City Heat - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

City Heat Reviews

Page 1 of 7
May 8, 2017
City Heat is what it is and that's all I wanted it to be. Watching it now, some thirty year later, I am not asking, "is this well acted" or even "does it make sense",; it has two of my all time movie heroes in it and I just sit back, take it, wax nostalgic and laugh.
March 19, 2017
Flawed, but definitely goofy enough to warrant a watch or two. Eastwoood and Reynolds are great together and do well, considering all they have to work with is 90 pages of one-liners.
Super Reviewer
March 12, 2017
It's a buddy movie with a nostalgic twist thrown in much like The Sting only ... Burt Reynolds. He's in one movie (like maybe The Naked Gun, as Lt. Frank Dreblin), and everyone else is in another. By the end of the effort one begins to have grown a tolerance for his look-at-me antics, but it takes a long time to get there. In the other movie, the one w/o him, everyone does just fine, particularly Jane Alexander.
July 8, 2016
A flatfoot and a gumshoe who were former police partners reluctantly cooperate to take down the mob. A-list pairing of Eastwood and Reynolds really disappoints. Strains for laughs at times. Depression era story only depresses viewers. Second viewing offered little improvement.
January 5, 2015
Two great taste that just don't go together.
June 15, 2014
It's just the usual and at times very dull and ordinary cop film
½ June 14, 2014
Naff. Entirely rests on the considerable charm/personas of the two leads, who have a few moments. Decent prod standards/period setting. But atrociously messy plotting, mostly dull dialogue, and a depressing missed opportunity for the team up of the late '70s two biggest stars.
September 3, 2013
it's the best Eastwood & Reynolds could do in the PG rating
½ June 26, 2013
Burt Reynolds is second billed but is the dominant character in this prohibition era comedy action that required some better acting given the time period edged the actors out of their usual comfort zones.
April 2, 2013
I kept hoping that this movie would get good as I watch it. (Eastwood and Reynolds sounds like a great combination) however, it just didn't work.
January 17, 2013
Very flawed, but not nearly as horrible as its reputation, this once-in-a-lifetime pairing of two major stars at the time it was made (1984) has relatively few sparks to suggest why they even bothered. The music is nice and there are a few moments that actually work (I liked a scene that took place in a movie theater, and few sight gags inspire chuckles like when a fire hydrant puts out a fire). What we're left with is good actors in pretty costumes searching for a better script and a director who can do this type of movie right. Madeleine Kahn and Jane Alexander are, sadly, given little to do.
½ January 1, 2013
Eh, not much to say about this one.
August 22, 2012
Poor. Not worth watching.
½ April 24, 2012
What a wasted opportunity, this action-comedy was originally to have been written and directed by Blake Edwards, who was then dismissed by either one of it's stars, maybe both, and replaced by Richard Benjamin (My Favorite Year (1982) and The Money Pit (1986)), had Edwards not been sacked, it might have been worth it, but as it stands, it's just a soulless, unfunny mess. Set in Kansas City in 1933, it has former cop turned Private Investigator Mike Murphy (Burt Reynolds) teaming up with Lieutenant Speer (Clint Eastwood) with a case involving crime kingpin Primo Pitt (Rip Torn). Speer and Murphy used to be together on the force years previous, they couldn't stand each other then, and they can't stand each other now. When Murphy's partner Diehl Swift (Richard Roundtree) is murdered by Primo's goons, and a briefcase full of money has gone missing, and Murphy's current squeeze, rich socialite Caroline Howley (Madeline Kahn) ends up being kidnapped by Pitt, Speer and Murphy have to team up to bring down Pitt's gang and stop a crime war from escalating in Kansas City. The action is half-baked and cartoonish, Clint looks out of place while Burt hams it up to the nines, and while it has good intentions to be a cheeky homage to cop films of the 1930's, it feels dated and corny. Pity really.
½ April 19, 2012
The film had a great cast, pretty funny, good action, and prohibition-era music. BUT the problem was the plot was a little slow and dull. Good performance by Burt.
½ February 22, 2012
A boring movie full of cheesy one liners and uninteresting characters.
January 28, 2012
The Worst Clint Eastwood Movie, I Have Seen (To Date). Here He Teams Up With Burt Reynolds For A Comedy It Just Doesn't Work. In The End It Was Awful. The Fight Scenes At Both The Start & The End Of The Film Are Very Cartoon Like.
½ January 26, 2012
A good plot consistency muddled with the character relationships. Sub-par action scenes but have a somewhat humorous aspect to them.
Super Reviewer
½ November 21, 2011
Two major Hollywood tough guy legends team together for this 30's period set comedy/crime thriller which doesn't quite get there.

Its basically an buddy action flick but for some reason they have forgotten to include some action haha there is allot of dialog and its all pretty dull, everything looks damn fine to be truthful though. All the sets, costumes and cars look really nice and compete easily with say...'The Untouchables' but as usual Eastwood plays his usual cliched tough guy with no rules whilst Reynolds fairs better with some reasonable laughs as the smooth talking danger magnet who is also handy with his dukes.

Bit of a flop when released and I can see why as this really does stand out as a missed chance for a good film, the blend does work almost but its just lacking some originality and punch.
Page 1 of 7