An absolute waste of money

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

"Breaking In" is a very forgettable Burt Reynolds comedy. For a really great Reynolds chuckles film rent "The End". This one falls flat, with just one caper after another, it is very redundant. Not much can be said about the two main characters either. Both fail to elicit sympathy, and in fact Casey Siemaszko as the thief apprentice comes across as more stupid than sympathetic. The ending feels so tacked on, it is bewildering. It is also very unsatisfying, which is not a good way to end what has already been a tedious film experience. Not recommended, even for Burt Reynolds fans.................................. - MERK

Pardon my pun above, but if there's any reason at all to try and catch Breaking In, Burt Reynolds is the main reason. He underplays Ernie, a veteran safe cracker who goes about his business being low key and certainly not flashy at all. He winds up teaming up with a youngster named Mike, played by Casey Siemaszko, who rejuvenates Ernie and he hires him as an apprentice for odd jobs cracking safes. The first half of the forgotten film is the better half because of Reynolds' performance as the aging thief, and is both sympathetic and funny, especially the scenes he's teaching Mike the ropes. It's unfortunate Burt passed up on many good movie roles because the man can act. Anyhow, the latter half of Breaking In revolves around how flashy Mike has become with his cash rewards and his hooker/on and off girlfriend, which I thought slowed the film down a bit. I found Carrie annoying and uninteresting and rather selfish; not sure what Mike saw in her.Watch this film mainly for Reynolds' performance, as he plays his role convincingly and develops decent chemistry with Mike. Siemaszko also plays his role well, but not quite up to par with his partner in crime.

I'm as puzzled as another viewer who disagreed with the hype that this was going to be Burt Reynolds' big comeback or that this was his greatest ever return to film. Why? Though taken out of context, this movie doesn't seem like it had much pull when it was released in 1989 and is terribly forgotten today. I would also agree with this viewer that the movie was only half good, but slightly more than just a few minutes worth of entertainment.Burt Reynolds plays safe cracker, Ernie Mullins. Casey Seimaszko plays Mike, his somewhat cocky young apprentice. The two happen to meet while breaking in to the same house--Mike just to lounge in an empty house and freeload on food and booze, and Ernie for the treasures of the house safe. Ernie takes Mike in, shows him the ropes, and the two are basically in business together. And they're good at what they do. About the time that Mike screws up and gets in way over his head, pissing off Ernie with his overconfidence and wrecking things with his prostitute girlfriend, this is the point where the movie takes a dive because it never manages to recapture the smart-mouthed quick wit of the first half of the movie which at least made some of it funny. Soon, it just topples for either lack of a better resolution, having too much of a moralistic ending, or the filmmakers just seemed unsure of what direction to finally take it in the end (perhaps one of those films that the studios rushed to release, I can't be sure). I haven't yet decided after only one viewing which one I'm leaning toward. But there was something odd there that entirely disrupted the jib of the traditional three acts of the film. Almost as though we are watching two different movies by the way the pace and genre suddenly shifts. Too bad. It looked like with Mike's cocky youth attitude and Ernie as a sort of cynic, it could've been a much funnier production.This one isn't something that I'd recommend or not recommend, but would simply say that if you didn't see it, you're not missing anything.

Burt Reynolds successfully ends a rather slow 1980's with a surprisingly good character part in this 1989 Samuel Goldwyn Pictures release. He portrays a veteran professional thief and safecracker who teaches a young novice how to be like him. Amusing crime caper.