Shooting Gallery

A pool hustler becomes a member of a pack of hustlers. He rises to the top, but soon finds himself the monkey in the middle of a match between his boss and a crooked cop.

Freddie Prinze Jr. seems to have a string of bad films lately, with such titles like Scooby Doo, Summer Catch and Scooby Doo 2. But one only has to look at his film credits to see that he hasn't been in a really good movie at all. His career ranges from teen slasher flicks to a poor excuse for a video game adaption. It seems with Shooting Gallery Freddie is trying to show that he's serious now, and that he's left his Scooby Doo image behind. Well, Freddie, I got a message for ya, keep dreaming'

When I first came across Shooting Gallery, Poolhall Junkies rip-off is what came to my mind, but for the sake of an argument, I gave it a chance. After watching it, I still came to the conclusion that it's a poolhall junkies ripoff and a poorly executed one too. The main character here tries to act as if he's cool and slick, but with Freddi Prinze Jr. as your main catch, he's comes off and nothing more then a pretty face who thinks he can shoot some pool. In the final stages of the film, I wanted to cut my ears off I couldn't stand his "broken nose" accent. Ving Rhames makes an appearance. All he does is walk around and chew on alligator feet. He actually does nothing in the film, until the climax when he shoots some pool and a gun.

In the film "Rounders" Norton has an ace tattooed on his arm, he says that he has an ace up his sleeve, it worked. In "Shooting Gallery" they get 8 balls tattooed on their arm, with Rhames on his bald head. It shows that their part of a gang...but it doesn't work. Rhames outfit is comical, you should see it to believe it. The plot is poorly written, and one of those, he was hustling everyone from the start type gigs, completely clichéd.

The pool shooting is quite good, not better then what is showcased in "Poolhall Junkies" but good nonetheless. Freddie actually shoots some pool here, nice to see that, but it's obvious that the trick shots are done by someone else. I liked the whole switching of the shooting sides that Freddie does near the end though, I thought that was a neat addition. "Poolhall Junkies" has Walken and "Shooting Gallery" has Macfadyen. Macfadyen is definitely the highlight here as the drunk, druggie, poolhall hustler. He brings some enthusiasm to an otherwise dead cast. It was nice to see some life pumped into this dead film, but it doesn't last long.

The poolhall lingo consists of what the director has heard and made up. Which is obvious when you listen to other lines such as "If I'm Lyin...I'm Dyin." Some characters names, if you'd like to hear are Paulie the Pawn and Cue Ball Carl. What's with the random words appearing on the screen? Poolhall lingo? Purpose to the script? It was distracting and adds nothing to the experience except confusion and dread.

Skip "Shooting Gallery" unless you want a headache from poor acting and a clichéd plot. "Poolhall Junkies" this is not. Unless you're a massive fan of pool, check out something else.

Freddie prinz is Jericho, hot shot pool player. And playa he is. He joins Cue Ball's group (Rhames) to take the money the tourists were so ready to give them. He's supposed to hand over a percentage to Cue Ball every time. But he starts playing on his own. And doesn't hand it over. And an undercover bails him out. And wants something. If Jericho will set it up to give up Cue Ball, detective Mortenson ( Callum Rennie) will have his back. But the cop has his own weaknesses... who is scamming who in this match of matches? Written and directed by Keoni Waxman; had been making films for ten years by this time. This one is pretty good.

It's true that this is not some sort of award-winning movie it's also true that for entertainment value it's a great movie especially if you happen to be a pool player. Not as good as the Hustler but at least as good or better than The color of money accepting the fact that it doesn't have Paul Newman and unless you're a real Tom Cruise fan Paul Newman's the only star in the movie.MHO

Well, where can I begin? The film does start in a strange fashion, with quick editing to get the ball rolling (no pun intended) as quickly as possible. It will later transpire that there are quite a few twists and turns in the story, hence the quick beginning. But once we are past the opening sequences and we see the first game of 8-ball, the film slows down and shows it's strengths. There is certainly an element of the film "Rounders" in this film; hustle to get the better of your opposite man. However, what was portrayed in "Rounders" was (in my personal opinion) not even conceived in this film. Many many sequences came about where you can see a certain scene, suck your teeth and think: "Hell, they could have done it better in such a way...." And the sad part about that is that it actually happens in the middle of the film too! But the mid-to-end part of the film does wrap up quite nicely.

The visuals within the film are frantic and well shot. Quodos to Keoni Waxman for showing such a different forray of shots; the sleazy underworld, the wonderful city shots and the added bonus of Pool-Hall terms being printed and written across angled camera-shots - I liked it. Oh - and I can't miss out the scenes where they are actually playing 8-ball! They were well shot and edited - albeit, when someone is playing pool, we always want to see the whole table and see the shots in their entirety, but that would mean sitting through 8 hours of extra film! But as we all know, we aren't here to necessarily be wow'ed by visuals in a film. A film should be the whole ten yards (no - I am not talking about the film, I mean it as a phrase...).

Ving Rhames was waaay below par in this film, Freddy Prinz Jnr did an adequate job, the divine Roselyn Sanchez played quite well, albeit her history in the story does not need to be actually in there, and finally Callum Keith Rennie does a good performance, but his character was written in what seems to be a hurried way. The whole crew was (if you can imagine the analogy) put into a blender, served up with whipped cream and a cherry on top, when you are expecting something bitter. It didn't blend at all well, the acting between the people. But as I stated in my title: "good to waste a Sunday night...." - no more, no less.

What we don't need to have is people now lambasting a film in simple words of: "Yes, this is better than..." or "No-one can make a film of such a story better than...." This film, in it's own right, is a film that was straight-to-DVD/video and quite rightly so. No way would it have performed in the cinemas with this summer's blockbusters. It is going to be one of those films that people rent when they have run out of films to watch. But I hope that this review will raise a touch more interest than that. Yes, I haven't given it glaring and massive praise, but who needs it when the likes of "Crash", "Batman Begins", "War of The Worlds", "The 40-Year-Old Virgin" and "The Wedding Crashers" are all due for release at the same time? Give it a go, but don't expect too much. It's entertaining (especially the end actually - I wasn't expecting it!) and keeps you watching. What most of us need when there is nothing on TV!

Waxman's straight-to-video film about a smart street pool player who gets involved with the wrong hustlers. It has a good enough screenplay, interesting direction and overall a great atmosphere. The actors do well enough, especially Rhames and Daniel Newman, though Prinze Jr.'s tone and speaking was totally wack, his acting wasn't completely horrible as he managed to get some of the emotional scenes down without appearing completely lost in the film. Still, Prinze jr. was the weak part about this film, Roselyn Sanchez was decent in the female role, though films like this have been done, and done well, like 86's "The Color of Money" directed by martin Scorsese, but i actually didn't mind Waxman's film, it was entertaining, fresh and fun to watch.--- IMDb Rating: 5.4, my rating: 9/10