Man on Fire

Man on Fire (1987) felt like a typical ‘80s action thriller that didn’t do much to stand out. While the premise had potential, the execution was flat, and I found no real connection with any of the ch... Man on Fire (1987) felt like a typical ‘80s action thriller that didn’t do much to stand out. While the premise had potential, the execution was flat, and I found no real connection with any of the characters. The performances felt stiff, and any attempt at emotion seemed forced rather than natural. The film relied on slow zooms and long frozen frames, which were common in that era but didn’t add anything meaningful here. Instead of building tension or depth, these choices made it feel dated and uninspired. It wasn’t a bad movie, but it lacked the intensity and emotional weight that could have made it memorable. The story moved along in a predictable manner without any standout moments to elevate it beyond just another revenge thriller. Compared to the 2004 version, which brought real grit and depth, this one felt hollow. If anything, watching this only made me appreciate how much better the later adaptation handled the same material.