Pride and Glory

User Score
6.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 38 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 22 out of 38
  2. Negative: 5 out of 38

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. JohnH
    Feb 14, 2009
    5
    I didn't like this movie. Edward Norton's performance was good but I found the movie to move too slowly.
  2. TDKinDallas
    Oct 26, 2008
    6
    It was a good movie, but nothing special. A lot of things happen that just don't make any sense. I still enjoyed the ride, but I am not recommending that you spend $10 a head to go see it......wait for DVD.
  3. ChadS.
    Oct 28, 2008
    6
    Denzel Washington's historical Best Actor win for his portrayal of a bad cop in Antoine Fuqua's "Training Day" at the 2002 Academy Awards was met with tempered excitement in some quarters. These well-wishers were disappointed that Washington couldn't have followed in the footsteps of Sidney Poitier with a role more along the lines of Malcolm X.(in which Washington lost the Denzel Washington's historical Best Actor win for his portrayal of a bad cop in Antoine Fuqua's "Training Day" at the 2002 Academy Awards was met with tempered excitement in some quarters. These well-wishers were disappointed that Washington couldn't have followed in the footsteps of Sidney Poitier with a role more along the lines of Malcolm X.(in which Washington lost the Oscar in 1992 to Al Pacino for his role as a "hoo-ha('ing)" blind man in Martin Brest's "Scent of a Woman"), or Dr. Virgil Tibbs(Poitier's 1967 Oscar-winning role from Norman Jewison's "In the Heat of the Night"), than the gangbanger with a badge who would leave his unformed partner in the ghetto for dead. But give Washington credit, when the "St. Elsewhere" alumnist put his screen image at risk, he went all out. Alonzo was one bad mutha*****. Thankfully, the filmmaker let Washington explore all the nuances of this one dimension, the bad mutha***** dimension, instead of fortifying the rogue cop with redeeming characteristics to cajole the audience into complicity, by having them sympathize with the antagonist's flaws. In other words, bad mutha*****s are human beings, too. But there can be only one Martin Scorsese. And "Pride and Glory" is not "Cape Fear"(Scorsese's reworking of the 1962 J. Lee Thompson original); it's also not "Good Fellas" in blue. Alonzo was a gangsta. Jimmy Egan(Colin Farrell) is a gangsta, too. But Jimmy has a wife and child; together, hangin' in the family crib, they look like the very model of domestic bliss(conversely, Alonzo's girl looks like a "homegirl" on blow). The kindness that Jimmy bestows on his family is supposed to absorb whatever illegal shennanigans he orchestrates on the job. But the good-hearted nurse and the child who goes to sleep with racecars dotted all over his blanket, can't absorb, and finally, redeem, a husband/father who'd punch a woman square in the face, hard, then threaten her infant with a piping hot iron, close. This sort of gratuitous act is ugly, but at least it would be honest, if Jimmy didn't show contrition soon after. Farrell is obviously thinking about his screen image. In the dialogue-less final scene, Ray Tierney(Edward Norton) become a Scorsese-like protagonist, but the expression is incomplete without Jimmy's presence. Ray never quite gets the chance to be the hero before his code of ethics is compromised by family pressure. Expand
  4. JayH.
    Jan 26, 2009
    6
    Brutal, well acted and edited. Convincingly cast with believable performances. The gritty setting is a plus. Good pace. Still, I never really cared about most of the characters so I never got deeply involved in the film.
  5. Aug 25, 2014
    6
    I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie, but this wasn't this.

    There were a lot of characters, with minimum introductions. Many stories, many shades, some with more purpose than the others. The story was good, but the execution pretty poor: the beginning was jumpy and a bit confusing, and the jumpiness never really stopped. Some agendas were quite clear - the rest, not so much.
    I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie, but this wasn't this.

    There were a lot of characters, with minimum introductions. Many stories, many shades, some with more purpose than the others.

    The story was good, but the execution pretty poor: the beginning was jumpy and a bit confusing, and the jumpiness never really stopped. Some agendas were quite clear - the rest, not so much. All in all the movie seemed very restless, pushing forward when it maybe should have taken a moment to calm down a little.

    The acting was good, but not overwhelmingly so; lots of good actors who didn't get to shine as much as I would have liked them to.

    In general, there's action and some violence, but it all drowns in the inability to keep the story together and running smoothly. The themes move around family, dirty cops, and what is the right thing to do when you could either lose everything you have worked for, or look the other way. And some people never look the other way.
    Expand
  6. Nov 26, 2015
    6
    A quite good film about cops. It has many themes, there is some action and violence, the performances are good. However the ending is stupid, I think.
Metascore
45

Mixed or average reviews - based on 29 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 29
  2. Negative: 7 out of 29
  1. The stark drama harkens back to Sidney Lumet classics like "Serpico" and "Prince of the City"-filmmaking that went after an unadorned, jagged realism, with acting to match.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    50
    Feels like a film that should have been made at least 25 years ago. Or made as a period piece. Heavy, doom-laden and, unfortunately, entirely predictable.
  3. 20
    How ironic that a movie filled with police officers should end up feeling like a hostage situation.