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

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

"Highwaymen" is certainly no "The Hitcher" who subsequently directed both films. The director's obsession with cars could almost mean that he's a long lost relative of Jeremy Clarkson or someone off the "Top Gear" team, however in this film the director could've been Jeremy himself. "Highwaymen" has a really interesting premise, a mad man mowing women down the road, like "I Saw The Devil" I heard someone say! (Please do not get excited)."Highwaymen" really deserves a 2/10, but for pure enjoyment value I've decided to give an extra point. It's so bad it's entertaining. The reveal of the killer is one of the funniest things I've ever seen in a film that's meant to be taken seriously. Is this bionic man supposed to look chilling? Because he looks ridiculous! How is a man who bowls about in a little electric wheelchair that goes about 2mph, and who's car has its own mechanical ramp meant to be scary or believable? I mean, if this vengeful man has meant to be chasing this bionic man for 5 years or whatever, why has it been so hard to destroy an blind old man who can't even walk? The acting is also really bad!Jim Caviezel gives an extremely hollow performance and expresses literally zero emotion in what he's saying. He just gives a blank look, speaks a few vengeful lines and walks on. He's about as charismatic as a carrot! His glamorous assistant isn't that much better either, and even after several car crashes she's still manages to look just as ravishing as before. There is also no sexual chemistry between them and you don't really care about what's going to happen to them. The cop isn't much cop either as he annoyingly springs up from scene to scene just to make the already short running time a little bit longer.The final confrontation is quite funny though. Why has this woman just sat their with the worlds weakest villain and not hit him over the head or something, or tore up one of his metal braces? And then the bionic man shows some unreasonable strength and manages to hang out for dear life from one car to another! It's really entertaining in completely the wrong way. It also doesn't make sense to not give the bionic man any motive! He wants this woman and we never know why. The director just thinks it sufficient enough to give the reason "he just does"."Highwaymen" is also quite well edited and would certainly be a car lovers dream. However, the screenplay department especially needs some work! So if you're looking for a light-hearted laugh then give this one a go. But it is very, very forgettable.

The first 8 minutes or so of this film, no one speaks. Just images. Men, machines. Roadway, asphalt roaring past.This is the film Vanishing Point, The Driver and Death Proof wanted to be.The engines supply the bass riff. The song of the road is here.Had this film been made in the 70's, it would still be in the theaters, a classic. It is an out of place artifact. It is still worthy of consideration and serious contemplation.The classic 'Cuda and the Caddy. The road belongs to these monster road machines, and them as are willing and capable of driving same.The fetish of Detroit lives here: the ferocious machines made by men like Clint in Gran Torino.The cinematography is brilliant, huge sweeping vistas, claustrophobic tunnels, vehicular interiors that are lived in, not Hollywood perfect.This is a great film. I was hoping to see it on the big screen, but it went from "Coming Soon" to "Now Available On DVD" before it ever made the screens in this area.

Nothing like as good as the director's earlier, 'The Hitcher', this does, nevertheless, have its moments. Impressive opening, some great landscape cinematography and a great ending, unfortunately a great film, do not make. The real problem seems to be that Mr Harmon doesn't know how serious a project this is. I have no problem with a decent, fast, lurid, exploitation flick, which is what I expected this to be. Unfortunately we are supposed to take much of this seriously and then between the action sequences we are given too much time to reflect upon how daft and unbelievable it is. The highway officer seems to be the key to it in that at the end, after all his pontificating, he makes a courageous and stirring decision, and we are left wondering what this film might have been like if he had been more like that all along, instead of acting so very dumb.

Highwaymen (2003) *** (out of 4) Director Robert Harmon made a name for himself with his 1986 cult classic The Hitcher and followed that up seven years later with the highly underrated Jean-Claude Van Damme film Nowhere to Run. In 2002 he made a return to horror with Wes Craven Presents: They but when Freddy vs Jason hit theaters horror fans got a big surprise. Before the film started New Line showed the trailer for a film that looked incredible and before the title popped up there was already a bit of buzz going on. That film was Highwaymen but it eventually kept getting pushed back to the point where it only opened limited theaters to cash in on star Jim Caviezel's role in The Passion of the Christ.Did the studio mess up a golden opportunity for another cult classic or was the film simply bad and that's why it kept getting pushed back? Well, on August 24th, New Line delivers this much talked about but rarely seen film on DVD with the low retail price of $19.95.The story is kept simple and violent throughout. Rennie Cray (Jim Caviezel) is out searching for a hit and run driver who no one knows about but himself. Five years earlier a man driving a '72 El Dorado ran over Cray's wife and got off without spending a day in jail. Cray on the other hand served three years in prison for aggravated assault after he crashed his car into this secret man who didn't die however. After being released from prison Cray goes out looking for the guy who is now deformed and has transformed his car into an extension of his own body. A cat and mouse game takes place over two years as the El Dorado keeps stalking and killing innocent women. The newest target (Rhonda Mitra) survives the first attack so Cray decides to use her in order to get the El Dorado who keeps coming back for more.Highwaymen is in no way a great movie and while there are many problems here the bottom line is that we've got a tense and well directed thriller that is destined to get a cult following just like The Hitcher did so many years ago. Like that film, the director goes over the top in some of the graphic violence but he also makes the wise decision to cut out all the Hollywood stuff and go straight for the jugular. I'm sure many other directors would have tried to turn this into some soap opera but thankfully Harmon knew exactly what to do with the film. The film runs 74-minutes not including the end credits and some said this is why New Line didn't give this a large theatrical run but it's this reason the film works so well.One thing missing from films today is the short running time. Films of the past were always good at keeping the running time low especially if they didn't have much of a story to work with. Various Monogram horror films and several exploitation films from the 1970's came in to show one thing and they delivered that without trying to butter up the viewer with silly side plots and stupid romance scenes between the two leads. Highwaymen is a very good example of this because it's 74-minute runtime is nothing more or less than a straight revenge story. The two leads don't fall in love and we don't have any stupid scenes dealing with the villain trying to come across as something he isn't.I'm sure some will criticize the film because we really don't get to know the good guy or the bad guy but once again I think this is a major plus. Do we really need an extra twenty minutes to know the good guy is a good guy and the bad guy is a bad guy? Of course not.This message is set up within the opening sequence and if the viewer has half a brain then he knows what's going on, who we're suppose to root for and we should be smart enough to know the bad guy is an evil SOB who is going to get what's coming. Director Harmon has a very simple setup and a very simple delivery. There isn't a scene in the movie that doesn't belong or doesn't add anything to the film. We go from the first act to the last one and the director delivers the goods without trying to do anything extra.Jim Caviezel moves slowly and speaks softly but the performance is right on the mark because we know exactly what he's thinking just by the way his walks and various body jesters that are given throughout the film. The supporting actors do a nice job in their roles but the film certainly belongs to Caviezel and the two cars. There are a few bad scenes, namely a rescue that's a bit far fetched towards the start of the film but other than that we've got a wonderful little B-film that manages to be tense without the added crap we'd see in a Hollywood film. The director has a fancy for showing some graphic crash violence but this here just adds to the discomfort of the film.