OK lets cut to the chase about this movie: the only people who should ever watch this movie are die hard Nicolas Cage fans. Everybody else will be bored out of their minds at this film. Micheal Bein turns in the most lackluster lead hero performance I have seen in years. The talents of both James Coburn and Peter Fonda are wasted in this movie. The only reason that anybody would want to watch this movie is to see Nicolas Cage screaming at the top of his lungs. Howver, all the best Cage scenes are already available online so it is basically a waste of time to track down a copy as Cage is only in about 30 minutes out of the movies 90 minute run time. However, the 30 minutes he is in the movie include some of the most quotable lines in Nic Cage history. The rest of the movie is watching the former Kyle Resse sleepwalking through a modern day film noir movie alongside James Coburn who honestly looks ashamed to be in this movie. Peter Fonda makes a brief cameo that is so short that if you blink you might possibly miss it. In short, check out the scenes with Cage being awesome and let the rest of the movie die off into obsurity.
36 Reviews
crazy Cage and bland Biehn
SnoopyStyle12 March 2017
Joe (Michael Biehn) learned grifting from his father Mike Donan (James Coburn). In his final deadly con, Joe is supposed to shoot him with a blank but the bullet turns out to be real. As Joe looks into his mysterious unknown life, Joe discovers his money had been stolen by his twin Lou (James Coburn). Eddie (Nicolas Cage) and Diane (Sarah Trigger) work for Lou.
This tries to be a noirish crime drama. It never gets to feel real. From the bullet onwards, there are obvious questions left hanging. There are jumps in logic. There are easy conveniences. Then there is Nicolas Cage. His is a fake character gone too far. He's insane bothering on a cartoon. The movie stops being a real thing. Everything is in question and Joe is too dumb in not asking them. The con becomes a mess and none of it matters. The whole movie is a mess.
This tries to be a noirish crime drama. It never gets to feel real. From the bullet onwards, there are obvious questions left hanging. There are jumps in logic. There are easy conveniences. Then there is Nicolas Cage. His is a fake character gone too far. He's insane bothering on a cartoon. The movie stops being a real thing. Everything is in question and Joe is too dumb in not asking them. The con becomes a mess and none of it matters. The whole movie is a mess.
How "Eddie" Goes, So Goes The Movie
ccthemovieman-123 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This was well on its way to high marks and I thought I had purchased a real "sleeper" or "find" in the previously-viewed VHS rack a decade ago but the last 40 minutes of the film made it a "thumbs down" reject. In that time period, there were about 20 usages of the Lord's name in vain. James Coburn accounted for eight alone in a period of one minute and 20 seconds! That ruined the film for me.
The final half of this movie wasn't that good anyway, with a confusing storyline and an unsatisfying ending. All of the above was a shame because the first half of this is very interesting and nicely filmed. It had good style to it and Nicholas Cage's character, "Eddie," was so outrageous it made the movie fun to watch. He was unbelievable!! In fact, when he went a little too berserk and was killed, the film went down the tubes.
The final half of this movie wasn't that good anyway, with a confusing storyline and an unsatisfying ending. All of the above was a shame because the first half of this is very interesting and nicely filmed. It had good style to it and Nicholas Cage's character, "Eddie," was so outrageous it made the movie fun to watch. He was unbelievable!! In fact, when he went a little too berserk and was killed, the film went down the tubes.
I started to trade it off, but I had to keep it because I feared people wouldn't believe my description of it!
insightstraight1 August 2004
This movie sashays between an attempt at modern noir, an homage to film noir, and a parody of film noir.
I like Michael Biehn, but unfortunately his voice-over narration comes off rather flat. Some of the noir dialogue just falls on the floor and lies there -- I had to rewind to believe that I actually heard the line: "That was the thing that would send me into the darkness, squinting at clues."
Nick Cage's character is certainly a standout. I think the excesses of the character are supposed to be funny. However, Cage not only takes Eddie over the top but down the other side -- he chews up the scenery, digests it, and poops it out right there in front of you. For some reason he seems to think the character should always be on the edge of having a seizure. The cumulative effect for me is to flinch from the thought of ever again seeing him in a film. Really. Like aversion therapy. Say "Nick Cage" and I will think of him drooling and choose another film.
And the film suddenly veers off into an Italian James Bond rip-off! I thought for a moment they had gotten reels mixed up with another movie... In a stylish secret lair (behind a billiard parlor) we meet Angus Scrimm (the Tall Man from "Phantasm") as "Dr. Lyme", the man obsessed with diamonds. Crystals are everywhere, his female henchmen are decked out in big blobby crystal jewelry, the furniture is designed with crystalline angles. He comes complete with a Dr. No suit, a Sidney Greenstreet growl, and -- get this! -- a metal arm with a sharp shiny lobster-claw hand! No fooling. My jaw dropped. At least he wasn't stroking a cat.
Throw in Charlie Sheen as a suave pool hustler, and Mickey Dolenz and Clarence Williams III (!) as sidekicks, and you have quite a stew. Peter Fonda looks like he is thinking about his shopping list. James Coburn (the primary reason I picked up the film) definitely classes things up, but we don't see enough of him.
This film isn't quite a train wreck, but it is something of a demolition derby. Between a bus, a sportscar, a taxi, and a motorcycle. And a kid on a tricycle.
I'm going to hang onto it for a while, just to share Angus Scrimm's scene with people. And to prove I didn't dream it.
I like Michael Biehn, but unfortunately his voice-over narration comes off rather flat. Some of the noir dialogue just falls on the floor and lies there -- I had to rewind to believe that I actually heard the line: "That was the thing that would send me into the darkness, squinting at clues."
Nick Cage's character is certainly a standout. I think the excesses of the character are supposed to be funny. However, Cage not only takes Eddie over the top but down the other side -- he chews up the scenery, digests it, and poops it out right there in front of you. For some reason he seems to think the character should always be on the edge of having a seizure. The cumulative effect for me is to flinch from the thought of ever again seeing him in a film. Really. Like aversion therapy. Say "Nick Cage" and I will think of him drooling and choose another film.
And the film suddenly veers off into an Italian James Bond rip-off! I thought for a moment they had gotten reels mixed up with another movie... In a stylish secret lair (behind a billiard parlor) we meet Angus Scrimm (the Tall Man from "Phantasm") as "Dr. Lyme", the man obsessed with diamonds. Crystals are everywhere, his female henchmen are decked out in big blobby crystal jewelry, the furniture is designed with crystalline angles. He comes complete with a Dr. No suit, a Sidney Greenstreet growl, and -- get this! -- a metal arm with a sharp shiny lobster-claw hand! No fooling. My jaw dropped. At least he wasn't stroking a cat.
Throw in Charlie Sheen as a suave pool hustler, and Mickey Dolenz and Clarence Williams III (!) as sidekicks, and you have quite a stew. Peter Fonda looks like he is thinking about his shopping list. James Coburn (the primary reason I picked up the film) definitely classes things up, but we don't see enough of him.
This film isn't quite a train wreck, but it is something of a demolition derby. Between a bus, a sportscar, a taxi, and a motorcycle. And a kid on a tricycle.
I'm going to hang onto it for a while, just to share Angus Scrimm's scene with people. And to prove I didn't dream it.
Down for the count
tomsview2 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
In his autobiography, "Wide-Eyed in Babylon", Ray Milland told about witnessing a performance by Charles Laughton while co-starring with him in "Payment Deferred".
First Laughton rolled his eyes until only the whites showed. Then his lips twitched and quivered, and then he began to slobber. This went on until Milland was convinced Laughton was having an epileptic fit. Finally the director called, "Cut."
Milland discreetly asked the director whether he considered what he had just witnessed to be fine acting. The director assured him that it wasn't, simply sheer self-indulgence, but that Milland shouldn't start feeling superior because he would be doing it himself if he lasted that long. The director considered it an occupational disease with most actors.
This goes a long way towards explaining Nicholas Cage's performance in "Deadfall".
The film is about con men, involving the same con that was the basis of "The Sting". "Deadfall", made in 1993, predates 2003's "Confidence" in 'paying homage' to that great movie.
Joe Dolan, played by Michael Biehn is involved in a sting that goes wrong when he accidentally shoots and kills his father, Mike Dolan. With his dying words, Mike sends his son to find his Uncle Lou. Mike and Lou are both played by James Coburn.
Lou decides to bring Joe in on a life fulfilling "long" con and teams him up with Eddie, his right-hand man.
Eddie, played by Nicholas Cage, becomes stressed by Joe's presence and this leads to increasingly excessive behaviour. Cage's performance is startling. To portray Eddie's anger management issues, Cage must have felt that tantrums along the lines of a child experiencing the terrible twos would be about right. After a fight with his girlfriend, Cage lays on a bed kicking and screaming. Cage also adopted a false nose for the role as though he knew he was going to cut loose and possibly felt he needed a little anonymity.
One is forced to ask if the director, Christopher Copolla, had any control over Cage at all? The answer could lie in the fact that Nicholas Cage is Christopher Copolla's brother – his little bro' in fact.
Joe becomes involved in his uncle's scam. The mark is one Dr. Lyme, who has a taste for beautiful diamonds. Distractingly, the doctor wears an artificial hand that features a large pair of scissors not unlike Edward Scissorhands' in hedge trimming mode. This arresting prosthesis gives his character a cartoonish quality – just another odd element in a movie that lacks a consistent style.
The scam goes down, and the movie ends with a series of twists that are too contrived to create much impact. "Deadfall" is unbalanced by some extreme characterisations, and is so derivative that there is not much originality left in the film – other than Nicholas Cage's performance that is.
First Laughton rolled his eyes until only the whites showed. Then his lips twitched and quivered, and then he began to slobber. This went on until Milland was convinced Laughton was having an epileptic fit. Finally the director called, "Cut."
Milland discreetly asked the director whether he considered what he had just witnessed to be fine acting. The director assured him that it wasn't, simply sheer self-indulgence, but that Milland shouldn't start feeling superior because he would be doing it himself if he lasted that long. The director considered it an occupational disease with most actors.
This goes a long way towards explaining Nicholas Cage's performance in "Deadfall".
The film is about con men, involving the same con that was the basis of "The Sting". "Deadfall", made in 1993, predates 2003's "Confidence" in 'paying homage' to that great movie.
Joe Dolan, played by Michael Biehn is involved in a sting that goes wrong when he accidentally shoots and kills his father, Mike Dolan. With his dying words, Mike sends his son to find his Uncle Lou. Mike and Lou are both played by James Coburn.
Lou decides to bring Joe in on a life fulfilling "long" con and teams him up with Eddie, his right-hand man.
Eddie, played by Nicholas Cage, becomes stressed by Joe's presence and this leads to increasingly excessive behaviour. Cage's performance is startling. To portray Eddie's anger management issues, Cage must have felt that tantrums along the lines of a child experiencing the terrible twos would be about right. After a fight with his girlfriend, Cage lays on a bed kicking and screaming. Cage also adopted a false nose for the role as though he knew he was going to cut loose and possibly felt he needed a little anonymity.
One is forced to ask if the director, Christopher Copolla, had any control over Cage at all? The answer could lie in the fact that Nicholas Cage is Christopher Copolla's brother – his little bro' in fact.
Joe becomes involved in his uncle's scam. The mark is one Dr. Lyme, who has a taste for beautiful diamonds. Distractingly, the doctor wears an artificial hand that features a large pair of scissors not unlike Edward Scissorhands' in hedge trimming mode. This arresting prosthesis gives his character a cartoonish quality – just another odd element in a movie that lacks a consistent style.
The scam goes down, and the movie ends with a series of twists that are too contrived to create much impact. "Deadfall" is unbalanced by some extreme characterisations, and is so derivative that there is not much originality left in the film – other than Nicholas Cage's performance that is.
What were they thinking?
ibufen20 August 2000
It takes a lousy director to ruin such a good batch of talent
kavenga28 March 2006
The script and the direction are just terrible. Take the scene where James Coburn is explaining the con to his gang as they sit around a card table. The camera is in the middle of the table and rotates around, panning across the faces of the crew. I think it goes around twice. Any film that makes you overtly aware of its technique is amateurish at best.
Was Nicolas Cage trying to ruin the film? Did he have it in for his director cousin? What else can explain this performance from the same guy that had previously starred in Moonstruck? He's ridiculous in this.
As others have said, watch it only if you want to see just how wretched a movie can be despite a superior cast. Charlie Sheen's brief appearance was the one bright spot in this turkey.
Was Nicolas Cage trying to ruin the film? Did he have it in for his director cousin? What else can explain this performance from the same guy that had previously starred in Moonstruck? He's ridiculous in this.
As others have said, watch it only if you want to see just how wretched a movie can be despite a superior cast. Charlie Sheen's brief appearance was the one bright spot in this turkey.
A must for bad movie and bad Nicholas Cage fans everywere
ejonconrad23 July 2019
I can't believe I've never seen this gem of a bad movie. For starters, it's the most over the top Nicholas Cage role Nicholas Cage has ever played. If he was at 11 in Wicker Man, he's at like a 23 in this, yet somehow it never made any of the "best of Cage" videos on YouTube. It's also got James Coburn, Peter Fonda, Charles Wainright III ("Linc" from Mod Squad), Michael Constantine, Talia Shire, and even a small part by Mickey Dolenz of the Monkees.
Then just when you think it can't get any weirder, they hit you with Charlie Sheen and - wait for it - Angus Scrimm. who actually has a bigger part here than in Phantasm.
They were going for noir, but ended up making an unintentional parody of noir. Very entertaining if you like that sort of thing.
Then just when you think it can't get any weirder, they hit you with Charlie Sheen and - wait for it - Angus Scrimm. who actually has a bigger part here than in Phantasm.
They were going for noir, but ended up making an unintentional parody of noir. Very entertaining if you like that sort of thing.
dreadful garbage
jreid-817131 November 2021
Probably in the top 5 worst nicholas cage movies he ever made. I remeber seeing it on late night years ago. The acting is atrocious and cringeworthy with no redemable qualities whatsoever. Theres basically zero plot and even the Cinematography is awful. Couldnt make it past 30 minutes. If you think youve seen nicholas cage at his worst, watch this and see if you can survive through the whole thing (not me).
Schemes and dreams
videorama-759-8593911 May 2017
Here is a film I really found unjustly criticized. Deadfall is a lot of fun, though a lot of people won't share my opinion. In the art of the con, father and son, team (Coburn, who double stars here) and Biehn, are the best. When the con backfires and Coburn is killed, Biehn makes a fatherly promise to track down his Uncle (a slicker white haired Coburn) and retrieve some stolen valuables. It's here that Biehn, meets some particular weird types, none weirder of course than movie stealer, Cage, in a great, purposely overacted performance, that's deserves some acting award- may'be great overacting. He's hilarious. His beautiful girlfriend (Back for Revenge's Sarah Trigger) is not all she seems, as are many others, and it's great to see her get her gear off. You'll never see the big pay off in the end, the ultimate con, which kind of really have bad repercussions for one party. There are some surprisingly take note, memorable, performances, in particular, that of Charlie Sheen, as a dark menacing figure, who spouts lines from Mark Twain novels, a fantastic pool player you don't want to cross. The other notable performance is that of Peter Fonda, as one of Uncle's Coburn's bodyguards, who you wish you saw more of him in this, he's that good. But of course it's Cage's scenes, that you're gonna love, especially if you're a Nic Cage fan. I like the fact, Deadfall chooses to be something different, an off the wall crime caper, with characters of insanity, the only sane being Biehn, who really didn't really exude himself enough. Or was he 'spose to play it down pat? He just didn't really do it for me, just being upstage by some classic acting performances. His sane character is an amusing contrast to the others. We even have one guy who would put Edward Scissorhands to shame. There so many things that make this film fun, but I know the main reason for watching it again: Cage.
I'm giving it an extra star for Mickey Dolenz
MaddHatterDeplorable9 August 2022
God, this horrible!!!
What an utter waste of talent. James Coburn? Fonda? Was the director high? Did the actors have to take this project to get on Daddy Coppola's good side?
I'm actually writing this review no one will read, rather than pay attention to the last 30 minutes of this epic time waste.
Thankfully you can fast forward through most of it.
What an utter waste of talent. James Coburn? Fonda? Was the director high? Did the actors have to take this project to get on Daddy Coppola's good side?
I'm actually writing this review no one will read, rather than pay attention to the last 30 minutes of this epic time waste.
Thankfully you can fast forward through most of it.
Nic Cage is Insane
JayRief6 March 2019
Possibly one of Nic Cage's most stellar performances (on a completely non-serious level, of course). The movie is absolutely ridiculous with Michael Biehn as the lead, and never loses steam through the twists and turns of absurdity. Worth checking out just for Cage's scattered coke-driven scenes. This'll be a new yearly tradition in my household with mandatory viewing for all.
Neo Noir - No Neo Blah
ninjaalexs6 June 2020
Joe's (Michael Biehn) dad is killed in a sting gone wrong. His dying words mention something a bout a cake. Joe must piece together what he means by this.
Christopher Coppola proved that he isn't much of a director or writer with this box office bomb. This is a fairly bog-standard Neo Noir which suffers from corny acting and bad dialogue. To be honest I'm not sure if the acting is intentionally over the top or its bad direction. Nicholas Cage has a fairly minor role where he looks like he could have stepped off the set of a 70s skin flick with Ron Jeremy. He doesn't appear to be channelling Elvis in this film, but there is a perverse pleasure in watching act like a madman shouting profanities at every opportunity. Despite what people say about his acting abilities he has proved his worth in films like 'Leaving Las Vegas' and 'Wild At Heart'. In films like 'Wild At Heart' and 'Vampire's Kiss' I couldn't imagine anyone else playing his role. With Deadfall it could have been played by someone like James Woods.
Michael Biehn is a fine actor and he is OK as the lead role, but he really chews the scenery in this one. The voice over should be profound, but it is really flat and not necessary. In other scenes it feels like the actors are trying to see who can ham it up the most. I know this film is about larger than life characters, but it gets a bit silly.
I'm a fan of Neo Noirs and this is on the mediocre scale. For me it is more fun than 'Romeo Is Bleeding', but nowhere near as good on a technical level. I wasn't that invested in the story and I found myself losing interest half way through. The end scene takes place in a funfair. We've seen that one before in 'Brighton Rock' and 'Mona Lisa'.
The film is as violent as you would expect. The action scenes as well as the photography in general are quite plain. I wouldn't blame anyone for thinking this is a lower budget TV Movie. Some critics said this is one of Nic Cage's worst performances, I think they missed the point. This film is silly, camp and tongue in cheek - I'm not sure how much of that is intentional. It is worth a watch for fans of the genre, but don't expect 'The Usual Suspects'.
Christopher Coppola proved that he isn't much of a director or writer with this box office bomb. This is a fairly bog-standard Neo Noir which suffers from corny acting and bad dialogue. To be honest I'm not sure if the acting is intentionally over the top or its bad direction. Nicholas Cage has a fairly minor role where he looks like he could have stepped off the set of a 70s skin flick with Ron Jeremy. He doesn't appear to be channelling Elvis in this film, but there is a perverse pleasure in watching act like a madman shouting profanities at every opportunity. Despite what people say about his acting abilities he has proved his worth in films like 'Leaving Las Vegas' and 'Wild At Heart'. In films like 'Wild At Heart' and 'Vampire's Kiss' I couldn't imagine anyone else playing his role. With Deadfall it could have been played by someone like James Woods.
Michael Biehn is a fine actor and he is OK as the lead role, but he really chews the scenery in this one. The voice over should be profound, but it is really flat and not necessary. In other scenes it feels like the actors are trying to see who can ham it up the most. I know this film is about larger than life characters, but it gets a bit silly.
I'm a fan of Neo Noirs and this is on the mediocre scale. For me it is more fun than 'Romeo Is Bleeding', but nowhere near as good on a technical level. I wasn't that invested in the story and I found myself losing interest half way through. The end scene takes place in a funfair. We've seen that one before in 'Brighton Rock' and 'Mona Lisa'.
The film is as violent as you would expect. The action scenes as well as the photography in general are quite plain. I wouldn't blame anyone for thinking this is a lower budget TV Movie. Some critics said this is one of Nic Cage's worst performances, I think they missed the point. This film is silly, camp and tongue in cheek - I'm not sure how much of that is intentional. It is worth a watch for fans of the genre, but don't expect 'The Usual Suspects'.
amazingly bad
markamuss5 January 2004
After watching this film, you feel very very dumb for paying money to see it. What would draw you to see this film? Nicolas Cage, James Coburn, a director with Coppola as a last name. Don't be fooled. What was so bad about this film? There's not enough time to pick it apart and describe everything, so I'll put it this way: Remember back in grade school, when the teacher would ask you to write a story, and you wrote a story that you thought was so great and clever, and your teacher may have said, "Very good", and your little friends thought it was "Awesome". Well, if for some reason that story was made into a full length feature film, then it would be about as good as Deadfall was.
So Bad it's great
reindawg30 May 2003
This movie is a must see simply because it is so horrible. Just poor film making with an even poorer script performed by a good cast. It was recommended by a friend (as a great bad movie) and we were near tears from laughter as a continuous parade of well-knowns spit out one cheesy line after another.
You don't have to be good, Just a Coppola
Nordicnorn1 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
A film noir of sorts, narrated by the son of a lifelong grifter. One day the con goes bad, and the grifter's son (Michael Biehn) shoots his dad (James Coburn). The dying Coburn, head of the "crew", gives a cryptic message to his son which sets Biehn on an oddessy to find an uncle he never knew he had. In the process, an odd assortment of over the top and incoherent characters, parades through the story. This movie should have been the end of Nicolas Cage's career. A performance like that has been the end of many before, but their names aren't Coppola. The unrealistic story falls short of campy or parody and leads up to a "twist" where James Coburn has set the whole thing up, is not really dead, and the uncle was played by him all along. Biehn leaves the grifter lifestyle disillusioned and alone.
As many before seem to have said, Michael Biehn, James Coburn, Charlie Sheen, Peter Fonda, and the rest of the decent cast, could have been enough to carry even this weak script and have made it watchable. Except the Coppola team of Nicholas Cage and Christopher Coppola seem to have gone the extra mile to sabotage them. Nicholas Cage is an actor who thinks that method acting means talking in weird, unintelligible, accents and dressing like a complete boob. According to the trivia on this movie, he thought that was more "believable". I would ask: On what planet? It was distracting and annoying. I think it was his attempt at scene-stealing. I give it a 2 because as bad as it was - watching Biehn and Coburn wasn't ALL bad. The wardrobe of Sarah Trigger had a very nice 1940's feel without being 1940's at all. VERY risqué sex scene between Trigger and Biehn.
Overall: Change the channel.
As many before seem to have said, Michael Biehn, James Coburn, Charlie Sheen, Peter Fonda, and the rest of the decent cast, could have been enough to carry even this weak script and have made it watchable. Except the Coppola team of Nicholas Cage and Christopher Coppola seem to have gone the extra mile to sabotage them. Nicholas Cage is an actor who thinks that method acting means talking in weird, unintelligible, accents and dressing like a complete boob. According to the trivia on this movie, he thought that was more "believable". I would ask: On what planet? It was distracting and annoying. I think it was his attempt at scene-stealing. I give it a 2 because as bad as it was - watching Biehn and Coburn wasn't ALL bad. The wardrobe of Sarah Trigger had a very nice 1940's feel without being 1940's at all. VERY risqué sex scene between Trigger and Biehn.
Overall: Change the channel.
A popular concept poorly executed...
dexter-328 February 1999
Great cast (and crew, apparently, all related as Coppolas) that has little to work with here, and as a result, the film comes up very short. An unsatisfying conclusion that the viewer suspects all along, along with the usual plot twists that couldn't seem to happen but do (yes, it's only a movie, but please...). Mamet and others ("The Grifters", for example) make better versions of this film. Unfortunately, a "3" and worth skipping. Notable if you'd like to see Michael Biehn's buttocks in the love scene.
so bad that is actually so bad
BigDuck202217 July 2020
So bad that I watched for half an hour in disbelief
walkerus10 September 2002
I can't believe that such a talented crew and cast could finish up with a movie so poor. Usually with a poor film my wife and I end the suffering after a quarter hour or so, long enough to make some sort of judgement, with this film I went on watching for another quarter of an hour because I thought it must be a parody on gangster - dropout movies, but alas, it just went from bad to worse. The acting was childlike, even Nicholas Cage, who prior to this movie I had thought to be a reasonable actor, overplayed his part to the point where he would have been better playing a circus clown. As I watched this film I thought of all the money spent telling this story that could have been used for more entertaining pursuits, such as filming a wet house-brick drying in the sunshine.
Leave this film alone!
Lt_Coffey_18212 October 2003
What is everyone's problem with this film? It really isn't that bad. I can not believe how many people have given this film a 1. This is a very low budget, very B movie that manages to turn out a fairly average film. Considering the cast, it should be much better but that doesn't justify the unfair criticism. Nicolas Cage is awful in this film, probably spoils most of it with his over acting. Hard to believe that it is the same man who was such a star in The Rock, Con Air and Face/Off! Michael Biehn has been much better but he is very likeable and believable, especially with his fears over the final con. The best scene in the film no doubt belongs to Biehn and Charlie Sheen. I headed for the snooker club afterwards and felt the need to sniffle "Damn, I'm good!" Needs to be given a chance.
Someone considered this a horror movie. Go figure!
lee_eisenberg25 March 2008
I watched "Deadfall" on the TV channel FearNet, which usually shows horror flicks. I spent about half the time watching the movie trying to understand why anyone considered it a horror movie; in my opinion, there's no reason to classify it as anything. A loosely constructed story of a man (Michael Biehn) trying to reclaim family heirloom from his con artist uncle (James Coburn), this is one truly low movie. It seems as if they were trying to make several different movies at once. Nicolas Cage plays his role as if he's getting pumped full of air, while Charlie Sheen, Talia Shire and Peter Fonda all get wasted (as does Mickey Dolenz in one scene).
Overall, as far as I can tell, this movie has no purpose except to show Nicolas Cage overacting. Just because the movie apparently constitutes a family get-together for the Coppola clan (aside from starring Nicolas Cage and Talia Shire, it is directed by Christopher Coppola), that doesn't count for anything. My advice is to avoid it. Although I gotta say that Sarah Trigger looked pretty hot in some scenes.
Overall, as far as I can tell, this movie has no purpose except to show Nicolas Cage overacting. Just because the movie apparently constitutes a family get-together for the Coppola clan (aside from starring Nicolas Cage and Talia Shire, it is directed by Christopher Coppola), that doesn't count for anything. My advice is to avoid it. Although I gotta say that Sarah Trigger looked pretty hot in some scenes.
Biehn, Cage, Sheen, Coburn = why did this not work?
Kyle Reese4 January 2003
Warning: Spoilers
The answer is that the film just looks so cheap! It's tacky! The finale 'shoot-outs' are awful, accompanied by some very bad extra's. Biehn was perfectly suitable in the role, it is a shame that he had such a bad character, with bad dialogue. Nicolas Cage is terrible as Eddie, he is nearly inaudible! James Coburn is great, and has a genuine chemistry with Michael Biehn. The ever-reliable Charlie Sheen is once again reunited with Biehn, the pair had built up a good rapport filming Navy Seals. But the film is just really bad, and I was so disappointed. Sarah Trigger (who?) is ok, but nothing special. The action lets it down, as it's too cheap. The music is terrible, really tacky. This is an ever-popular concept, which games like Grand Theft Auto have excelled in, but this film just wasn't good. The money must have been spent on the cast. This was the first 'deadfall' in Biehn's career, luckily he was still cast in Tombstone later that year. You can't blame him for this movie, "Hey Mike, we're going to put you in the starring role of a movie by Coppola, with Nicolas Cage, Talia Shire, James Coburn, Charlie Sheen, oh and Peter Fonda as your support cast." You'd be silly to have turned it down. Disappointing.
So wowwwwwww
casablancavic8 December 2021
The movie never really picks up or is interesting aside from when Nick Cage and Charlie Sheen are being their totaally wacked characters.
We don't know what purpose they serve - but their on screen presence is just simply amazing - and attracts you to this atrocious movie mess.
Yes, their roles are so off from everybody else - but when you are wondering what is actually going on during the rest of the mess of this movie, they are the most fun to watch as this sinks into something bland and uninteresting.
Nick Cage knows how to make a scene for sure - and yes, his acting is baddddddd - but it's fun to watch.
We don't know what purpose they serve - but their on screen presence is just simply amazing - and attracts you to this atrocious movie mess.
Yes, their roles are so off from everybody else - but when you are wondering what is actually going on during the rest of the mess of this movie, they are the most fun to watch as this sinks into something bland and uninteresting.
Nick Cage knows how to make a scene for sure - and yes, his acting is baddddddd - but it's fun to watch.
Nick Cage at his worst
seveb-2517931 December 2017
Nicholas Cage has been responsible for more than his fair share of bad acting, but never worse than he is in this. Possibly no-one in the history of cinema has gone so far over the top as Cage does in this heinous performance.
More Ham than a Pig Farm
richv-418171 July 2022
Low budget catastrophe that somehow managed to get some talented actors (Coburn, Biehn) and Nick Cage who deserves a category all his own.
Story is hum drum, been there, seen that, but what makes this worth a cursory look is the over the top, scenery chewing, regurgitation, and repeat swallowing of every scene that Cage is in. I believe that high school actors would have used much more restraint that Mr. Cage. Hey Nick, more is not necessarily better, take it down about a thousand notches. What is frustrating is that Cage is capable of much better. The rest of the film is totally boring, performances by Biehn and Coburn are ok. Kinda cool to see small roles for Mickey Dolenz and Clarence Williams, III.
Story is hum drum, been there, seen that, but what makes this worth a cursory look is the over the top, scenery chewing, regurgitation, and repeat swallowing of every scene that Cage is in. I believe that high school actors would have used much more restraint that Mr. Cage. Hey Nick, more is not necessarily better, take it down about a thousand notches. What is frustrating is that Cage is capable of much better. The rest of the film is totally boring, performances by Biehn and Coburn are ok. Kinda cool to see small roles for Mickey Dolenz and Clarence Williams, III.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
