Dear Reader: Update, Movie Review Intelligence will discontinue
publishing this website at the end of May (more...)
Search a Movie:
STAND UP GUYSMovie Reviews
Comedy drama about three aging gangsters who reunite when one is released from prison. Cast:Al Pacino, Christopher Walken, Katheryn Winnick, Alan Arkin, Julianna Margulies, Vanessa Ferlito, Mark Margolis, Addison Timlin, Rick Gomez, Bill Burr, Weronika Rosati, Eric Etebari, Courtney Galiano, Brandon Scott, Yorgo ConstantineDirector:Fisher StevensRelease Date:February 1, 2013DVD Release:January 8, 2013From:LionsgateRating:RLength:1 hr. 34 min.
Stand Up Guys played in national release to mixed reviews. • Abhimanyu Das wrote for Slant, "...hits every sitcom-esque cliché... And yet, it's difficult to condemn outright a film in which Christopher Walken and Al Pacino kick butt together." More Reviews Below...
Stand Up Guys Positive Reviews (40 Reviews, reviews below)
Alynda Wheat, People: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "It's to the actors' credit that we do feel for them... Pacino, Arkin and Walken are such rare talents, it's fun being around them, even if the movie isn't their equal."(See all of Alynda Wheat's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 233 words, 01/31/13
Mary Pols, Time: FAIR "...it's the narrative, written by Noah Haidle and directed by Fisher Stevens, that ultimately proves too wobbly and unstable, derailing this graceful trio of old pros."(See all of Mary Pols's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 937 words, 02/01/13
Christy Lemire, Associated Press: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...things pick up significantly once they decide to bust their old pal, Hirsch (Arkin), out of the retirement home in the middle of the night for some spontaneous adventures."(See all of Christy Lemire's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 484 words, 01/31/13
Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: GOOD(cg) "...reminds you that these three actors are still way too good to collapse into shticky self-parody, even when they're in a movie that's practically begging them to."(See all of Owen Gleiberman's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 251 words, 02/01/13
Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...solid entertainment.... Arkin is a master of the slow burn. Pacino shows off shamelessly. And Walken's deadpan is a constant delight."(See all of Peter Travers's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 198 words, 02/01/13
Roger Ebert, RogerEbert.com: OUTSTANDING(cg) "Sometimes it's all about the casting.... These men move through the monuments of sad lives. They have not lost the gift of bitter amusement."(See all of Roger Ebert's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 849 words, 02/01/13
James Rocchi, MSN Movies: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...light and slight enough... you can enjoy watching the three lead actors playing sunset-years tough guys out for one last spree before the bill has to be paid."(See all of James Rocchi's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 613 words, 01/30/13
Jeffrey M. Anderson, Common Sense Media: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "Many viewers will probably feel that the material is overall too slight... but for many others it will be an amiable time-waster, capable of producing many smiles.... Age 16."(See all of Jeffrey M. Anderson's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 586 words, 01/30/13
we have an app for when you're out and about
get our iPhone app... or get our mobile web app...
movie review intelligence
NEW YORK/LOS ANGELES/CHICAGO/TORONTO (11 Reviews)
Stephen Holden, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...feels like a sentimental elegy for a generation of first-rate actors who, having nothing left to prove, are enjoying themselves... the men expertly play off one another..."(See all of Stephen Holden's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 534 words, 12/14/12
Elizabeth Weitzman, New York Daily News: WEAK(cg) "Walken's certainly the best thing about Fisher Stevens' otherwise disposable con-man comedy.... The script is undernourished, the supporting characters ill-conceived..."(See all of Elizabeth Weitzman's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 323 words, 12/14/12
Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times: GOOD "...they had me at Pacino, Walken and Arkin.... Whenever the film veers off course, it is rescued by its slick production and the smooth operators it has in its stars."(See all of Betsy Sharkey's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 622 words, 12/14/12
Kyle Smith, New York Post: POOR(cg) "...painful, misshapen and a little gross. It's an enlarged prostate of a movie.... trite, unfunny, contrived... amateurish..."(See all of Kyle Smith's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 379 words, 12/14/12
Rafer Guzman, New York Newsday: MODERATE(cg) "These three old pros work their magic, but writer Noah Haidle and director Fisher Stevens don't ask much more of them. The actors merely play themselves..."(See all of Rafer Guzman's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 292 words, 02/01/13
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: OUTSTANDING(cg) "Sometimes it's all about the casting.... These men move through the monuments of sad lives. They have not lost the gift of bitter amusement."(See all of Roger Ebert's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 849 words, 02/01/13
Alan Scherstuhl, Village Voice/LA Weekly: WEAK "...the feeling the film inspires isn't suspense but relief: Thank God that the producers behind 'Grumpy Old Men' and 'The Sunshine Boys' didn't yet have Viagra to joke about."(See all of Alan Scherstuhl's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 826 words, 12/12/12
Peter Howell, Toronto Star: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "None of this really goes anywhere.... It's just fun to watch Pacino, Walken and Arkin work together, very much enjoying the shared experience."(See all of Peter Howell's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 730 words, 02/01/13
Norman Wilner, Toronto Now: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "What Christopher Walken and Al Pacino do in this film has a sturdy, no-bullshit quality that you have to respect.... Alan Arkin contributes a lovely cameo..."(See all of Norman Wilner's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 237 words, 01/31/13
KEY CITIES (13 Reviews)
Ann Hornaday, Washington Post: MODERATE(cg) "...shuffles along at a leisurely gait, hoping that audiences will have the time and patience to catch up with it.... Walken keeps it real."(See all of Ann Hornaday's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 549 words, 02/01/13
Steven Rea, Philadelphia Inquirer: MODERATE(cg) "Elegiac and corny and not really convincing on any level... nonetheless holds some fascination just for the off-the-charts affectedness of Pacino's performance."(See all of Steven Rea's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 360 words, 02/01/13
Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star-Tribune: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...has a comfortable class-reunion vibe... Pacino, Walken and Arkin deserve better material, yet it's so nice to have them onscreen together."(See all of Colin Covert's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 427 words, 02/01/13
Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "Walken is the most interesting, as he often is. There's something in the way the guy moves (a dancer's grace, no doubt), how he takes whatever comes in stride."(See all of Bill Goodykoontz's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 566 words, 02/01/13
Ty Burr, Boston Globe: WEAK(cg) "...barely deserves to be called a movie.... represents the genre's new bottom of the barrel. It's like watching your grandfather get naked on YouTube."(See all of Ty Burr's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 535 words, 02/01/13
Stephen Whitty, New Jersey Star-Ledger: MODERATE(cg) "...what do the actors have to work with here? The movie isn't funny enough to allow them to burlesque their images, or serious enough to give them a way to reflect upon..."(See all of Stephen Whitty's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 379 words, 12/14/12
Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...well-written, extraordinarily well-cast and well-acted.... Pay attention to how even the small roles are detailed and defined..."(See all of Mick LaSalle's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 782 words, 02/01/13
Moira Macdonald, Seattle Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "These actors, playing longtime friends, seem to shuck off the script and just become buddies before our eyes, and you want a seat at the diner table with them."(See all of Moira Macdonald's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 264 words, 02/01/13
Marc Mohan, Portland Oregonian: POOR(cg) "It's often said that actors with distinctive vocal styles could compellingly read the phone book -- in this case, it would absolutely be a more entertaining hour-and-a-half."(See all of Marc Mohan's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 515 words, 02/01/13
Joe Williams, St. Louis Post-Dispatch: WEAK(cg) "...falls flat.... Dare we say it? Even the acting is atrocious, with pop-eyed Pacino chewing the scenery like a geezer gumming his oatmeal."(See all of Joe Williams's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 344 words, 02/01/13
Sean Daly, Tampa Bay Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...may not be as fresh and invigorating as in the famed actors' salad days, but man, it's still cool to see these sly dogs at play, isn't it?"(See all of Sean Daly's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 633 words, 01/31/13
Tom Long, Detroit News: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "Is it fun? Sure, some of the time. Is it good? That's a stretch. Does it tap the potential of these three actors? Fuggedaboutit."(See all of Tom Long's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 298 words, 02/01/13
Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: POOR(cg) "...excruciating and melodramatic... a series of supposedly wacky episodes building up to a violent finale that seems to have been spliced in from another film."(See all of Rene Rodriguez's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 656 words, 02/01/13
ALTERNATIVE/INDIE PRESS (7 Reviews)
Alan Scherstuhl, Village Voice/LA Weekly: WEAK "...the feeling the film inspires isn't suspense but relief: Thank God that the producers behind 'Grumpy Old Men' and 'The Sunshine Boys' didn't yet have Viagra to joke about."(See all of Alan Scherstuhl's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 826 words, 12/12/12
Nathan Rabin, AV Club: POOR(cg) "This movie is the sitcom 'Mikey & Nicky' no one asked for. In spite of its stars' age, its asinine macho wish-fulfillment fantasies are patently juvenile."(See all of Nathan Rabin's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 419 words, 01/31/13
Cynthia Fuchs, Pop Matters: POOR(cg) "...you may be less inclined to care what happens to whom than to wonder what either Pacino or Walken had in mind when he signed up for this."(See all of Cynthia Fuchs's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 760 words, 02/04/13
Abhimanyu Das, Slant: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...hits every sitcom-esque cliché... And yet, it's difficult to condemn outright a film in which Christopher Walken and Al Pacino kick butt together."(See all of Abhimanyu Das's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 524 words, 12/13/12
Norman Wilner, Toronto Now: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "What Christopher Walken and Al Pacino do in this film has a sturdy, no-bullshit quality that you have to respect.... Alan Arkin contributes a lovely cameo..."(See all of Norman Wilner's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 237 words, 01/31/13
HIGHBROW PRESS (4 Reviews)
Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal: FAIR "...comes up short on plausibility in at least two areas: the impending assassination of one geezer by another, and the undiminished virtuosity of Hirsch, a former wheelman..."(See all of Joe Morgenstern's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 218 words, 02/01/13
Stephen Holden, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...feels like a sentimental elegy for a generation of first-rate actors who, having nothing left to prove, are enjoying themselves... the men expertly play off one another..."(See all of Stephen Holden's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 534 words, 12/14/12
Scott Tobias, NPR: WEAK "Fisher Stevens gravely misjudges the tone -- when he isn't trying to get too cute about everything, he slathers his characters in unearned sentimentality."(See all of Scott Tobias's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 575 words, 01/31/13
Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times: GOOD "...they had me at Pacino, Walken and Arkin.... Whenever the film veers off course, it is rescued by its slick production and the smooth operators it has in its stars."(See all of Betsy Sharkey's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 622 words, 12/14/12
MOVIE INDUSTRY (5 Reviews)
Alissa Simon, Daily Variety: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...mildly raunchy, modestly entertaining.... Fisher Stevens' talky, tongue-in-cheek feature is most likable when the main characters are simply playing off each other."(See all of Alissa Simon's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 532 words, 10/12/12
Duane Byrge, Hollywood Reporter: VERY GOOD "...raunchy and touching... lubricates its old joints -- of the plot, genre and actors -- quite entertainingly.... a sharp mix of comedy and pathos, and superbly balanced."(See all of Duane Byrge's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 542 words, 10/12/12
Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times: GOOD "...they had me at Pacino, Walken and Arkin.... Whenever the film veers off course, it is rescued by its slick production and the smooth operators it has in its stars."(See all of Betsy Sharkey's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 622 words, 12/14/12
Stephen Holden, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...feels like a sentimental elegy for a generation of first-rate actors who, having nothing left to prove, are enjoying themselves... the men expertly play off one another..."(See all of Stephen Holden's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 534 words, 12/14/12
Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal: FAIR "...comes up short on plausibility in at least two areas: the impending assassination of one geezer by another, and the undiminished virtuosity of Hirsch, a former wheelman..."(See all of Joe Morgenstern's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 218 words, 02/01/13
20.0 Percentage Points Average Difference Between Reviews (Norm is 18.4pp; <18.4pp = More Consistent; >18.4pp = More Mixed)
Stand Up Guys's reviews are separated by an average 20.0 percentage points. The norm for this measure is 18.4 percentage points. Less than 18.4 indicates more consistent reviews; greater than 18.4 indicates more mixed reviews. In the chart below, each dot represents a review, with the dots at the top more positive than the dots at the bottom. From left to right, the dots represent reviews in big, bigger and biggest publications. Roll over each dot for more detail.
Stand Up Guys (40 reviews) Roll over dots for each review
Coverage:Stand Up Guys's reviews cover 83.0% of potential readers (average is 67.9%). Volume:The film's reviews total 19,282 words involume (average is 20,172 words). Length:The film's reviews average 482 words in length (the norm is 517 words).
Stand Up Guys Coverage, Volume & Length (40 Reviews, reviews below)
Reviews Broke 8 Days Before Release (Norm is 1.2 Release)
Stand Up Guys's reviews on average broke 8 days before opening. Norm for this measure is 1.2 hours before. The chart below shows reviews on opening day and the days before and after opening; the left side is earlier and the right side is later. The red bars extending above the horizontal mid-line represent more positive reviews, and the red bars extending below represent more negative reviews. The white space/red bar in the middle is Stand Up Guys's opening day. Click on any bar for a list of the reviews for that day.
Stand Up Guys (40 reviews, click on bars for reviews)
Mobile Web App version 1.2 shows a list of all current movies and review information. You can click through to the cast, director, synopsis, release date and rating on page two, plus individual reviews on page three. The information is updated on a live/real-time basis. You can also search our database of films. Designed for when you're on the move and want the latest info, this app will work on any mobile web browser. From your mobile device -- only from a mobile device -- open our Mobile Web App here...
