Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

The first must-see film of the year.

The acting in this movie is really good.

My first title was "I love the 1980s, but not to this extent!". On second thought I found that this is a bit harsh and mean to this movie.It got a fine ground for: a funny revenge story, the kid who beats the monster (or the playful resistant who beats the unjust sheriff), and the suppressed objections against a reign when go off by a hero to overthrow it. However the dealing wasn't as fine.All the time you're asking yourself : where this plot is going to ?! It's nothing but one practical joke after another. I thought that the lead will go and investigate the corruption of the mayor deeply with a game of many disguises, exposing more evidences every step ahead. But sorry. All what we had was just exposing for (Zimmerman Flew and Tyler Knew) and for endless times ! The enemy/the mayor looked so nice and helpless more than menacing or tough which weakened the conflict very. His men were talking more than doing, seeming old and defeated without anything to fight with; so more weakness for the conflict. Actually all of that turned the movie into the lamest, most boring, Robin Hood story ever!Moreover an annoying question : How the young lead could pull off all of these tricks, to sneak into highly guarded places many times without anybody seeing him ?! We didn't have the chance to watch him carefully while doing that. Seriously that could have made some thrilling scenes instead of a torpid sequence of photos! Then the matter of the climax. The mayor was finished anyway so what this last move was going to add ? It looks perfectly goofy. And what's the motive to kill Turk AND opposite to hundreds of witnesses, let alone all of these TV cameras as well??? And after the end, sure that Turk will be prosecuted for deforming the city, so how about bringing back his brother's lost rights ?So by now, it'll be cruel already to talk about things like the role of the heroine and how it was so empty, doing nothing but smooching with the lead, to sound eventually like a supernumerary. For example why she wasn't the mayor's daughter for god's sake?. Or at least a girl from his staff who believes in him then gets sympathetic with Turk's case?!! Anyway, I won't do this scriptwriter's work for him! Simply there had to be a love interest anyway, and they did it…anyway! Generally this script wanted a lot, but truly what it wanted the most was some reformation !The second killer element was the lead himself. (Timothy Hutton) ranged between blank, bland and idiot all the time, missing the charisma and the credibility. He was throwing his good lines badly, acting so uninterestingly like he's in a cold rehearsal. This is a Razzie worthy material folks (to a degree where I suspected it was deliberate !).In totally painful irony, the supporting role of the brother went to the one who got the charisma, the talent and the cuteness (Robert Urich)! This man assured here that he was undoubtedly good actor, and one of the unluckiest too. True that he'll be saved by being cast as the lead role in the TV hit series, and one of my favorites, (Spenser for Hire) in the same year, but to tell you the truth, still (Turk 183!) is his better work as an actor I have ever seen, if not the best, in spite of the fact that his cinematic career was dead and gone after it! It kills me even more when he got nominated for the Razzie of the worst supporting actor for his super performance in here ??, while in the same year (Jon Voight) got nominated for the Oscar of the best actor for his disastrous performance in (Runaway Train) !!!!! This is a mystery for me. A real provocative one !Technically speaking, it's only the editing at the last sequence which celebrated the lead to an exaggerated extent that bothered me, because aside from that the directing was so intense and attractive. The image looked bright and sharp. And there was a sweet lovable spirit all over the movie. Nevertheless, director Bob Clark's name was related to some of the most infamous movies like (Rhinestone – 1984), (Loose Cannons – 1990), and (Baby Geniuses – 1999)??. Well, sometimes the director's taste for not-so-good scripts, while leading his actors clearly bad, can destroy him!Although it got a well-meaning goal, but it isn't well made, having a not well appointed lead. Plus it doesn't stand a chance in front of its competitors in the same year : Back to the Future, Brazil, Mask, Rambo: First Blood Part II, White Nights, The Goonies, and even Summer Rental. But it's still watchable and nice compared to the year's horrible pieces : Rocky IV, Legend, Death Wish 3, and yes.. Runaway Train ! The most interesting thing about this movie is that it was made. In the 1980s there was a room for little goofy and childish movies such as this one. The executives were having the carriage to make a product with no-star, no-nudity, and no-explosion. It is a feel good movie from the 1980s with its marked innocent entertainment. Now, you've got to feel real good about that apart.

I love this movie, despite its flaws. Let me tell you why you will probably at least like it, too.I have been reading through the comments of this movie and find myself agreeing with many of the generally positive and some of the negative comments made by previous posters. This remains to me a lovable movie, and after nearly 25 years, something of a cult classic.What always got me was the basic story of the "dead-beat" younger brother, Jimmy Lynch, played by Timothy Hutton, standing by his tough, elder, FDNY fire-fighting brother, Terry, played by (the very much missed) Robert Urich, who had always taken care of him, but was now himself in need of medical care having been injured, and subsequently depressed, after trying to save a girl from a fire.Terry has been denied benefits and help because he was off-duty and intoxicated. Jimmy goes all the way to NYC Mayor Tyler (Robert Culp), but is rebuffed.Jimmy's inventive and high-profile - if unlawful - one-man campaign to play on the woes of the Mayor's own re-election campaign, and eventually gain public sympathy for his brother's plight, endears him to, and gains the intrigue of, the people and media of NYC, much to the chagrin of the Mayor, and in particular, his staff.From the early "oh no!" and indignation of Terry's plight, to the amusing "Turk 182" campaign, you find yourself gradually getting more and more behind Jimmy, but the "Turk 182" campaign against the Mayor is anonymous and its true motive is still to be revealed. You realise that in order to succeed in publicising his brother's case, Jimmy must reveal his true motives which must also mean revealing himself as "Turk 182", and that will inevitably mean Jimmy having to face consequences - but what consequences exactly?. Aha!By the time you get to the thrilling finale, if you are not rooting for Jimmy Lynch...well you just ought to go and change your name to "Scrooge" and have done with it.You can debate the rights and wrongs of the decision not to give the Terry Lynch character his fire-fighter benefits, but the fact that NYC could take that position, and Jimmy continues to fight it on his brother's behalf, in itself tells you that the decision is perhaps not clear cut, hence the central conflict that the story runs from. Wouldn't really work if if there was no reasoning whatsoever behind it other than "The Mayor and the city are evil and stingy" now, huh? Now would you expect an off-duty Fire fighter to standby in such circumstances where a little girl is trapped in a fire, when the trucks and fire fighters are not there yet, although he's a had few drinks, but isn't fall-down drunk? Clearly the movie takes the sympathetic view that it is a pretty stingy way to treat a man who risked his life, to save a little girl and was injured in the process.This is key to the movie. If you are not going to accept that premise then you may not have sympathy for the central characters and will not enjoy the film as much as those that can and do.No, it's not the greatest film ever made, and yes it is essentially a feel-good movie, a bit flimsy in places, with some dodgy accents (I am not even American, let alone a New Yorker, and I was amused at some of the accents) and it had some thin characterisation of some of the support roles; but that thin characterisation is partly responsible for this movie's greatest asset.That feel-good movie factor you get from this film arises from the empathy for Jimmy and Terry Lynch, and how you find yourself rooting for "Turk 182" and willing him on. The empathy and sense of injustice you feel for the characters would have suffered by having the Mayor and his minions, particularly Peter Boyle's angry detective, having deeper or greyer characters and coming across as at all sympathetic. I think Robert Culp plays the Mayor here perfectly. The character is hardly an evil, sneering Bond villain, and it's left unclear if he is actually even guilty of being anything more than a successful politician, but Culp's performance just leaves you feeling in your bones that the Mayor is "dirty" and probably guilty of something - and he does not therefore warrant any sympathy.I can see that one of the reasons I love this movie is because it is a little bit more black and white than real life - and if it had been more realistic, it simply would not have given me the same level of empathy for the Lynch's sense of injustice and I would not have got the joy out of Jimmy Lynch's antics as "Turk 182" that I did when I first saw it back in circa 1986 - or still got when I last saw it in 2009.The more fairly fleshed character of Terry Lynch may seem pale in comparison to his contemporaries - Tommy Gavin and his buddies from "Rescue Me", but it was a feel-good movie made in 1985, made in mind of the video generation, and aimed generally at a youngish audience. You could take the girlfriend to the movies to see Turk 182 - or better still, rent the video for the couch at home.So relax and enjoy it for what it is, rather than slate it for what it isn't. Get behind "Turk 182", and maybe you'll experience some of the joy that I got out of this movie.

Director Bob Clark ("Porkys," "Murder By Decree," "A Christmas Story") films one of his best ever here. When an off duty fireman (Robert Urich)attempts to save a child from a burning building, he is injured. But due to the fact he had been at a local bar at the time of the fire, the city of New York deny's him his earned and justified Pension. When his younger brother (Timothy Hutton) tries to get some justice for his brother he is rebuffed by everyone including an arrogant Mayor (Robert Culp)of New York. After his brother is blamed and arrested by the police for a minor bit of mischief that he is responsible for, Jimmy Lynch fights back, using a plan that will literally drive the politico nuts. Also stars Peter Boyle as an over the edge cop, and Daren McGavin as a police detective. Kim Catrall is a social worker that wants to help Jimmy in the end. This film is one of those feel good movies, with a lot of good moments and a fine understated moral. With this one Bob Clark is a modern day Aesop.Most definitely worth a watch.

Kim Cattrall looks fabulous. The movie may be old but she was new. There was a short love scene but, unfortunately, there was no nudity.I miss Bob Urich. How can someone so incredibly healthy die so young.The movie plays well--heavy, fake accents and all. The one exception to the enjoyment of this simple fare is the soundtrack. What a god-awful music score. It's like trying to watch a fun movie while sitting next to a calliope. Otherwise, I did enjoy the movie.I'm taking away two stars for the story and to pay for some acting lessons, and two stars must die for the music director's mistake.-Cosmically-Psychic-Bob