IMDb user comments for
Shooting Gallery (2005) (V) More at IMDb Pro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Index

14 comments in total

---

16 out of 18 people found the following comment useful :-
Not a bad movie, 20 December 2005

Author: Nautica7mk from United States

I didn't watch this movie expecting to find Oscar-caliber performances. But it did have a story, and it kept me interested right to the very end. The premise started out simple. Pool hustlers. And then suddenly it meat of the story starts to unravel, and I got to give props for an awesome climax. The pool playing was eye catching. And it's nice to finally see FPJ play subtle. It's a flawed film, but certainly not a terrible one. There were several pieces of dialogue I could live without. I was also a bit surprised to find myself chuckling a few times - when you see it, you'll know what I mean. Ving though felt terribly miscast, but he didn't distract me, so I'll take the good over the bad.

---

6 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
Unwatchable, 7 April 2006

Author: deeveebee from United States

Giving it a 2 only because a few scenes are actually quite interestingly photographed. But otherwise this is pure, odious, drivel. Insulting that this guy Keoni Waxman actually expects people to sit all the way through this mess -- I sure didn't. Why is it so apparent that the writers of pool movies have never set foot in actual pool rooms? Why are we allowing these hacks to make movies? I saw the bad reviews on this one, and decided to rent it anyway because I love pool and I'm still waiting for a decent pool movie. (Poolhall Junkies is bad, sure, but at least it offered some laughs. It's worth the rental just to hear Christopher Walken say "Benz," and to see Rod Stieger overacting to the point of hilarity.) I'm begging you: don't make the same mistake I made. Skip this one entirely. Anything to dissuade Waxman from making another movie. Please!

---

9 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
Higledy Pigledy.... but good to waste a Sunday night...., 13 December 2005

Author: Mark Hendrikx (phreakhamster) from London, UK

Well, where can I begin? The film does start in a strange fashion, with quick editing to get the ball rolling (no pun intended) as quickly as possible. It will later transpire that there are quite a few twists and turns in the story, hence the quick beginning. But once we are past the opening sequences and we see the first game of 8-ball, the film slows down and shows it's strengths. There is certainly an element of the film "Rounders" in this film; hustle to get the better of your opposite man. However, what was portrayed in "Rounders" was (in my personal opinion) not even conceived in this film. Many many sequences came about where you can see a certain scene, suck your teeth and think: "Hell, they could have done it better in such a way...." And the sad part about that is that it actually happens in the middle of the film too! But the mid-to-end part of the film does wrap up quite nicely.

The visuals within the film are frantic and well shot. Quodos to Keoni Waxman for showing such a different forray of shots; the sleazy underworld, the wonderful city shots and the added bonus of Pool-Hall terms being printed and written across angled camera-shots - I liked it. Oh - and I can't miss out the scenes where they are actually playing 8-ball! They were well shot and edited - albeit, when someone is playing pool, we always want to see the whole table and see the shots in their entirety, but that would mean sitting through 8 hours of extra film! But as we all know, we aren't here to necessarily be wow'ed by visuals in a film. A film should be the whole ten yards (no - I am not talking about the film, I mean it as a phrase...).

Ving Rhames was waaay below par in this film, Freddy Prinz Jnr did an adequate job, the divine Roselyn Sanchez played quite well, albeit her history in the story does not need to be actually in there, and finally Callum Keith Rennie does a good performance, but his character was written in what seems to be a hurried way. The whole crew was (if you can imagine the analogy) put into a blender, served up with whipped cream and a cherry on top, when you are expecting something bitter. It didn't blend at all well, the acting between the people. But as I stated in my title: "good to waste a Sunday night...." - no more, no less.

What we don't need to have is people now lambasting a film in simple words of: "Yes, this is better than..." or "No-one can make a film of such a story better than...." This film, in it's own right, is a film that was straight-to-DVD/video and quite rightly so. No way would it have performed in the cinemas with this summer's blockbusters. It is going to be one of those films that people rent when they have run out of films to watch. But I hope that this review will raise a touch more interest than that. Yes, I haven't given it glaring and massive praise, but who needs it when the likes of "Crash", "Batman Begins", "War of The Worlds", "The 40-Year-Old Virgin" and "The Wedding Crashers" are all due for release at the same time? Give it a go, but don't expect too much. It's entertaining (especially the end actually - I wasn't expecting it!) and keeps you watching. What most of us need when there is nothing on TV!

---

4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
"PoolHall Junkies This Is Not", 24 May 2006

Author: Matt_Layden from Canada

A pool hustler becomes a member of a pack of hustlers. He rises to the top, but soon finds himself the monkey in the middle of a match between his boss and a crooked cop.

Freddie Prinze Jr. seems to have a string of bad films lately, with such titles like Scooby Doo, Summer Catch and Scooby Doo 2. But one only has to look at his film credits to see that he hasn't been in a really good movie at all. His career ranges from teen slasher flicks to a poor excuse for a video game adaption. It seems with Shooting Gallery Freddie is trying to show that he's serious now, and that he's left his Scooby Doo image behind. Well, Freddie, I got a message for ya, keep dreaming'

When I first came across Shooting Gallery, Poolhall Junkies rip-off is what came to my mind, but for the sake of an argument, I gave it a chance. After watching it, I still came to the conclusion that it's a poolhall junkies ripoff and a poorly executed one too. The main character here tries to act as if he's cool and slick, but with Freddi Prinze Jr. as your main catch, he's comes off and nothing more then a pretty face who thinks he can shoot some pool. In the final stages of the film, I wanted to cut my ears off I couldn't stand his "broken nose" accent. Ving Rhames makes an appearance. All he does is walk around and chew on alligator feet. He actually does nothing in the film, until the climax when he shoots some pool and a gun.

In the film "Rounders" Norton has an ace tattooed on his arm, he says that he has an ace up his sleeve, it worked. In "Shooting Gallery" they get 8 balls tattooed on their arm, with Rhames on his bald head. It shows that their part of a gang...but it doesn't work. Rhames outfit is comical, you should see it to believe it. The plot is poorly written, and one of those, he was hustling everyone from the start type gigs, completely clichéd.

The pool shooting is quite good, not better then what is showcased in "Poolhall Junkies" but good nonetheless. Freddie actually shoots some pool here, nice to see that, but it's obvious that the trick shots are done by someone else. I liked the whole switching of the shooting sides that Freddie does near the end though, I thought that was a neat addition. "Poolhall Junkies" has Walken and "Shooting Gallery" has Macfadyen. Macfadyen is definitely the highlight here as the drunk, druggie, poolhall hustler. He brings some enthusiasm to an otherwise dead cast. It was nice to see some life pumped into this dead film, but it doesn't last long.

The poolhall lingo consists of what the director has heard and made up. Which is obvious when you listen to other lines such as "If I'm Lyin...I'm Dyin." Some characters names, if you'd like to hear are Paulie the Pawn and Cue Ball Carl. What's with the random words appearing on the screen? Poolhall lingo? Purpose to the script? It was distracting and adds nothing to the experience except confusion and dread.

Skip "Shooting Gallery" unless you want a headache from poor acting and a clichéd plot. "Poolhall Junkies" this is not. Unless you're a massive fan of pool, check out something else.

---

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
worse than others have posted, 23 June 2007

Author: expatinasia from Bangkok, Thailand

Beware of movies where the same person is credited as the writer, producer, and director. It's an omen that should never be ignored. The general consensus is that this movie is terrible, and I have to agree. Unless this person inherited a boatload of money, hoe could he have convinced anyone to provide financing for it? I bought the DVD in Shanghai for $1US, and it's not worth that. At least there are captions...in both Spanish and in Chinese - nice! Check out an incredible continuity problem around the 50 minute mark. Freddy Jr is in bed, talking with Jez. Freddy has a huge tattoo on his right arm...next scene, it's missing...no, there it is again...wait, it's gone...it's back, again...Hilarious! If you need to vacuum the floors, or iron some shirts, this is the perfect DVD to have playing in the background to keep you company.

---

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
A nice butt does not a good actress make, 5 October 2006

Author: joe nobody from United States

I can't believe people are saying Roselyn Sanchez was good in this. Granted, with all the things wrong with this film, not much would have made it better, but a competent lead actress might have helped a bit. I know white boys from Iowa that could play a hardcore barrio chica better than her, and as far as being a gambling junkie - gimme a break. She's utterly unbelievable, unsympathetic, unlikable, and her acting is as flat as a railroad track in this film. The rest of the actors' poor performances have been adequately covered elsewhere here - the only worthwhile performance was from Angus Macfadyen as Tenderloin Tony. If you can see it for free, go ahead and watch it as an example of how not to make a film, but by no means pay to see this one.

---

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
It's about hustling, indeed, 2 July 2006

Author: dolph50 from Cuba

According to the movie slang, a "slide" is a guy so dumb he even has no idea he's being framed on. I wish I know someone that would knowingly allow to be framed, so the term is kind of a lame one to me. Anyway, when you finish watching this movie-crap you feel that someone got framed indeed. You feel like you are the "slide" here. Specially if you paid for the flick. I found it miscast, poorly written and bad directed. But I have to agree with those who still find something enjoyable on it. If you search hard enough you can always find useful things in a garbage dump, as long as you care to sift it out. So maybe I have missed the hidden gems of this one. It's a blessing it went straight-to-video. I mean for Keoni Waxman. It should have gone straight-to-dumpster.

---

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
To be honest, hardly worth commenting upon..., 21 April 2006

Author: MrGKB from Ohio

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

What can I say? Ving Rhames takes a paycheck, Freddie Prinze Jr. demonstrates the limitations of his acting abilities, and the script tries to simulate the coolness of the "insider" but serves mostly as the embodiment of its own title, providing easy targets for ridicule. I was glad I got this one at the library. It's not badly produced, granted, and some of the green felt action is well-shot, but this dog ain't no hustler, if you catch my drift. Small wonder this went direct to video. One thing is certain: its shelf life will depend strictly upon the durability of Ving Rhames's career. I surely hope his career never depends on this film.

---

5 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
ridiculously stupid., 17 September 2006

Author: vbaria9700 from United States

I'm a fan of poolhall junkies. i loved PJ because everything flowed and the shots were awesome. PJ wasn't so focused on hustling and an obvious fantasy plot line. PJ showed a range of pool players and the community. The kids who get punked, hustlers, pro players, and everything in between.

This movie on the other hand was so made up. The director even mentions a few of the lingo used was made up. SG had too much lingo if you asked me. All the clutter messed up the dialogue. Normal people in pool halls do not talk like that and I have been in plenty. So who the hell was the writer trying to target? Cuz I am sure there is only a small population of the nation that can understand everything these kids are blabbering about. And why have 8-ball signature logos when everyone knows the game is 9 ball. The 8-ball has no significance to the movie.

Bottom line, the director has no concept of what is true to real-life and what is just made up. this movie is like a report with a whole lot of footnotes, but none of the sources are relevant to the point.

---

8 out of 16 people found the following comment useful :-
Shoot... me..., 29 December 2005

Author: sweetmarissa from Georgia (United States)

My chief complaint is that there are no captions, so I'm only catching bits and pieces of the movie. The names are already killing me. Jezebel... Jericho... Is this pool or 'Children of the Corn'?

The acting as a whole was atrocious. Was there even a director on the set? The accents and dialogue are hilarious. All I hear is "sisal, sisal, sisal". I have never in my life heard anyone talk like this in any pool hall I've ever been in. The special features said the slang was 30% made up by the movie makers - try 90% and the rest they got wrong. Like what is all this "tribe" talk? Nice tattoos, by the way. So they get branded. With eight-balls, no less. Way to hustle there, sports. I expect to hear Ving Rhames offer to get the horses for his "mastuh" any minute now. Oh, Freddie... if you're lyin, you're dyin? That's tough. Especially with you lowering your voice like that. It's reminiscent of Rocky Balboa.

Then not only did they make up their own jargon, they butchered actual pool terminology. It's a good thing this movie never made it to theatres, or we'd have a bunch of clowns running around our pool halls rambling about dandelions and lemons.

Of course, the shots, the bridges, and the "sharking" these guys are doing are all horrible, but I expected no less. The rack twirl got me, though. You know what I'm talking about... That thing ball-bangers do. I also noticed when "Jericho" and "Cueball Carl" (*rolls eyes*) are playing, they rack the balls in numerical order. Nice. And love the glove, Carl.

Shooting Gallery was also an apt title. I think they shot more with guns than cues. I actually felt like I was watching a soft porn through some of those scenes.

Not all is lost, though. I walked away with a new playing strategy: When on the nine, hit it as hard as you can. And cuss. A lot.

This movie does what I never thought possible, which is suck more than 'Poolhall Junkies'.

---

---

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Ratings	External reviews	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history