#In the line of fire movie#
Give him crap material and he’ll easily steal any movie he’s in. Malkovich is Malkovich - give him good material and the man will run wild with it. Eastwood was more interested in playing multi-faceted characters making Horrigan a memorable turn for the legendary actor. The two are in their element with their respective roles of Horrigan and Booth. While Petersen’s direction and the film’s script are key factors, this movie wouldn’t be what it is without Eastwood and Malkovich. I enjoyed Blood Wook, Jeff Daniels is fun - but it’s not a great movie by any stretch. And he’d try again a time or two but without the same gusto or enthusiasm. This is the movie that proved Eastwood still had it in him to make an action thriller. He brings a sensitivity to the role that comes from playing action heroes for decades but is still more than capable of taking on a younger faster foe. It’s almost as if he took a vacation to play one more classic everyman tough guy before jumping back into the director’s chair. With Wolfgang Peterson behind the camera, Jeff Maguire’s tightly wound Oscar-nominated script, and removed from any producing or active creative decisions - Eastwood feels at ease as Horrigan. Hot off his career-defining performance and direction of Unforgiven, In the Line of Fire was made in that very brief five-minute period where Eastwood said he wouldn’t be acting in another film he directs.
Does Horrigan have it in him to take that fateful bullet, or will he fail and let another president die? Obsessed with the Kennedy assassination, Booth plays a cat and mouse game goading Horrigan to catch him or die trying. After a career of busting currency counterfeiters, Frank is pushed back into serving and protecting when a madman who calls himself Booth (John Malkovich) threatens the president. He’s the only active Secret Service agent to lose a president. I see you standing over the grave of another dead president.”įrank Horrigan was there 30 years ago at Dealey Plaza.
0 kommentar(er)
