Broken City

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation | Release Date: January 18, 2013

5.4	USER SCORE Mixed or average reviews based on 107 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

OroiaelJan 25, 2013

I guess Hollywood thinks we'll watch any old piece of trash it throws up on the screen. They got my money. Congrats. Movie is devoid of original thinking and most of the acting is stale. The screenplay was as artfully written as furnitureI guess Hollywood thinks we'll watch any old piece of trash it throws up on the screen. They got my money. Congrats. Movie is devoid of original thinking and most of the acting is stale. The screenplay was as artfully written as furniture assembly instructions. I seriously question the critical thinking skills of anyone who thought this was a good movie.By the way, Zeta-Jones isn't hot anymore and since she never could act I was hoping to see her fade away. No such luck though.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

vdiaz9Jan 23, 2013

A contrived crime drama that feels like it was written by a first time screenwriter during a screenwriting 101 class. Expect the big name actors in this picture to make it a sure-fire hit on Redbox.

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

WhySoSerious54Jun 19, 2013

Predictable and strangly poorly acted as well. I expected a lot more from these two. Maybe an aspect of a terrible script, screenplay, direction, I can go on and on.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

BairdoNov 18, 2013

Wow. One can picture the director turning to the producer and asking "Should we go with cheese or cliche for this scene?" and the answer invariably being "Both". The blackmail part was the only authentic scene in the whole Turd I'm guessingWow. One can picture the director turning to the producer and asking "Should we go with cheese or cliche for this scene?" and the answer invariably being "Both". The blackmail part was the only authentic scene in the whole Turd I'm guessing because they had to extort these actors to get them to buy into this mess. There must have been a "I will never have to watch this piece of garbage" clause in their contracts....Actually, Wahlberg has probably seen it a few times.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

cameronmorewoodJul 25, 2013

Allen Hughes' intellectually vacant Broken City feels about as fake and pretentious as Russell Crowe's Kardashian-like spray tan and obnoxious blonde wig.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

PaulystanMar 3, 2016

The only good thing about this film was the character played by Mark Wahlberg. The rest tries so hard to be deep and mysterious but is quite the opposite. Its thin and poorly tied together. The acting is mostly very poor, especially by theThe only good thing about this film was the character played by Mark Wahlberg. The rest tries so hard to be deep and mysterious but is quite the opposite. Its thin and poorly tied together. The acting is mostly very poor, especially by the stars and it seems to be more of feature length advert for pro liberal agenda. Kinda weird really.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

DawdlingPoetNov 28, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is a crime drama film, covering themes including justice and manipulation. First off, I felt from the start that this film was very much typical of its type - it seemed like a pretty typical traditional PI/detective film. I felt that, if anything, Russel Crowe over-acted in his role as the Mayor, given that he sounds quite distinctly not unsimilar to a no-nonsense Mafia or gangaser 'wise guy' type (more on the performances later). If anything, I wished he wouldn't be quite so softly spoken at times, as ocassionally I found myself wondering precisely what he'd said - the audio is ok but not perfect.

I noticed that camera wise, the camera is nearly always moving about, with one scene toward the start of the film shot as if the camera were going slowly around a large circle around the two main characters at the time. I imagine this is done to try to (artificially or otherwise, although it did feel a little unnecessarily forced I think) heighten the feeling that anything could happen at any moment, to try and increase the sense of a fast pace and so on. Also, as far as that is concerned, I couldn't help but notice a heavy use of incident style music throughout - sounds of a breeze brushing past metal and banging drum type pieces.

I felt there was a strong feeling of artificiality present in this film - whether this was due to the somewhat over-use of incident music, camerawork and the like im not entirely sure but it probably didn't help. The characters seemed pretty basic - if anything, the females were slightly more memorable. Again im not entirely sure why but I did feel it to be the case never the less. I felt that Billy Taggart seemed to be a rather mediocre character, in terms of him seeming relatively apathetic in general, certainly during the first half of the film anyway. I felt there was a sense that the film was going through the motions, showing the usual characters - good guy, bad guy, person who may be good or bad, we're not sure, sexy lady (aka eye candy for men - not all men but some), the token plot twist scenes, chases and so on.

Cast wise, Mark Wahlberg plays Billy Taggart. This is far from a stretch for him, in as much as he's well known for his action/thriller film roles in films such as Lone Survivors, 2 Guns and Shooter. Billy seems a fairly down-and-out type character (which makes sense given what we known of Billys past) but I can't say I felt any real interest or pretty much any emotional attachment to the character, which is never a good thing when your talking about the main character. He plays the role pretty blankly, if you know what I mean. Another main character is, of course, Mayor Hostetler, played by Russell Crowe. As I've mentioned, he is quite a softly spoken (aka really quite quiet) character, yet someone who seems both sneaky and reasonably clued-up. If you've seen Crowe in other similar films then you'll no doubt have a rough idea of what his character is like - somewhat stealthy, determined et al. In a sense, the two main cast members could be thought of as a good pairing, since they are quite similar in type and you could argue that its like fighting as twins but thats maybe simplifying things a bit. I wouldn't say Crowe was especially memorable in his role in this film but then I don't think this film was particularly memorable in general anyway - both of the main cast members have appeared in better films before and hopefully will do again.

Some scenes in this film are relatively dark, lighting wise and it can seem somewhat sinister, with the camera moving slowly from one side, or part, of a room to another. At one or two points the music changed from more basic incident style music to a low-key operatic style music, as events started to 'come to a head'.

Content wise, this film contains strong language, some moderate violence including people shown with bloody injuries. There are also sex references, plus one scene with brief nudity. Due to this content, the film carries a 15 rating. I'd also like to add that I felt that, on one or two ocassions, the use of strong language seemed a bit forced i.e. didn't seem entirely necessary. Honestly, I felt like I watched the film while feeling unsure quite what the whole plot was. In its favour, it isn't a completely dire watch, it is relatively watch-able as such but I just didn't feel like I was in any way immersed in it, rooting for any one particular character, dreading or desperate to find out what truths would be discovered and who may be proven right or wrong. All the same though, it was entertaining enough to pass the hour and 40 minutes or so that it runs for. It isn't entirely boring, due to the fairly constant moving camerawork (although this may distract and bother some people) - the effects were alright and so on but its most definitely not one of the better examples of its type.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews