A Rage in Harlem (1991)

People are voting emotionally.

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

The story revolves around a chest of gold. People find it and lose it, people kill and die for it. Deceit is the currency for everyone. Well, for everyone but Jackson, whose candid innocence and unwavering faith in his love and his Imabelle brings some light in what's basically a very dark tale. And this is true even with all the humor and the wit which is indeed in the story. There's violence here, there's bad things happening, but there's tenderness too, and caring, and straightforward humour. The actors are familiar stars, back when a bit younger (produced in 1991). But their talent is very evident here, shown through every twist and tumble of the cliff-hangers throughout the film. And the print is fine indeed; along with all production values. Forest Whitaker, Danny Glover, Robin Givens and Gregory Hines all give their all; everything, action, bawdy humor, music, all shine through.The fast pace, the witty dialogues, the honest rendering of human flaws and strength reminded me a lot of the book, even if some of the dynamics are different. Still I enjoyed what's new in the film as much as I enjoyed everything in the book. One of the new ideas I particularly enjoyed is the larger importance of Imabelle character inside the story. She has a larger part, her story starts first and is presented in more detailed, and she comes across as an exceptionally hard-boiled, and still very vulnerable characters. This was just a good fun heist film set back in Harlem's hay day. Take a ride back into time and have a good laugh, you will be glad you did.Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

A Rage In Harlem is probably one of the most slept-on comedy/action features of all time. It had an all-star cast and didn't waste them and under the direction of Bill Duke, it succeeded in what it needed to be.The story: Imabelle is a pretty female crook that leaves for Harlem after taking the money from the last heist she pulled with her crew with her. She meets up with a naive milksop named Jackson(Forest Whitaker)and uses his naiveté' to her advantage. She later ends up falling for him but things get worse when her gang shows up to his apartment.A Rage In Harlem is interesting when its funny and is interesting when its not being funny. Its funny without trying too hard and it captures the 1930s era of Harlem. Plus it has nightclubs where people actually perform(hell, Harlem Nights didn't even have that). Forest Whitaker is good as the naive Jackson and Gregory Hines(RIP) is also good as his cousin Goldy. Robin Givens is great as the gorgeous but deceptive Imabelle. They have a little chemistry with each other even though I could do without the scene where Jackson licks her buns(YUCK!). Too raunchy for my taste. At any rate, A Rage In Harlem is one hell of ride from start to finish and is definitely worth being in your collection. Two thumbs up.Also recommended movies by director Bill Duke: Hoodlum, Sister Act 2 Deep Cover.

This is a pretty good, violent, gangster romp directed with definite panache by Bill Duke. Forrest Whitaker plays a decent upstanding Christian boy how gets embroiled in hokey plot involving stolen money (or something) and Robin Givens. Different groups of parties are all after the dough (including Forrest's good for nothing brother Gregory Hines), when Forrest just wants the girl. Its pretty hackneyed stuff, but the players (in particular the great Gregory Hines and the baddass Danny Glover) elevate it to a standard that just serves to entertain and no more.It also features a great recurring joke about a picture of Jesus that I won't spoil.The only problem I have with this film is that the book it's based on is actually nothing like this. The first scene in the barn is lifted from the book, but everything else has been changed. The two cops in the film, Gravedigger Jones and Coffin Ed are Chester Hime's greatest creations, but here they're just an obstacle for Whittaker (who in the book is actually a supporting character and is a coward, here he is the against all the odds hero of the piece). If you haven't read Chester Hime's novels you won't notice, but be prepared to be disappointed with the liberties taken with the story.On it's own though, this is an accomplished movie from the talented Mr Duke, who's next movie was one of the best of the nineties, Deep Cover.

Nasty, unforgiving, unrelenting blood sport. I watch war movies and don't bat an eye except for Saving Private Ryan, but this is downright sickening. I went because I liked Forrest Whittaker, but it was so savage, so sick with violence just for violent's sake that I was shocked. I also took a date and it was lucky that we had seen other movies together because she would have had real doubts about me if this was my kind of movie. The movie reminded me of news stories about people killing puppies and torturing cats. I still have nightmares about this movie. The reviewer for the Washington Post at the time called it an urban comedy. If this is his version of a comedy, I never want to see another one.