People are voting emotionally.

Overrated and overhyped

Absolutely the worst movie.

It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.

Johnny Handsome is directed by Walter Hill and adapted to screenplay by Ken Friedman from the novel "The Three Worlds of Johnny Handsome" written by John Godey. It stars Mickey Rourke, Ellen Barkin, Elizabeth McGovern, Lance Henriksen, Forest Whitaker, Morgan Freeman and Scott Wilson. Music is by Ry Cooder and cinematography by Matthew F. Leonetti.John Sedley (Rourke), AKA: Johnny Handsome, has a severely disfigured face, when he and his only real friend are double-crossed by two accomplices during a robbery, Johnny is sent to prison and his life reaches a new low. However, hope springs in the form of Dr. Steven Fisher (Whitaker), a pioneering plastic surgeon who offers to give Johnny surgery that would give him a normal face as he attempts to integrate back into society. With a new face making him unrecognisable, there is scope to enact revenge on the two people who killed his best friend and had him put in prison...Walter Hill knows his film noir, anyone who has seen The Driver knows this. Here for Johnny Handsome, Hill takes a lot of the fantastical elements of noir and dresses it up admirably as a violent revenge thriller. A box office flop and something of a kicking post for big hitting critics of the late 1980s, it's a film that now can be seen as being very much in tune with its influences.The charges of it being too bonkers, too violent and too much of a "B" movie homage just don't add up, because what is on offer is good solid meaty neo-noir cinema. A protagonist with an affliction, medical shenanigans, hyper femme fatale, over the top villain and a stoic and sarcastic gumshoe type copper. All of which operate in a sweaty and luridly coloured New Orleans. Add in Hill's eye for aggressive action sequences and it's neo a go-go.Hill gets strong performances from his cast, ensuring emotional bonds are not over egged and a clamour for sympathy and understanding kept to a bearable level by the actors playing the "good" guys "n" dolls. While giving Henriksen and Barkin licence to sizzle with sinister glee is astute and perfectly in tune with the material on the page. Leonetti's photography has the requisite pulpy noirishness to it, and the familiar twangs of Ry Cooder are never a bad thing in a Walter Hill movie.It's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but those complaining about missed opportunities regarding rehabilitation - or that the liberal doctor turns out to be clinically wrong in his reform beliefs - really are missing the point or unaware of the world where something like Johnny Handsome lives. From the kinetic misery at film's start, to the "ever so in tune with film noir" finale, Johnny Handsome is well worth a look by anyone interested in noir's updated version. 7/10

Walter Hill' filmography is always engaging at first sight.Stirred up by a screenplay promising action, sex, betrayal and revenge, you sit on your couch and insert longingly your DVD.Cast is good,no technical flaws,New Orleans'heat, should be a great movie....well, i ended up unsatisfactory; not really frustrated, but in a longing-for-more position.Watching this film helped me whiling away the time, but i won't watch it again, because it lacked elation.Two actors save this flick and owe the credits for not turning it into a B-movie. Ellen Barkin plays so well a hell of bitch and Morgan Freeman portrays effectively and jubilantly a cynical cop.As for Mickey Rourke, i don't know what to say for his acting as his role requests almost no acting, wearing a mask on his face for half the movie....

It is rare that a movie with a premise as far-fetched as Johnny Handsome could wind up being so memorable. It helps when a top notch action director is assisted by an outstanding ensemble cast firing on all cylinders to make this story believable.Johnny Handsome hit theaters in the fall of '89. It bombed, largely due to a weak promotional campaign by Tri-Star pictures. 19 years later, it is still unavailable on DVD. The excellent cast includes Ellen Barkin, Scott Wilson, and future Oscar winners Morgan Freeman and Forrest Whittaker. However, it is Mickey Rourke in the title role and Lance Henriksen as his arch-nemesis who truly hit grand slams with their performances. The heartbreaking original score by Ry Cooder and the rich atmosphere of the New Orleans setting also elevate this material considerably. This is not your typical revenge action picture.The movie can best be described as a gritty, noir-ish crime drama with a sci-fi twist that maintains plausibility instead of running off the rails into comedic territory as with 1997's Face/Off. The film moves at a brisk pace, which is fine, but this fact ultimately winds up being the only flaw with Johnny Handsome. One almost gets the impression more was filmed but the studio demanded a 90 minute cut. A Special Edition director's cut DVD is warranted. A longer run time allowing for more scenes to flesh out the characters portrayed by the great supporting cast would have made this already outstanding film a true classic.It would really be nice to see Walter Hill direct another action film one of these days. Hill and Peckinpah were the real deals. Other filmmakers (such as John Woo) strive to match the perfection of these two, but have yet to achieve it.

I wanted to just say that Mickey Rourke is one of my favorite actors...period.....but when i saw this flick i always wondered when he had surgery and had a normal face he learned to speak normally....well i found it weird that when Lance Henrikson(another of my favorite actors)slashed Mickeys face.....Mickey started talking like he was abnormal again....I always wondered if Mickey thought that was a good idea or that the director thought that was a good idea.....just seemed like bad acting to me....anyone else find that weird. ?.......all in all sometimes Mickey and Lance have made good role choices, but i think that someone should have told them that some of the dialog or scripts should be changed to make them look like great actors that they are.....Deniro and Pacino hardly ever make this mistake even though they do at times, but thats what makes them a little bit above the latter....i also wanted to point out that Mickey and Lance have made better choices lately and since i do love their acting and such that they keep it up.....thanks, Eddie