (1998)

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find 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.

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.

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'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.