User Score
5.3 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 23 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 23
  2. Negative: 7 out of 23

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

  1. MichaelM.
    Oct 23, 2004
    5
    Entertaining, but the writing really stinks! The Rock makes for a good bad ass good guy. He has such great screen presence, he reminds me of Arnold Schwazenegger in his prime. The movie isn't too great though, kind of average really. Thumbs down.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  2. JermaineB.
    Jun 20, 2004
    9
    This movie was a fun action flick and one of the better movies I've seen this summer. Its a slam bam thank you ma'am without all of the BS that alot of movies are doing nowaday I.E. Matrix (what is choice) enough with the brew haha we wanna see some butt Kicking. Much props to the Rock.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. SteveT.
    Oct 2, 2004
    3
    This new "pop culture" version is way too short. It's disapointing that people today have such a sort attention span, we can't watch a movie that does not progress very quickly or last longer than 2 hrs?! So let me get this right, the whole town was cleaned up in a weekend? I was able to watch the original version and I found it more exciting and dramatic. I'd put a 2x4 to this picture and a 10 to the original! Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  4. PhillipK.
    Apr 10, 2004
    3
    Even The Rock deserves better. It's almost laughable that when this soldier retires and comes back to his small hometown, absolutely everything that can go wrong has gone wrong - kids are on drugs, young women are stripping or hooking, a whole troop of thugs has moved in, the cops are corrupted (every one of them), jobs are lost (the job-producing mill is closed), but the new casino's open!! Not so much a remake of a '70's staple in my view, but an excuse to film The Rock roughing up the bad guys that deserve roughing up. Even then, the action scenes are blandly staged. And then it gets hyperviolent with machine-gun and point-plank shotgun killings... What happened to the big stick??? Not worth it. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  5. Kyle
    Apr 4, 2004
    8
    Don't expect anything deep and you won't be dissapointed. Want to enjoy yourself? Go see this movie.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  6. RichardG.
    Apr 6, 2004
    1
    This movie is garbage. Filled with cliches, and I could predict everything that was about to happen. Corny lines. Over acting from Jonny Knoxville. I wish I never saw this pile of crap.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  7. KevinF.
    Apr 8, 2004
    3
    For wrestling fans with double-digit IQs only.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  8. BlizzardBob
    May 4, 2004
    10
    Dude the ones who gave this movie a bad rating have to watch this movie more closely. People were getting busted open by the rock. If u care more about the plot of the movie more than explosions and ass whopping than ur not a man. Come on people this is a mans movie. And to Kevin F. i'm a huge wrestling fan and huge fan of this movie and my IQ is 116 and that's above average. And i'm only 14. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  9. ChadS.
    Jun 8, 2004
    3
    You know it's The Rock's movie because we never get a clear look at the girl in the red bra shoot her gun. The action scenes belong to the star. She can be proactive in her underwear, but not that proactive. Categorically, you don't write off a film like this for wanting to be a piece of fluff, but they're not even trying. "Walking Tall" is so lazy, they forget to write the scene in which the hero gets his family out of town, in a concentrated effort by four scribes to keep the running time down. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  10. Spriggangirl
    Apr 16, 2004
    5
    Good stuff for walking, bad stuff for talking.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  11. BenL.
    Apr 17, 2004
    8
    Yes, the depth of the dialogue is laughable. Yes, this only superficially skims the legend of Sheriff Buford Pusser. Yes, there are quite a few plot holes that will make you say, "huh?". However, in the final analysis, if you are out to watch The Rock open a can of whoopass on a bunch of bad guys, then this movie will fit the bill. Come in to the theater with an open mind, and you will not be disappointed. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  12. PatC.
    Apr 19, 2004
    1
    Sure I get off on an occasional violence flick if it's not too dumbed down and the hero has a little class. But here apparently it is simply a lot of fun to blow big bullet holes in folks that deserve it. That's not right, I don't find it entertaining, and without a little more justification for such savage behavior I don't even think it's cute. Christ, the critics rated this bloodbath the same as the Christ bloodbath. I guess any bloodbath gets mixed reviews, whether it's human garbage or the son of God getting blown away. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  13. MarkB.
    May 28, 2004
    2
    This remake of 1973's classic cult action film about the life of legendary take-no-prisoners Southern sheriff Buford Pusser's war on crime and corruption isn't this year's worst movie--just its most unnecessary. Even diehard ACLU afficionados should appreciate the passion and the fury behind Phil Karlson's original and in Joe Don Baker's electric lead performance. Anything prickly or edgy about the 1973 film (for example, the fact that Pusser was a devoted family man but was undeniably attracted to a casino waitress; here the sheriff isn't even married) is totally deleted; the result is a professional but totally generic piece of product. The Rock admittedly had displayed charisma onscreen in The Scorpion King and The Rundown, but compared to Baker, he comes off here as nothing more impressive than The Pebble. Most disconcerting of all is that the original's theme of the entire community taking a stand is nowhere to be found here; the predictable army of one superheroics are no substitute at all. Ultimately, the violence level is the only element the two films share; even so, the original was bloody, raw and messy--this one's is PG-13 slick. But speaking of that rating, adolescent boys, take heart: this movie provides you with a rare opportunity to see your first lapdance! Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  14. Feb 15, 2012
    4
    The acting was fine, There was a lot of action, and its worth the watch if you have nothing better to do. However the film never sucks you in and it feels too generic when compared to other vigilante films.
Metascore

Mixed or average reviews - based on 31 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 31
  2. Negative: 9 out of 31
  1. The cast acquits itself well, with the Rock evincing a quiet balance between humor and brawn.
  2. Reviewed by: Scott Foundas
    70
    Moves along at a clip and provides a terrific action lead for Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson.
  3. Reviewed by: Ed Halter
    30
    The plot is so absurdly perfunctory that preview audiences snickered at its TV-drama slapdashness; the producers should have pushed the straight-camp potential much further and retitled this weak bruiser Sporting Wood.