Being a 1991 film (and an HBO Original Production), this was made before Denzel Washington really hit it big but it's one of his finest films in my opinion. While Washington portays a young cop turned bright futured district attorney, the best job in the film is done by John Lithgow, who plays one of the best psychotic yet genius characters in recent memory (Earl Talbot Blake). Lithgow, in fact, does such a good job playing this insane yet calculating killer hell bent on revenge that it's very strange to turn around and watch him on 3rd Rock From The Sun!

The supporting characters played by Ice-T and Kevin Pollak are well done and well written, but also very important in the storyline...something that isn't always true in mainstream films.

The plot is very interesting, and not something that has been 'done to death'. As the film winds down, it seems a little predictable but also the only suitable way for everything to end. Ok, so it's not a blockbuster 4 star masterpiece, but RICOCHET is still a very well written film that is action packed and keeps you on the edge of your seat until the very end. Highly recommended.

Every few years or so, I come across a movie that seriously contends for the title of "worst movie ever made." Godzilla was one of them, then 200 cigarettes, tomb raider... Anyhow, if it weren't for the respectable effort made by Denzel Washington, this movie just might take the cake..

Denzel plays a cop-turned-DA and Lithgow is a psycopathic hitman who has an obsession with breaking out of prison and getting his revenge on the man who put him away.

Nothing here seems to make any sense. For example, the sword fight at the beginning between Blake (John Lithgow) and his cellmate -- first of all, Blake already established his dominance as soon as he entered the jail cell and beat up his new roommate. This bizarre neo-medeival sequence, using books and newspaper as armor, has no point at all. It's just a excuse to showcase some really bad dialogue.

And as for really bad dialogue, Ricochet is unequalled. I cringed at least once every two minutes. Lithgow is so ridiculously serious in his role that anything he says sounds like it's a mockery of himself. It reminds me of the head gangster in the movie Ghost Dog, except in that movie it's *supposed* to be ridiculous. Who knows - maybe that was the idea here.

The end is totally gratuitous. The plan that Denzel comes up with is completely foolish for one thing - if his plan were to fail, which would almost certainly happen, he would end up completely ruining himself. But in the movie, it doesn't fail. Ok, fine. But then, when he has Blake surrounded and could easily have him captured, or at least video-taped to prove that he's still alive (oh yeah, Blake made a preposterous escape at the beginning of the movie and then faked his death), he draws the charade on longer and has Blake chase him down to the Watts Towers.. (The fact that the towers are used is the only cool thing about this movie besides Denzel..) It just seems like he's making things as difficult as possible for himself. He comes off like an idiot.

A good mainstream suspense movie should have a very intellegent protaganist and a slightly more intellegent antaganist; the only reason the protaganist should ever win is because of his absolute commitment to survival and justice, not because the antaganist is easily tricked into silly little scenarios, like being electricuted on Watts Towers (would those towers really conduct that much electricity??)

I misread the title of the movie on my Satellite TV guide and thought I was going to watch a movie about Pinochet..