Stand Up Guys
User Score
5.7 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 24 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 24
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 24
  3. Negative: 5 out of 24

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. GreatMartin
    Feb 1, 2013
    3
    Al Pacino won an Oscar in 1992, Christopher Walken in 1978 while Alan Arkin received his in 2006. All 3 have been well financially rewarded, and prize awarded, for their many years of fine performances but it has been awhile since any of them have had a major hit. Being a fan of Pacino’s since 1969 when I saw him on stage, in “Does a Tiger Wear a Necktie”, and in film, in “The Panic In Neec In Needle Park” in 1971, I have gone to every current movie of his hoping that it would be the one to put him back on top.

    “Stand Up Guys” is more of an actors class exercise than a film with each actor playing characters they have played before but as if given a signal to ‘go for it’. As the movie starts Pacino is being released from prison after serving 28 years taking the fall for his gang where a mob boss’s son was killed. Walken picks him up and it isn’t long before both know that he is suppose to kill Pacino. One of the first stops is a brothel where Pacino isn’t able to perform so they leave, break into a pharmacy and steal some drugs along with Viagra which he takes a handful of and after a raunchy scene or two they have to go to the hospital. At the hospital they meet a nurse, played by Julianna Margulies, who just happens to be the daughter of the third member of their gang, Arkin, who they find is in a nursing home. Yes they break him out and go on a wild race but first stopping back at thebrothel for an item on his bucket list.

    Walken is suppose to kill Pacino before 10 AM in the morning but first they help a woman who has been raped get revenge, Pacino eats a surf and turf dinner with a root beer float, comes back to the same restaurant in the early morning to have 2 steaks, waffles and a shake. Oh, by the way, there is a reason they keep on coming to this restaurant.

    There really doesn’t seem to be much sense in the screenplay by Noah Haidle or the direction of Fisher Stevens. It is hard to place when, or where, this all takes place as there isn’t a cellphone or computer in sight no plus when was the last time you saw a pay phone in a restaurant? At the same time they steal a car that doesn’t need a ignition key to start.

    Actors of this caliber are always a joy just to watch even if it looks like an Actors Studio class but it seems Hollywood and Independent films are having a problem with the old actors and getting stories worth their talents.

    By the way it is time for Pacino to clean up and doing something with his face and head hair!    … Expand
  2. geedup
    May 7, 2013
    4
    Not even Pacino and/or Walken could save the slow witted, uninspired writing of this movie. And that is saying enough. But i need to write a few more letters to submit this.
  3. certified_hater
    Feb 6, 2013
    1
    In the first film of 2013 worse than “Movie 43”, “Stand Up Guys”, which contains a rather intriguing premise, is absolutely ruined by a perfect storm of tonally clunky direction, a script filled with some of the stupidest dialogue (I swear, some of the lines here are out-and-out plagiarized) and a wealth of surprisingly terrible acting from Al Pacino, Alan Arkin and Christopher Walken; notken; not to mention, Lucy Punch (Bad Teacher) doing one of her worst accents yet.
    The Plot: In yet another elderly “let’s get the band back together” storyline, Pacino and Walken (who each play annoying versions of themselves) are a couple of aging hit-man types that go by the names Val and Doc; who also happen to be best friends. The movie begins on the afternoon that they reunite, after Val is released from a long stint in prison. But when Doc’s promise to Val of a night out he won’t soon forget, coincides with Val learning that a hit has been put on him, he quickly realizes that Doc’s motives may not be all that they seem. The entire tone of “Stand Up Guys” is in fact its own worst enemy. Beneath this dark storyline, there lies a slew of underdeveloped and rather generic slapstick sequences, mostly between Pacino and Walken, which seems more suitable to a “comedy” such as “Old Dogs” or “Wild Hogs”. But far worse than having to hear a barrage of “I don’t know how to work this new fangled computer” or countless prescription drug jokes, is having to sit through the multitude of humorless and disturbing erectile dysfunction bits, which seem to be the ONLY driving force of the first two meandering acts of this movie. OK, so if you don’t see the problem with this, then let me spell it out for you. If you’re going to make “Grumpy Old Men”, make “Grumpy Old Men”. And if you’re going to make a crime drama concerning a hit-man that is ordered to kill his best friend, then make that movie. But by attempting to haphazardly mash these two types of very distinctive films together, all the filmmakers have done is created a movie where essentially the poor comedic humor cancels out all dramatic effect, and vice versa. In short, the tone is the reason (above all others) that we don’t care about any of these characters. Suffice to say, Pacino’s erection sadly motivates the first half of the story, but after about 45 minutes there stems a very compelling initial diner sequence, which fooled even me into thinking that this movie was officially going to start getting good. Well that was short lived because soon afterwards Arkin’s character makes his first appearance and “Stand Up Guys” ventures into non-sense land, crashing and burning in a wreckage of cringe inducing one-liners, unfathomably impractical situations and asinine revelations, resulting in something that is simply downright pathetic.
    The Acting: So when I made mention that “Stand Up Guys” contains terrible performances, this in fact may be the understatement of the decade. Yes, it doesn’t help that Pacino can hardly move anymore or that Arkin and Walken continue to play caricatures of themselves, or even how each one of these actors very particular voice cadences gets in the way of any sentimentality “Stand Up Guys” should have had, but at the end of the day, no real excuse can be made for performances which come across as though each actor is reading this script for the first time. Plus, it has come to my attention (through this film and “Seven Psychopaths”) that anytime Christopher Walken isn’t reciting his lines for ironic laughs, he is literally unbearable to watch or listen to. Final Thought: And if all of that weren’t bad enough, “Stand Up Guys” contains the worst ending of any film this year (so far). But on the other hand, maybe this movie was meant to be a satirical piece of filmmaking, promoting, through subtle yet methodical means, director Fisher Stevens’ backhanded theory on how Pacino, Arkin and Walken should be ushered out of the business by any means necessary (short of shooting them all in the heads). If that’s the case, then “Stand Up Guys” is still a bad movie. Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

    Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus    … Expand

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
41 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 30
  2. Mixed: 8 out of 30
  3. Negative: 15 out of 30
  1. Rolling Stone
    Reviewed by: Peter Travers
    Feb 1, 2013
    63
    Some actors don't need top-shelf material. Just the pleasure of their company is enough. And so Al Pacino, Christopher Walken and Alan Arkin turn the insubstantial Stand Up Guys into solid entertainment.
    Read full review
  2. New Orleans Times-Picayune
    Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    Feb 1, 2013
    60
    Stand Up Guys becomes something not only enjoyable but memorable and emotionally layered at the same time.
    Read full review
  3. San Francisco Chronicle
    Reviewed by: Mick LaSalle
    Jan 31, 2013
    100
    The thing most people will take away from Stand Up Guys is that it contains Al Pacino's best performance in years. So if you don't think Al Pacino still has it in him, this is a welcome chance to be proved wrong. But here's something interesting. Stand Up Guys also contains Christopher Walken's best performance in years. In addition, the film is extraordinarily well cast, and the acting, even in the smaller roles, is more than noteworthy.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »