OK, I'll have you know that I own a copy of this film so don't think I hate it viciously. It's not a bad story, and Hutton and Urich do well at their heavy New York accents. Actually, if there's one thing that makes the story, it's the thick flavor of 80's NY that runs through it. Some notable bit characters (notably Dick O'Neil) do great jobs as curmudgeons, and Culp and Boyle are completely evil. However, Steven Keats COMPLETELY blows it as a total NY buffoon stereotype- lines like "Dis is bee-yoo-tee-fulll", and "Dis is yoo-ge (huge) wit a capital U!" don't make him much more than a cartoon. Kim Cattrall's acting is pretty flimsy to boot. The ending is absurd beyond words- all of a sudden the mayor and all the cops revert their anger towards him and all cheer on Turk in a complete Hollywood photo finish. Please.
For me, the draw here is pretty much linked to the graffiti aspect of the movie. The sequence where Hutton sandblasts the subway train is fun stuff, as well as the over-the-top feats with the scoreboard, the mounted police horse, etc. But it's important to note, especially in the time period, that no such graffiti writer in New York could avoid massive and brutal prosecution. The story of NY writer Smith has so many parallels to this story it's hard to tell which came first- Smith's late brother Sane has even gone by Sane 182 in homage to the film. Smith painted his name on the side of the Brooklyn Bridge and not only made headlines, he came under the city's first million-dollar lawsuit. Turk 182 effectively makes the mayor look demonic, but only in a silly comic book way. There are some real heroes with real stories to tell from those days; maybe one day a realistic portrayal will come down the pike when people are ready to see both sides of that story.
