The Walking Dead
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We want to hear what you have to say but need to verify your account. Just leave us a message here and we will work on getting you verified.
Please reference “Error Code 2121” when contacting customer service.
Though it can't best Robert Siodmak's classic 1946 version, Don Siegel's take on the Ernest Hemingway story stakes out its own violent territory, and offers a terrifically tough turn from Lee Marvin.
All Critics (24)
| Top Critics (5)
| Fresh (19)
| Rotten (5)
| DVD (4)
Siegel's terse, seething, and stylish direction glows with the blank radiance of sheet metal in sunlight; the movie's bright primary colors and glossy luxuries are imbued with menace, and its luminous delights convey a terrifyingly cold world view.
Perhaps the sole justification for turning a fine old movie into a just passable new one can be summed up as Angie Dickinson.
Ronald Reagan fails to crash convincingly through his goodguy image in his portrayal of a ruthless crook.
The second film version (1964) of Ernest Hemingway's short story, directed by Don Siegel with far more energy than Robert Siodmak could muster for his overrated 1946 effort.
A familiar tale of robbery and betrayal unfolds, not enhanced by the glossy colour but given a terrific boost by the fact that the two killers stick around and are superbly characterised by Marvin and Gulager.
Marvin is the un-McQueen. Not handsome, unconcerned with the audience and therefore compelling, he is distant and takes things personally. He's too smart to be monumental like other movie stars, but when he falls it's like a world got killed.
This low-budget neo-noir is really a different kind of riff on the Hemingway story's themes and the genre. It also serves as a bit of foreshadowing for Seigel's violent 1971 hit Dirty Harry.
This color version of Hemingway's yarn is every bit as fatalistic as its black-and-white predecessor but nowhere near as impressive.
The movie defines the violent, complex persona that would make Marvin a star, and he's cast alongside the irresistibly alluring Angie Dickinson ...
A crime mystery that takes the best from every cast member and creates a hell of an ensemble piece.
This take on the story by the invariably overrated Don Siegel is probably the most brightly lit, atmosphere-challenged movie ever to be tagged as noir.
The 1946 and 1964 versions of The Killers are vastly different, except for a couple of plot points, like the lack of surprise and failure to run the hitmen note with their target, and the double cross that is revealed at the end
Siegel's minimalistic style perfectly suits every crime tale he touches. This version rivals Robert Siodmak's previous by being something completely different, having more of a pulp-ish, b-movie sensitivity, au courant with a more nihilistic, violent, and mysogynistic time it was made. Memorable parts played by everyone, especially the badass Lee Marvin, and Angie Dickinson is to die for..
The original is where it's at, although this has it's moments. Very watchable.
Not as atmospheric as Robert Siodmak's 1946 version but this neo-noirish rendition of Ernest Hemingway's short story does have it's merits. Lee Marvin and Angie Dickinson are standouts in an otherwise lethargic cast. Director Don Siegel took a completely different approach to the material, resulting in a film that's more of a retelling than a remake. In fact, if the titles weren't the same, it's doubtful you'd even recognize the story. I still favor the original film but The Killers of 1964 isn't nearly as bad as I thought it might be.
the opening sequence at the diner is freaking genius
View All Quotes