Not his best, but it's still an Eastwood

Rating: 6/10 (4 November 2003)

Yes, this movie is too long and could certainly benefit by being further edited down to 90 or 100 minutes. However, my main disappointment comes from the shaky premise on which the whole film is based. I don't want to write a spoiler--you'll see for yourself, when you see the film.
Even though I was disappointed, I still enjoyed those inimitable little Eastwood touches that occurred every 20 minutes or so. He can get right to the border of sentimentality (or sometimes outright absurdity) and never quite lose his balance. I relish those moments more than anything about Clint Eastwood's films, and they're enough to keep me seeing them despite any inadequacies of plot, characterization, or motivation.