Another recycled story over and over again, without any freshness, where Liam Neeson returns to be the defender who does not forgive! A Walk Among the Tombstones is a big of a mess with huge plot holes but strangely manages to have something interesting for you, due to some elements that can give the impression that we are see a film noir, through its visual style and characters in a desperate outlaw world. But that alone is not enough to make it a good film.

This film, based on the bestseller by Lawrence Block, tells the story of an ex-cop and private investigator Matthew Scudder, hired by a dealer to find out who kidnapped and killed his wife. The action takes place in the 90s in New York but there's any references about it, I never felt that in the atmosphere. New York always has an imposing presence. It's always "the" city which itself becomes one of the characters, in this case it does not. All characters are poorly developed and basically there is no suspense it's fairly easy to predict what comes next. The villains of the story are certainly creepy and some of its scenes can even be minimally disturbing, but as all the characters, they were super underused.

Liam Neeson, a good actor who already deserves good roles (again!) where we could see the good potential that he always had being well spent! But it seems to me that it will not be soon, because his next film will be the third film od the franchise Taken - more of the same - but what is certain is that even predicting that such films will give us, we always end up having an interest in seeing all that this gentleman does.

We reached the end of A Walk Among the Tombstones and the only thing that remains is an empty feeling. One of those films that quickly fall into oblivion.

This movie had quite some premise and it is a decent enough movie but, sadly, it never really rises out of the ordinary. We have some really despicable criminals and I mean some real creepy nutcases and we have Liam Neeson as a gritty former cop turned private investigator. Good recipe to start with I would say.

Unfortunately it never really took off. Liam Neeson is doing a good job of portraying the former cop and he is pretty much making the picture. The creepy guys are, well creepy but they never really get to shine in their creepiness. Most of the other characters around are just decoration with the possible exception of the young brat whom I personally just found annoying.

Speaking of annoying I have to say that the AA sessions and the voice overs from them pretty much falls into that very category. They felt at best like unnecessary fillers to me. I do not know why it is so popular to portray “heroes” as drunks or former drunks.

The movie is not a quick paced one. It is more of a thriller than a action one although there are a few outbursts of action. Sometimes it goes quite far down the road of some real detective work and sometimes it just jumps about leaving a few inconsistencies and plot wholes hanging around.

I would say that this movie is a fairly ordinary, good but nothing special, crime story about two psychopaths and a gritty former coop given the task of chasing them down. Without Liam Neeson as a lead actor more or less carrying the movie along it would have been a fairly bland movie.

Private investigator Matthew Scudder (Liam Neeson) is hired by a drug kingpin (Dan Stevens) to find out who kidnapped and murdered his wife.

While there is nothing new about this film, it still manages to offer some thrills that only Liam Neeson can pull off. The main thing that this movie had going for it was Neesons character Matthew Scudder. While he's played former cops in other movies, he does so differently in this one as he his tragic backstory comes into play, and it gives his character more than a guy who shows up and saved the day. There are a few fight scenes, but this crime thriller focuses more on his investigating than ass kicking which I appreciated, it wasn't without its cliches.

It had a very noir atmosphere that really added to this film, and it complemented the setting very well. Neeson actually felt vulnerable and made for a more compelling film, he had flaws and made him a lot more human than he is used to being. It is quite a dark movie that I actually didn't mind.

Some issues I had are with the villains and with the street kid TJ. Seeing Neeson grow close to the kid just felt like a strange addition. It may have been used to tone down how dark this thriller is and give Matthew a sense of purpose and someone to care for, but if that's the case it didn't work for me. The villains are also a big problem. While David Harbour was really creepy, his character never became anything more than just evil. He was not developed well enough and was just another bad guy for Neeson to stop. He didn't seem to have any motives that made us understand him.

It managed to keep me interested throughout and is a fairly well made movie that Neeson makes better. 6/10.

Though I haven't watched a lot of them yet (I've mainly devoted my time, of late, to catching up on 1920-1970s cinematic milestones), I have a profound respect for the new roles Liam Neeson has taken on in recent years. It makes me think of what would have been had my favourite actor ever, James Cagney, hadn't basically retired for the quiet life in the early 60's, when the perfect storm of 'great actors in B-movies' hit the fans.

My lady is more a horror aficionado, and of recent vintage films, so it was nice to throw this on for a spin and show her its neo-noir tendencies, almost as if going through a 'make your own movie' template, checking them off one-by-one. I don't mind that sort of rote predictability if it's done right, and, though heavily flawed, for the most part it does. By the climax, I basically only cared for four things: that the kidnapped girl, Matthew Scudder and TJ were alive, and that the two kidnappers/murderers got their just desserts, whether it be lengthy incarceration or murder, anything so their crime spree would be ended. The film was well-made and a very enjoyable experience, so considering the relatively minor flaws (especially the one-dimensional aspect of the antagonists), I would definitely recommend at least a watch for most cinephiles out there, especially those interested in 'true crime' type of contemporary American cinema.

This movie had quite some premise and it is a decent enough movie but, sadly, it never really rises out of the ordinary. We have some really despicable criminals and I mean some real creepy nutcases and we have Liam Neeson as a gritty former cop turned private investigator. Good recipe to start with I would say.

Unfortunately it never really took off. Liam Neeson is doing a good job of portraying the former cop and he is pretty much making the picture. The creepy guys are, well creepy but they never really get to shine in their creepiness. Most of the other characters around are just decoration with the possible exception of the young brat whom I personally just found annoying.

Speaking of annoying I have to say that the AA sessions and the voice overs from them pretty much falls into that very category. They felt at best like unnecessary fillers to me. I do not know why it is so popular to portray “heroes” as drunks or former drunks.

The movie is not a quick paced one. It is more of a thriller than a action one although there are a few outbursts of action. Sometimes it goes quite far down the road of some real detective work and sometimes it just jumps about leaving a few inconsistencies and plot wholes hanging around.

I would say that this movie is a fairly ordinary, good but nothing special, crime story about two psychopaths and a gritty former coop given the task of chasing them down. Without Liam Neeson as a lead actor more or less carrying the movie along it would have been a fairly bland movie.