Don't listen to the negative reviews

Absolutely Fantastic

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

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

I try and not bash movies/shows just for having a lame plot, except when they are being extremely hyped - and unjustly so, but I feel I have to add my 5 (?) Cent whenever a show/movie is offensive or immoral, and this one is the latter. For no understandable reason Hackett is portrayed as the hero and being rewarded in the end, when all he does is getting about 6-7 people killed (or 5-6 killed and one nearly killed and probably handicapped for life) while it could have been only one dead (bad enough, but better than several more). No money and no wrongly understood sudden change of moral is worth these losses. First, he agreed to go along with it - very naively believing that no one will get hurt - which is always a possible outcome in things like these, and when it goes south, he is the one who makes it go to hell even more. It would still have been disloyal and somewhat questionable had he gone through with the theft and afterwards ratted out his fellow workers to the police. But endangering many people and getting Dobbs and Palmer and whoever dies in his bomb trap and Cochrone killed and Eckehart severely injured - that's the worst move he could do. Sure, he gets Eckehart into hospital, but I doubt he will fully recover from this severe injury he would not have gotten at all if it wasn't for Hackett - he must have known that this is the likely outcome, what was he thinking? One man coming and they all put down their weapons? Very egoistical! If this is how Hollywood perceives heroes, we are all doomed. If you writers cannot come up with better actions/characters/plots, then better not write anything at all. That's poisonous. Other than that the movie isn't good anyway, and that you cannot side with Hackett plus the interesting characters being killed off early, makes it even worse. A waste of great actors.

There is a general feeling among the fans of 'heist films' that Armored is not a good film. This is an unfortunate reaction for a film which features some of the best actors in the business of cinema. There would hardly be a dedicated viewer who would accuse a film with Matt Dillon, Lawrence Fishburne and Jean Reno of being a 'bad film'. However, in many ways the fans' anger is justified as viewers who watch this film are likely to state that due to a weak script, Armored has failed to capture viewers' attention. It is rather sad especially its ending is not at all convincing. Armored has been directed by Antal Nimrod who chose to portray a moral tale set in an urban milieu in order to depict how greed can take hold of a human minds. One basic weakness which viewers find with Armored is that one cannot feel the tension in the film. It is true that there are some good moments in the film but overall tension is absent from the film. Most heist films are believed to have rock solid scripts with a provision for the description of foolproof plans. However, there are no such elements in Armored. This is one reason why Armored would end up being watched by viewers out of sheer curiosity of being a member of 'heist films'.

Heist movies can be good (see: "The Italian Job") and bad (see: too many to list), but they can also be neither. This one is right about in the middle. With a lot of filler, boring dialogue and cringe-worthy hinge-popping, it's just a bore. The five minutes dedicated to "action" at the end weren't nearly enough to justify watching. But the exposition into Jimmy's artwork and school attendance was great. I don't understand why they couldn't have delved into that more. Maybe when the bad guys go to the house to pick up Jimmy he's actually at school and so they have to come up with another plan. Why didn't Ty just leave in the cop's car? Oh well, at least I was able to write enough sentences for it.

I have long ago stop relying on critics reviews about films.Most of them are naming their selves critics and these people have the nerve to tell us ,that they are capable of understanding art and "good cinema" and we don't.But enough about them ,no one anyway takes them seriously today. But what really baffled me ,was reading user reviews here in IMDb(which generally i take into account) totally burying the film ,with arguments like "it didn't deliver" ,"with such good cast the movie wasn't that good", "DVD material" and stuff like that. I never understood the phrase "it didn't deliver" because by saying that ,you are admitting that you don't see all films the same way.I don't care if it's a b-movie ,or a 200m $ budget film ,my judgement will be made only of what i see on the screen.There isn't any logic in saying "you know what ,i expected this film to be 4/10 and it actually is 7/10 so it's a masterclass and i expected this film to be 10/10 ,but it proved to be 7/10 so it's rubbish".This is totally crazy. With all that i'm also referring to "the good cast" argument ,like that if you have 6 superstars they must all have the same contribution to the plot ,or their characters should be equally "strong". I also understand that if you are going to see a comedy ,you expect to laugh ,if you are going to see a horror film you expect the opposite and if you are going to see an action film you expect not to get bored.So can anyone explain to me how could you get bored with "Armored",when actually the film in its biggest part is like "24"(all happens in real time)and there is such fierce battle against time and between characters them shelves.It's a very good action film ,you don't want to go to sleep because you want to see who prevails and it's as simple as that. I think when you go to a movie ,you don't have the movie already played in your head and if the movie itself doesn't match "your's" is rubbish .Or if it does then it's great.It's wrong. And to end all that , i have to add that we must stop checking every single detail of a film like detectives.(There was a user in his review that didn't like ,that the contact between the tracks and the track company was one time every hour!!!!!!)