Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

When I first saw Hangmen, I don't think I watched all of it. In fact I remember I found it boring. Cut to a few years later where I'm now in the nineties, I viewed it again, this time finding it much more entertaining. It does have a lot of acting and VIOLENCE by some quite merciless parties. And you know what it also has, besides an impactful and involving lead- a young Sandra Bullock in her first pic, ever. Hangmen of course isn't the best film ever made, or even good, but it is a quite involving popcorn flick if giving a chance. There might be a couple of moments you feel yourself droning, but I found the whole thing quite a nifty B grade Canadian action pic, with unknowns, except for it's partial known lead and Bullock. The story is quite good of an CIA agent, told to stand down, as so a corrupt agency can do their own thing, only our main guy intervenes, thus bringing hell down on him and his men who are taken out. His son who's girlfriend (Bullock) like himself was taken, teams up with an old CIA buddy of his Dad's to get her back. We have some quite nasty baddies in this appealing pic, and Bullock, shows us how real stars are born. There are much worse movies out there, than this one, believe me. Go easy on it, give a chance.

Spoiler Alert: This is a bad movie. I'm not sure if that qualifies as an actual spoiler, but trust me. Your day will be spoiled if you sit through this movie. But I'm sure somewhere below I will reveal plot stuff that can be construed as spoilers.I've really been a fan of Sandra Bullock for a long time. She funny, adorable, and really a very good actress. I've never really seen her in a bad movie. Until now.I'm not going to blame her. It's not her fault. I suppose an aspiring actress needs something to do to make money or break into the acting business. But apparently it didn't hurt her career, so… whatever.On the whole, the acting was not just sub par. It was abysmal. Maybe some of the blame for that can rest with the direction/production, but not all. Sandra was the best one, and she was pretty green. Still, nothing can make up for the torture I was put through while trying to find something - anything - redeeming about this movie. I was utterly unsuccessful. Everything is gratuitous, from the absolutely unnecessary amount of dead bodies (with absolutely NO police interference whatsoever - right in the middle of the day in public buildings, no less) The foul language is also not only gratuitous and forced, but since the acting is so horrid it's all foul anyway. The head honcho over all the assassinations apparently loves giving orders over the phone, because he was on the phone more than a teenage girl. The editing is awful - you can tell where all the voice overs are. In one scene where Danny is riding in the car with "Dog" (or whatever his name was), all the background noise of driving, gravel, or city noise nearly disappears and the dialog is inserted at a different volume and you can hear the volume go in and out each time it's inserted. In each scene throughout the movie, the volume is high then low then high again… which didn't help the dialog because it was already bad, and after a while I started feeling lucky when it was low.I must confess, I couldn't finish the movie. I tried. I really did. But after about an hour I just didn't think I could take it anymore. Although I don't recommend anyone watch this for any actual pleasure, I do highly recommend it for breaking the will of our enemies.

Oh boy! Oh boy! On the cover of worn out VHS has a picture of Sandra Bullock and her name written on top. I think only reason they had chance to sell the movie in nineties, was because of Sandra Bullock's name. Bullock's fans don't have to disappoint. Sandra is only thing to watch in this movie and her performance is the only you can call acting. Rest of the movie… It's fun to watch in first fifteen minutes because it's bad but after that it's going worse. Much worse. Directing is awful. Acting is awful. Script is awful. Dialog is awful. Action is awful. Music is quite good actually. Typical score for eighties action movies. This movie is so bad that it goes close to anything Andy Sidaris has ever produced. It's so bad that there isn't proper word to describe this poor attempt to be a movie. But still, there was Sandra Bullock. And super cool (sarcasm) Jake LaMotta who tried to be Marlon Brando. I think they can now bring the film out on DVD. It could be cool! And they should write on the cover: ACADEMY AWARD WINNER SANDRA BULLOCk IN HANGMEN1 out of 10

I LOVE Sandra Bullock-She's one of my all-time favorite actresses-but this is a movie that she should have paid a long time ago to be trash-canned. I realize that it's almost 20 years old-but my dead grandmother can act better than these people did. Beware-it's not even worth the $ 5.50 WalMart rack...You know that when the acting stinks this bad that it's not even worth a couple of bucks-the sound quality is horrendous-there's no closed captioning to even hear the hideous dialog, and it looks as if it were filmed on a $ 1.98 budget. I thought that I'd like to see Sandra in an early role to see how she evolved as an actress-but YIKES is too kind a word to use...