Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Sadly Over-hyped

People are voting emotionally.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Shot and near fatally wounded by his corrupt former partner, a police officer reemerges as a mob contract killer; he might be working undercover or he might be trying to getting to revenge, with things becoming clearer as the film progresses. If this sounds like a confusing plot description, it is because the film is arguably too complex for its own good; the action scenes are generally well done and Chuck Norris even turns in a decent performance as he mentors a local kid and gets to utter some witty quips, but these highlights are hard to appreciate as the film pitches Norris so deep undercover that it is hard to say where his agenda lies. What can be made out from the film is nevertheless often entertaining. There are many atmospheric nighttime shots and Joel Derouin's jazzy music score is perfectly moody. There is also a thrilling sequence set in the snowbound backwoods of Canada, where half the film is set, and the final few scenes are pretty powerful, over-the-top as the actions of vengeful Norris might well be. Salim Grant also deserves a special mention as the local boy who Norris befriends. There is a particularly touching scene in which Norris confesses to being scared of bullies when he was a kid too, and Grant manages to be wide-eyed and genuinely taken with Norris throughout without the film ever getting mushy or sentimental in this regard.

Just out of Soviet fear and the Cold War we were in 1992. Modern American cowboy films had to invent another enemy. Simple recipe: Italian mafia, French mafia, and Iranian mafia, all three together. And there you are. The only place possible is Seattle and Vancouver. The Italians are in Seattle. The French (Canadians) are in Vancouver. And the Iranians are invading with the help of a rotten ex-cop turned drug-lordlet. All that is by far too much and too many. So many will have to be eliminated. What's more there is the ghost of an officially dead cop playing the double agent, and he was officially killed by the rotten ex-cop turned drug-lordlet. And the ghost will finally meet face to face with this drug-lordlet and the latter will be turned into mid-air minced meat, after the three other gangs had mutually been eliminated one after the other by one of the others. The ghost only came for the last harvest of cadavers. It is strange how these modern time cowboy films are little creative. It is all defined within the limits of a shooting posture and a noisy exchange of bullets.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine & University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne

Chuck Norris stars as a police officer who goes undercover to take out mobsters who are warring over the drug market. They include Middle Eastern mobsters, typical Itallian mobsters and Candian(!) mobsters who all declare war on each other, which then of course causes Norris to wipe out all three of the families and settle a score with Michael Parks(The best thing about this movie.) If anything else The Hit-man is a one man show, with Norris trumping anyone who really gets in his way. Back in 1991 I remember catching this in a triple-bill with Showdown In Little Tokyo and Out For Justice, to which in comparison to each movie The Hit-man lacked the edge of Out For Justice and the inspired action of Showdown In Little Tokyo. Also Lundgren, Seagal and Lee seemed far more agile and charismatic than Norris ever did in this film. Indeed had Seagal done this movie instead of Norris and I mean back in his heyday, Seagal would have provided enough edge to really get into this clichéd nonsense. Because we know Norris is always righter than right, we never feel as if he's facing a grave danger and is falling under the spell of evil. Norris is as always Norris and although the action sequences are okay, they are uneventful and the real plus comes only from watching Michael Parks overact. In fact his scenery chewing performance somehow makes the movie come to life which is not often enough unfortunately.*1/2 out of 4-(Poor)

This is a damn good Chuck Norris movie. Of course that doesn't make it a movie you could recommend to just anyone as "good," but if you look at it as part of its own sub-genre--say the Chuck Norris/Jean Claude Van Damme/Stephen Segal sub-genre--then it is pretty damn good in comparison. And I had never heard of it before today! The story leaves much to be desired, but this is the kind of low-budget action movie they just don't make any more: slick and goofy, crass and sentimental, moral and ultraviolent, "funny bad" and just plain funny--all at the same time. But the standout feature is definitely the great Michael Parks. Just as he did in the similarly obscure Charles Bronson flick "Death Wish V: The Face of Death," and in his "From Dusk Until Dawn" cameo, Parks takes charge of every scene he's in and simply walks away with the movie. Why hasn't this brilliant actor been given leading roles? He has been so fascinating to watch in everything I've seen him, especially in his later years.