I'm afraid I found the movie rather boring but the location had a special meaning for me. It was filmed in a bar that I have hung around in for the last 15 years now called "Boxers" in Greenwich Village, NY. It is a great place with lots of character on West 4th street in Manhattan.

Robert De Niro proved once again what a good actor he is, even given the poor writing in this 1992 film. As Harry Fabian, an adventurous lawyer on the make for a quick buck, De Niro showed a dimension of a fast talking, aggressive lawyer, who is looking to make a big score as he focuses his attention to the crooked world of boxing. De Niro had a really excellent supporting cast to work with, Jessica Lange and the late Cliff Gorman, as a couple, looking to make it big as well, with Lange romancing DeNiro on the side. The late Jack Warden represents the old-time prize fighter, filled with memories, along with his bad ticker. Alan King shines as his mobster brother, threatening and menacing to the hilt. To me, De Niro represented another midnight urban cowboy, living in a city of decay, searching for an easy buck, and getting a bullet in the back for his efforts in the end.

I'm the kind of guy that sometimes watches a movie based on its cast or its director, and that was the case with 'Night and The City' with Robert de Niro. Unhappily this movie is not as good as the best ones from de Niro ( Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, King of Comedy, Once Upon a Time in America or The Godfather 2, Jackie Brown ). In this movie, de Niro looks like Jim Carrey with his electric style, but this is not the de Niro we're used to see. The movie is about Harry Fabian ( a second-class lawyer from N.Y. ) that tries to make success in the boxing-promoting market. But the market is dominated by Boom Boom Brossman, a senior promoter of big fights in N.Y. that sees his domain threatened by Fabian. To get the money to promote the fights, Fabian needs to beg money from all his friends, one of them, Phil is the owner of the Boxers pub. Phil's wife, Helen, is in love with Fabian and plans to leave Phil and open her own pub. Night and the City is a remake of the homonym filmed in 1950, that I haven't seen but is much better rated than the 1992's version. It seems that Irwin Winkler works better as a movie producer than as director. One of the movies he promoted are Ranging Bull, New York New York and The Goodfellas, all them starring Robert de Niro.

If so, and you enjoy it, then perhaps this is the movie for you. The casting people loaded this film with a lot of good, solid character actors, but apparently forgot a cohesive plot and a story to go with all these screen gems. This movie goes to further serve that De Niro can make a vehicle, not matter how rusted and barely running, watchable. The way he develops his characters is always attention-grabbing and this picture is no different. This film starts off in a bunch of different directions, then does the old bait and switch, but doesn't really go anywhere. The ending is possibly one of the worst of all time, it seems like whoever was directing this just went on whatever whim struck him at the time and at the end of two hours, the producers just got bored and stopped the show. Ultimately unfulfilling and unless you are a huge De Niro fan, a complete waste of 2 hours. If you do sit through it, please accept my best wishes that you are able to enjoy it without screaming, "Where is the payoff?" for most of the time it takes for viewing.

Night and the City is directed by Irwin Winkler and adapted to screenplay by Richard Price from the novel written by Gerald Kersh. It stars Robert De Niro, Jessica Lange, Cliff Gorman, Jack Warden, Alan King, Eli Wallach and Barry Primus. Music is by James Newton Howard and cinematography by Tak Fujimoto. Ambulance chasing lawyer Harry Fabian (De Niro) has grand designs to be a boxing promoter. Unfortunately this ruffles the feathers of a local promoter who is not exactly known for his kindness... It's often unfair to do down a remake of a classic film, with the rule of thumb being we are asked to judge said remake on its own terms. However, Winkler's neo-noir remake of Jules Dassin's brilliant 1950 film noir of the same name just lacks the edginess or urgency to make a mark. It's not down to performances of the cast or the tech production in general, in fact De Niro, Warden and the under written Lange are watchable, while Fujimoto's photography around the New York locations is superlative. Yet the characters as written here, in the shift from postwar London to a thrumming NYC, have no psychological pangs to drive the picture forward. Harry trudges from one slice of idiocy to another, with a big plot development making no sense, and all the time there's ill placed humour hanging over the plot to further compound the feeling we are watching a disjointed attempt at neo-noir nirvana. While the conclusion here is weak and kind of a cheat. The makers dedicated the film to Dassin, that's a nice sentiment, but really they should have honoured him by making a far better movie in the spirit of the great director himself. 5/10

I actually liked this movie quite a bit but if you're not a De Niro fan, this movie would be completely lost on you. Just read the plot outline to see what I mean. An incompetent lawyer strives to become a boxing promoter. If you're not a De Niro fan but you still find that interesting than you probably have time to catch this movie while you're still deciding on your method of suicide. On the other hand, if you ARE a De Niro fan, the idea of ol' Bobby playing a bullpoop-slinging, sheisty lawyer and ticking everyone off pretty much speaks for itself. He's got quite a few moments that make the movie interesting even if the plot line isn't.

I can honestly say there has only been one or two movies that were so bad I left the theater and refused to watch them. This was one of those movies. I stayed as long as I could but I couldn't bear to stay until the end. I like Jessica Lange and Robert DeNiro and consider them both to be good actors. Thus this was a real disappointment. They have both made much better movies than this one. She's a waitress and he is a lawyer. I thought it was depressing and their first sex scene was carried out with wooden acting. I was on a date so that made it even worse. Don't waste your money.

Am I the only one who constantly sees the microphone at the top of the screen, sometime including the stick that holds it ! People who make such errors shouldn't be allowed to direct movies, especially if they turn out as boring as this one. This movie proves that no mather how good the actor(s) and script or how big the budget, if you have a bad director you get a bad picture. At least Irwin Winkler is a good producer.

The only reason I saw this movie was its filming locale, Boxers on West 4th Street in NYC. (Ironically, the bar had nothing to do with "Boxers" as in pugilists). Its not Boxers that I will remember, its the predecessor on this corner, Boxers decor was the same as the lamented JIMMY DAYS that graced this corner from about 1970 until 1989 or 1990. When Jimmy was forced out by escalating rents, Boxers moved in, keeping the exposed brick ceiling decor the same. Soon, this movie may be the only permanent record of a great NY neighborhood bar known as JIMMY DAYS. There is a Margot Kidder independent movie from the 1970s that was filmed here when it was Jimmy Days, called Willie and Phil.

I beg to disagree with Roger Ebert on this one. I think he is too obsessed with comparing this film to the original. Even though I didn't see the original, I can see that this film isn't supposed to be a copy, but only borrows the premise in order to develop an original, realistic and contemporary plot of its own. I can't understand Ebert when he claims that characters in a noir film should not be developed and the plot should not be realistic..?? I suppose you have to be a critic to understand that. This film "feels" like a good old movie from days past when screenplays, characterization and dialog where important, that's why I liked it, and I suppose that may not be "modern" enough for some... I found this to be a good film, with excellent characterizations that work (finally a movie that has 'real' characters we can understand, believe in, sympathize with), a realistic plot and some very good acting (especially De Niro whom I found to be excellent once again). On a lesser note, the photography and soundtrack.