A Walk Among the Tombstones

A perfect, old school detective movie with a precise Neeson, perverted kidnappers and a cold, sodden atmosphere. These non-digital guy’s movies are few and far between and I’m glad that Scott Frank was able to resurrect this genre even in today’s world. A gloomy mood at the end of the millennium, full of junkies and cut-up whores, an ingenious story from the pen of Lawrence Block, all spiced with the crackly, hoarse, Irish telephone voice of a former drunk? I want a sequel! (10/31/2014)

Do not expect an action flick just because it’s Liam Neeson. The only action scene takes place in the first minutes. This film is closer in spirit to Joel Schumacher’s 8MM, but it’s afraid to become too dark and heavy. For incomprehensible reasons, it lightens up and mocks the aura around the main bad guys, who should chill you to the bone. Philosophizing over guilt and redemption does not work very well either – in one of the final scenes it sticks out like a sore thumb. Neeson is OK, but Ólafsson is the best, albeit in a smaller role (he was also the best in Walter Mitty). [Cinemark 18, Howard Hughes Promenade, LA] (09/20/2014)

Liam Neeson is a current action hero and let's face it, he is perfect for that role. Age-wise, one would think that he is a little past his prime, but not even close. He constantly proves that he chose the path of an action hero at the right moment. The movie is thrilling, has quite interesting twists, definitely above average, but not action elite. (10/06/2014)

Liam Neeson again plays a first-class ass-kicker, but unlike Bill Marks, his character has overcome alcoholism (emphasised here more than in the book) and, unlike Bryan Mills, he makes more room for psychology and diplomacy. For a viewer wanting another furious action spectacle, it may even seem that Oskar Schindler will talk the violent psychopaths to death. Personally, I welcomed the consistency of the hard-boiled stylisation, even though it involves reducing women to the status of passive victims. After brutal sexual crimes have been perpetrated against them, the men can avenge them and, in a certain sense, thus redeem themselves (the motif of redemption is quite forcefully pushed into the foreground in the climax, when we have to listen to all twelve steps of the Alcoholics Anonymous programme). Women’s suffering serves only as a pretext for heroic deeds and the moral purification of flawed men. The only relatively active female character from the book (Scudder’s girlfriend, Elaine) was cut out of the film in the interest of better narrative flow. Of course, classic noir films weren’t any more considerate in their handling of female characters, but wouldn’t it have been enough to emulate the classics only at the style level? With its longer, mostly static shots and claustrophobic compositions together with muted colours and a gloomy soundtrack, that style elicits the need to escape into another, more colourful and kinder world. However, the image of a corrupt society with twisted values is taken to such an extreme that the film’s most appealing scenes are the perverted fantasies of serial killers (we see the first one in the opening credits). Such a film naturally cannot have a happy ending, though the last scene may at first give the impression that it will. However, in the context of the immediately preceding events, which most radically deviate from the book (apparently because of the more active role given to Scudder, whose character is otherwise paradoxically based on the passive acceptance of violence), the “superhero” aspect mainly raises concerns about whether there is a way out of the endless cycle of violence that only inspires more such behaviour. 75% (10/29/2014)

A well-made action film bordering on a film noir that keeps up its suspenseful atmosphere from start to finish. Although there are fewer gunfights compared to other Neeson films, it’s not a bad thing in this case. The film has a good atmosphere and steers clear of unnecessary sentimentality and pathos, so I greatly enjoyed it. (07/10/2016)