User reviews

Seems to me that the reason why this movie isn't liked and known any better is because the world was not really ready yet for a this sort of action movie, at the time. It's more the sort of action-thriller we are accustomed to of seeing now days, with a better- and more slow build up to it. So the movie was actually ahead of its time and I could understand Tony Scott's interest in this movie and why he decided to make a remake of it, back in 2004.

It's definitely not an usual revenge flick. It seems more focused on its characters and drama really but this of course is not necessarily a bad thing. It actually makes this movie a pretty refreshing and original one within its genre. And having said that, it's not like the movie is all drama. It of course is still being filled with plenty of straightforward action, in its second.

And you would think that this is when the movie becomes truly good and interesting. However in this case I have to say I liked the first half, so its drama and buildup, better than the second, more action filled, one. I just liked the story and far slower pace of the movie its first half way better. It was a genuinely good movie, while its action part comes across as far more standard and the story suddenly got pushed to the background. Besides, director Élie Chouraqui was obviously far more at ease with telling a story than at handling the action really. It's still good and fun enough action all but it just still feels like the second half of the movie is doing a good job at destroying what the first half of the movie had been building up. In that regard this movie is totally the opposite of its remake, in which the second half and all of its action parts were its highlights.

With its pacing and buildup this definitely feels more like a foreign movie, which is not all that surprising really, considering that it had a French director at the helm. But this approach is actually what makes the movie work out as something special and refreshing. I however don't think simply just everybody will be able to appreciate this approach. especially of course when you are expecting a more straightforward action flick.

And for such a low key movie, it definitely has a great cast in it. Scott Glenn, Joe Pesci, Jonathan Pryce, all in one movie, that's pretty awesome! And there are all really right at place within this movie as well. Scott Glenn is a great leading man to have, when the main character is supposed to be a grumpy, tough guy, with his heart still at the right place.

Maybe it's only just a half successful movie but it's still really worth giving a go!

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

When most people today hear the title "Man on Fire", they probably think right away of the 2004 film starring Denzel Washington and Dakota Fanning. Unbeknownst to many of them is that film is in fact a remake of a gritty, disturbing, and above all, unusual European film of the same title. The 1987 version of "Man on Fire" is probably a film that I would have to consider schlock. From the looks of it, it's budget was fairly decent for it has good acting, good effects, and good sound design. But the reason why it falls under the category of schlock is because of its very unusual and sometimes, inferior styles. This is a film that will meet viewers halfway. Some people will enjoy it just for what it is. And the other half will simply despise it.

For me, "Man on Fire" was in deed unusual and strange and definitely not the most creative film ever made. But while that is true in my personal opinion, there is another factor that I cannot deny. And that is the factor that while the film was a bit shoddy, it was highly entertaining and in a way, a bit more complex and more compelling than the 2004 remake. It has some gorgeous scenery, absolutely wonderful acting, a fairly decent screenplay, and other things that I simply find attractive in a motion picture. Scott Glenn was absolutely flawless as Creasy and he pulled off the character as being mysterious, cold, and unusual. He wasn't quite the tough guy as Denzel Washington was in the remake. To be honest, I wanted him to be tougher, but it kind of worked out. Jade Malle, an actress who unfortunately did not do much acting after this debut, was fairly good as Sam. Yes, she wasn't the best child actress in the world and not a patch when compared to Dakota Fanning, but I found her to a fairly decent addition to the cast. And Joe Pesci, while definitely one of the unusual aspects of the film, pulled off a fairly good performance as well.

Action sequences in "Man on Fire" were fairly decent. Many of them were flawed, but they were, for the most part, thrilling. There was one part that I personally felt did not work out. When one of the bad guys gets shot in the stomach, he just kind of stands there until he finally starts to slowly fall over. The camera doesn't change angles or anything like that to create a more distressful feeling. But other than that, the gunfights and action sequences were intense, gritty, and bloody. And the gore here is used at a controlled level. And what I will always remember about this film was that unlike the 2004 version, there was a scene here that just made me jump.

So what doesn't work in "Man on Fire"? Basically, it's just a few aspects of the film's style. Some parts of the film I think could have used a few more takes. The scene where Creasy finds the first of the kidnappers probably could have been done differently, for I found it to be too disturbing and uncomfortable. And like I said, there are some wonderfully talented actors and actresses in this film. Jade Malle's parents were portrayed wonderfully, unfortunately, their characters are what I would call stick figures. Just in the background, so that you know they're there. The ending for the film is a mysterious one of the highest order. For a while, it doesn't make any sense. And I think the explanation of the ending just depends on an individual viewer's point of view. Maybe that's what the director intended.

The original 1987 "Man on Fire" is not the kind of film for everybody. Some aspects of it are inferior to the 2004 remake, but other aspects exceed well above it. Personally, I might prefer this version for its colorful acting, its not-so-gangster style, Scott Glenn's wonderful performance, the great music score, and just the great thrills of a 1980s European thriller.

Although several films are entitled "Man On Fire", this one (1987) has Scott Glenn playing the lead. This precision and talented actor has accomplished many a role in which he so personifies and brought to life the living essence of his character, that few can deny his superior ability. So much so, when we view any performance he exhibits, he is truly remarkable. Much the same can be said for the gifts of Europe's Elie Chouraqui. He proves to be an adroit, and successful director. With the combined talents of both and then add Joe Pesci as David, Jonathan Pryce as Michael, Paul Shenar as Ettore and especially Danny Aiello as Conti, the film becomes a unique stage upon which abundance talent is configured to provide an explosive outcome. Interweaving, both classic literature and stirring quotes between Hero and his young charge for whom he has been assigned as bodyguard, it's hard not to picture a restrained tiger on a leash which had been wounded and left for dead. As a result, it convinces this audience member that at anytime during the dark, moody and poignant tale, the screen will detonate and shake the foundations of the theater. Instead, Chouraqui restrains Scott and his pent-up volcanic anger until the climatic finale which is both dynamic and emotionally touching. All in all, a great vehicle for Glenn and his acclaimed resume. ****

"Man on Fire" is a trashy, simplistic thriller based on a novel by A.J. Quinnell. It stars Scott Glenn as John Creasy, a former C.I.A. agent living in Italy who forever mopes about his traumatic past. Then his good friend David (Joe Pesci) finds him some work, as a bodyguard for Sam (Jade Malle), the daughter of a financially well off couple (Paul Shenar, Brooke Adams). Not long after the adult and the kid actually form a bond, she's violently kidnapped by scuzzy terrorist-types. Once he's recuperated, he's determined to get her back using the most ruthless means available to him.

The 2004 version of the same story, directed by Tony Scott (originally considered as director of this adaptation) and starring Denzel Washington, Dakota Fanning, and Christopher Walken, may be much better known, but this version offers a well paced, watchable enough (and very rainy) revenge flick, full to the brim with violence. At first it seems as if it will be overly dreary, but it develops humor and heart as the crusty, sullen Creasy and the personable pre- teen girl start hitting it off. Still, it's pretty melodramatic stuff overall, with some decent but rather perfunctory action. The deeply affecting music score by John Scott will make you think you're watching a better movie than you really are.

It is somewhat fun to see the under-rated Glenn join the ranks of cinematic bad asses. For a while, the script allows him to look like a bum, until he begins his bloody mission and decides on a makeover. The excellent supporting cast is a major draw: Pesci, Adams, Shenar, Danny Aiello, Jonathan Pryce, Giancarlo Prati, Lou Castel. Pesci has one offbeat moment where he does an enthusiastic rendition of "Johnny B. Goode", and Aiello is memorable as a snivelling weasel, but the lovely Adams gets barely anything to do here. Young Malle is endearing.

One other major point of interest for viewers may be comparing this film to its 2004 counterpart. At least this one has less fat on the bones and less reliance on show-off stylistics. It's adequate entertainment and runs a trim 93 minutes.

Six out of 10.

Not being fan of director Tony Scott's 2004 remake starring Denzel Washington and Dakota Fanning, it however did get my attention that this novel adaptation was also attempted in the late 80s in a very European style. Not as easy to get a hold off, but it turned out to be a solidly atypical, if unspectacular, lean revenge thriller with a striking performance by Scott Glenn in the central role as former CIA agent turned bodyguard Mr. Creasy. It's the cast that makes this one work (where can you get Joe Pesci doing what he does best; getting angry; yelling profanity, breaking radios and singing "Johnny Be Goode"), outside some methodically stylish directorial touches (like the opening slow motion intro) and stunning Italian backdrops and decors. The music score is atmospherically edgy and always complements the on-screen action with the cinematography fluidly projecting the details.

The pacing is rather stodgy, as it does take awhile before it builds up some momentum (soon after the ransom kidnapping by some terrorists), there it crackles along (Creasy gaining health and then going on the warpath finding those involved to only dispatch them) until reaching its abrupt, if confused climax. However the final frame really does paint a beautifully haunting picture, which does leave it open. While grimy and mean when it does explode (effectively staged too), it might be too short-lived, as it could have up the ante on numerous occasions (despite one bloody shoot-out and a brutal beat-up scene). Instead it's rather understated - more so moodily brooding in its activities (and Glenn's husky narration), as it's quite a lyrical character drama, spending a lot time developing upon the relationship of the young girl and her bodyguard. While not particularly deep, still it feels genuine in the thoughtful bonding and the transformations. Glenn's wearily lamenting, but hardy performance balances out nicely to Jade Malle's wholesomely bright turn. Danny Aiello shows up as one of the kidnappers. Also the cast features Brooke Adams (who we don't see too much of) and a little role for Jonathan Pryce.

I loved, loved, loved the remake with Denzel! I liked the book. But this? Not so good. Scott Glenn just doesn't work as Creasy. And the voice over really doesn't work. Plus, the girl playing Samantha is just terrible. It just pales in comparison to the Denzel film. I missed hearing "Blue Bayou" and instead got Joe Pesci singing and strumming a guitar? Yeesh. Read the book, skip this movie.

I am a fan of the 2004 version so I was quite eager to investigate the original 1987 piece. I was ready to be set afire!

Well that didn't happen. This is an incredibly lacklustre movie that has had the tension and action sucked out of it and replaced with a Lolita feel. The relationship between the bodyguard and the girl in this movie is far more miss-directed love from the girl than a feeling of protective care provided in 2004. She doesn't want his protection she wants his love.

The dialogue is stilted and sterile much like the action.

The style of the cinematography is fundamentally unappealing, the use of sound is jarring.

Some nice moments from Pesci are the only small highlights.

As has been said, when people think of the title 'Man on Fire' one immediately think of the far better known 2004 film. Which is actually a remake of this film from 1987. This version was not well received by critics at the time and is a poor adaptation of the book (almost unrecognisable and the book's author AJ Quinell disliked it intensely for that reason), but to me it is a perfectly serviceable film in its own right.

One of those times of me going against the general critical consensus. Tend to be along the same lines and on the same page as critics, who tend to be unfairly bashed on the internet for no reason, but there have been times where a panned film is not that bad to me and an acclaimed film considered not that good or not doing much for me. The former is an example here. 'Man on Fire' is not a great film exactly and can totally see where the critics are coming from. Personally do share some of their criticisms. However, 'Man on Fire' does have a lot of things in its favour, so if asked whether it is that bad my answer would be no. Not a lot is done exceptionally, nothing also is done disastrously.

'Man on Fire' is an interesting film visually. The locations are stunning, especially the palazzo, the industrial loft and the boat dock, and the film has some of the best location shooting from personal opinion of any film from that year. Not perfect by all means, some of the editing is choppy and incomplete-looking and count me in as another person or didn't see the need for the slow-motion, which has very rarely been a favourite camera technique of mine in film. The music is dynamic and haunting.

The script has some nice tension and, contrary to what some critics have said, it does have wit and coolness (especially Scott Glenn's lines). The story could have been better, the build-up of the first half tends to be slow and take too long, some of it is routine and other parts forget to make sense and come over as ludicrous. However, the second half generally really picks up the momentum, fun and suspense levels, leading to an exciting and touching ending.

Don't agree that it completely lacks emotion, though there could have been more and it does for my liking come too late. The action mostly (a few routine moments) is gritty and suitably uncompromising without going unnecessarily over the top. The direction has been criticised, can understand as it is sluggish to begin with but there is a real sense that Chouraqui is more comfortable.

Scott Glenn is an intensely charismatic lead and carries the film brilliantly. Jade Malle is more charming than she is irritating, which was great. Her and Glenn's chemistry is the heart of the film and it is dealt with a believable amount of charm and that it developed gradually rather than them hitting it off straight-away was a good move. In support, a fun Joe Pesci and sinister Danny Aiello (despite an inconsistent accent) stand out.

Not everybody comes off well, more to do with screen time than performance quality. Jonathan Pryce and Brooke Adams just have too little to do to make much impression, Adams in a role little more than the smallest, blink-and-miss of cameos is particularly wasted.

In summary, not a bad film and has enough to not make it fizzle but some elements bring it down from being on fire. 6/10 Bethany Cox

Recently, I decided to take a look at 'Man on Fire' (1987), which is apparently the inspiration for the film of the same title with Denzel Washington. The selling points to see it include the fact that it's from the 80s, it's a thriller, and Scott Glenn is in the lead.

What I found fascinating about this film is that it takes place by lake Como in Italy and that it's supposed to feel "European." On the other hand, I found the script to be incredibly underdeveloped with underused actors. You nearly have an all-star cast with names such as Brooke Adams, Joe Pesci, Danny Aiello, Jonathan Pryce and Paul Shenar, yet it's if they're not in the film at all. I can't believe all of those actors were cast, just for the film to revolve around Glenn and the girl who gets kidnapped.

The kidnapping doesn't even take place until it's halfway over, so it feels clumsy. I get it, Glenn forms a fatherly fondness for the girl and we're supposed to see how that develops, but all in all it's just underwhelming. There's also no twist and very little suspense, so I'm not certain what the director wanted to accomplish.

All in all, the movie is simply okay and very straightforward, so if you're looking for something quite special, you may want to skip this one.

I watched this after seeing the 2004 remake and was quite surprised by how good this one is. Scott Glenn gives a suitably haunted and melancholic performance, despite his dorky 80s wardrobe; no man can look cool with puffy shoulder pads like Joan Crawford and his coat-sleeves pushed up past his elbows. Jade Malle has just the right combination of loneliness and intelligence as the kidnap victim. Joe Pesci has a great weapons prep scene (opening a crate of handguns he says gleefully, "I ran into some old friends of ours. Do you recognize any of these guys?") but he isn't really given much to do. The violence is quick and dirty. The director, Elie Chouraqui, directs in a style that recalls Brian DePalma when he was at his peak.The ending is open to interpretation. Perfect. All in all I would say this version of Man on Fire is definitely worth seeing.

An American bodyguard and former CIA agent, Christian Creasy,(Scott Glenn), is contracted by a family (marriage formed by Brooke Adams and Paul Shenar) to protect their child (Jade Malle) . Even though it wasn't mentioned in the film, John Creasy was a Force Recon Marine prior to working for the CIA. Creasy recalls how he was hired to babysit Sam. The bodyguard becomes in Italy the protector of a girl who awakens in him a tenderness he never felt before. Sam's a cute kid, but she reminds him (in slow-moving flasback) of a dead child in war-torn Beirut. Then she's kidnapped by reptilian criminals and a terrible vendetta takes place , as the protagonist carries out a vow to avenge , as revenge is a meal best served cold . When she is abducted, Creasy's fiery rage is unleashed, and he embarks on a bloody revenge spree. Forgiveness is between them and God... His job is to arrange the meeting ! . His art is death, and he is about to paint his masterpiece ! . Sabotage his work, his fiery will be releashed !. There's trained and there's untrained. Now, which one are you?. For an ex-CIA agent, the job of bodyguard for a twelve-year old girl should have been a breeze...!

In this moving movie based on a novel written by A. J. Quinnell there is thriller , frenetic action , suspense , violence, intrigue , a little bit of social denounce and brief sparks of imagination . An uneven film with its ups and downs , but is neither tiring , isn't boring ; because being fast moving, and that's why it is entertaining enough . The final showdown between the starring and the baddies is breathtaking . Borrowing wholesale from Scorsese , the film also has a certain likeness to Charles Bronson's films of the series : ¨Death Wish¨ for the matter , a relentless vendetta. The picture failed at the box office due to the strong violence and the crude theme . Scott Glenn's interpretation is acceptable and the little daughter played Jade Malle (director Louis Malle's daughter) is cool . Support cast is pretty well with plenty of familiar faces, such as : Joe Pesci who steals the show in a sympathetic role, Jonathan Pryce, Paul Shenar, Brooke Adams Laura Morante, Lu Castel and a brief role for the deceased and beloved Danny Aiello.

Man on Fire(1987) was remade as Man on Fire (2004) that obtained too much success at boxoffice, directed by Tony Scott with Denzel Washington, Dakota Fanning, Radha Mitchell, Marc Anthony, Giancarlo Giannini , Rachel Ticotin, Mickey Rourke, Christopher Walken . Writer Brian Helgeland first saw the original Man on Fire (1987) when he was renting videos in the late '80s. He walked in to the video store where Quentin Tarantino was working and asked what was good, Tarantino recommended "Man on Fire".

Man on fire (1987) was financed by TriStar Pictures and Man on Fire (2004) by 20th Century-Fox , the latter wanted the film to be set in Italy as in the original version. An early script was set in Naples. Tony Scott argued that if the setting were Italy, the film would have to be a period piece, since by the 2000s kidnappings were a rare occurrence in Italy, that's why Mexico City became the setting, mainly because it had an extraordinarily high kidnapping rate.

John Scott's' musical score is atmospheric and evocative. As well as adequate though some dark cinematography by cameraman Gerry Fisher. This interesting and nail-biting film was unevenly but professionally directed by Elie Chouraqui. He is a director and writer, known for The Origin of Violence (2016), O Jerusalem (2006), Harrison's Flowers (2000), Qu'est-ce qui fait courir David? (1982) and Les menteurs (1996). The picture will appeal to action buffs and strong emotions enthusiasts. Rating: 6/10 . Well worth watching.

I have to admit, I only watched this after I had watched the newer version (with Denzel Washington in it). So I guess I kinda knew most of the story before watching it. But it still could have made an impact on me, if it actually were better. As you can tell by my voting, I wasn't impressed. While there are remakes that could be deemed unnecessary (though studios never think that, especially financially), this one was more than ripe and really easy to top.

While I do like Scott Glenn in general (you might also remember him from "Silence of the Lambs", but he's done quite a lot of other work, mostly small roles in a lot of movies), I don't think he adds anything to the mix here. Still I do like some of the ideas this introduced, although it never really got as raw as the budget was meant to be (or should have aspired for).

I enjoyed this film when it first came out and even more when I had a chance to see it again this weekend. Though billed and treated by most as an action/thriller/revenge film it's much more than that. The aspect that really grabbed me was the development of the relationship of Scott Glenn's Chris Creasy and Jade Malle's Samantha. The gradual development of the Creasy character from an isolated and emotionally shut down loner first into a friend and finally into a surrogate father and mentor to Samantha is touching and believable. Touching and believable as well is Samantha's simultaneous evolution from a lonely if charming rich kid into Creasy's surrogate daughter and protégé. I just wish Ms. Malle, who exhibited such a strong screen presence in this film had gone on to make more films than the one other movie and one TV show credited to her on the IMDb site.

The first movie adaptation of A. J. Quinnell's novel is a moody and atmospheric European co-production. French director Elie Chouraqui sucks you into a world of detached relations and understated emotions, in many ways a typical setting for this melancholy tale of a disillusioned body guard (Scott Glenn) whose acquaintance with the precocious 12-year-old he is hired to protect (Jade Malle) revitalizes him and awakes his repressed emotions. There is a delicate balance to the interplay between Creasy and the girl, and debutante Malle gives her character expressivity and emotional curiosity, despite some below par line readings. A tough-looking Scott Glenn finds just the right tone for Christian Creasy, empowering his subsequent violent revenge spree, which retains a certain nerve despite its obvious triteness. Joe Pesci is spirited as Glenn's friend and former partner. And Danny Aiello has a great little bit part as an Italian-American mobster. Remade in 2004 with Denzel Washington as Creasy and Tony Scott as director.

Enough has been written about this underrated movie. What is less known is that french director Elie Chouraqui is known for his interest in breaking down structure and conventional expectations in film in general, including this one. Therefore, the movie contains elements of both European and American approaches to filming and places American actors in the Italian political universe. The result is a wonderful work of dreamy "art-atmosphere", melancholic aura with great subtlety and elegance. Definitely worth watching, either before or after the remake with Denzel Washington and especially as it is one of the unique gems of its time.

"Man on Fire" opens with a truly tedious relationship build up between Glenn and the twelve year old kidnapping victim, Jade Malle. I kept wondering, is she ever going to be kidnapped? The screenplay is very straight forward, with Scott Glenn miraculously recovering from several gunshot wounds, and then going after the kidnappers. Danny Aiello plays a very minor part as one of the bad guys. Joe Pesci more or less just revolves around Glenn's character, and really never gets involved in the action. Speaking of the action, a couple of explosions and a truck wreck, along with some gun blasting is about all there is. Character development is weak, and the film is way too dark in places. Despite the intriguing cast, I say don't bother. - MERK

Edgy Characters with Internal Turmoil is a Scott Glenn Type.

Here, Before the Hit Made by Tony Scott, Denzel Washington, and Dakota Fanning, is the Original.

Inferior Budget and Euro-Crime (Italy) are what is Done with its Story Split in 2 Parts.

First, the Introduction of Glenn to His New Job as a Protector/Babysitter for a 12 Year-Old Girl, Shuffled Off by Her Wealthy Parents.

After the Girl is Kidnapped by Low-Lifes Demanding $1Mil, Glenn, who has Gone from Work-For-Hire to Friend-For-Life to the Smart, Pretty, and Charming Adolescent

His Ex-CIA/Mercenary Training Kicks-In as He has Now Gone from Aloof/Cynical Lost Soul to a Soldier on a Mission.

To Obliterate the Opposition as a "Man On Fire" who is "Born to Kill".

The Movie is a Well-Done Work, Enhanced with the Aid of Joe Pesci as Glenn's Former Partner,

and the Girl (Jade Malle) who Brings just the Right Blend of Naive Curiosity as She Searchers for Someone to Befriend.

The Violent Scenes are Unstylish with Calculated Realism Delivered with a Punch and Not a Brawl.

It's More of a Neo-Noir and Character Study than an 'Action-Flick", Unreeling at a Slow-Pace (especially the 1st Half).

Definitely Worth a Watch for Fans of the Remake, that Tony Scott Turned Into a Hyper-Noir with Flash and Bang. Also for Fans of B-Movies, Neo-Noir, and Euro-Cinema.

The Remake is Better and it Needed to Be. They Used A-List Stars, Big-Budget and a Wild Director to Pull it Off.

Every character was under developed and some were barely given a name, yet we're supposed to feel for them or even know who they are ???

Maybe people expected less from their movies back in the 80s, but this seemed awful even for the time period.

I just found Millie Bobby Brown's look alike, not that I was looking.

Samantha Benetto (Jade Malle) is a carefree little girl that is the daughter of rich parents in Italy. That means potential kidnapping. The parents hire Creasy (Scott Glenn) to be Samantha's bodyguard. They form a tight bond and are inseparable until Samantha is kidnapped. Now Creasy will have to employ all of his skills to get her back.

I didn't like this as much as I liked the remake with Denzel Washington but it was decent. I didn't feel it as much as the remake--the relationship between Creasy and Sam or the sheer force of will that Creasy had become to get Sam back. It could simply be because I saw the remake first or it could be because Denzel is a superior actor.

Scott Glenn takes brooding to a new level in this neo-noir thriller that runs long on despair but short on . . . Well, substance really. Bodyguard loses his charge, vows revenge and goes right out there and gets it. As straightforward as it gets. I did appreciate the bond (ever so fleeting) that he develops with 12 year-old Jade Malle but the film really could've used more interactions between them. I'm happy I finally got around to seeing this, but it's a definitely curiosity, something to be scratched off the list.

Now since comparison to the '04 version is unavoidable, I will say that I liked the hard-boiled narration here; it helps flesh out the character's world-weariness; it was a nice touch. But overall, this '87 original lacks the emotional weight of the remake, which went to satisfying lengths to convey the guy's bloodlust. You knew Denzel was going to make them pay and he damn well delivered.