This movie has some rawness and grit, interesting story line, plot, and sub-plots, with Eastwood as a tough no-nonsense detective, Speer, and Reynolds as an ex-cop and Private Eye, Murphy, who butt heads with each other, in Prohibition-era 1933 (last year of Prohibition, in fact), but team up to investigate mob murder and corruption. It also has some funny lines and wittiness. And of course, Eastwood, with his intensity, as well as his piano playing, is in true form as usual.Is this a comedy trying to be a drama or a drama trying to be a comedy. It's not a dramedy; it's too confused to be a successful dramadey. The talent of both stars is squandered in this production that can't decide what it's meant to be. One suspects that it's meant to be satire, but it's a long way from the success of Swift's "A Modest Proposal". That's the risk of satire: the wrong move and the whole effort is thwarted. The costumes are great. The sets are delightful and the cars dazzling. The treat in the movie is Jane Alexander as Reynold's long suffering brilliant secretary. Worth watching just for the pleasure of her company.Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

Many reviewers have missed the mark when judging "City Heat" starring Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds. The film has been snubbed almost since its release in 1984 and that is truly a shame. For what it is worth, "City Heat" is really a very entertaining buddy film. Most (if not all) critics fail to realize "City Heat" not only makes fun of the established stereotypes of its two lead stars, but it does so very well. This is what spoof comedy is when you have 2 of Hollywood's biggest stars spoofing themselves. A wonderful, and truly memorable scene that emphasizes this point is the scene where there is a shootout in the street and Reynold's character is cowardly (or smartly) hiding behind a parked car, while Eastwood's character walks right down the middle of the street blasting everything with a shotgun with no fear of being hit by the baddies. Reynold's reply directly to Eastwood during this is, "So that's all you got to do huh? Walk right down the middle of the street?" Reynolds delivers the line flawlessly and that's just one funny example. Yeah, "City Heat" isn't Academy Award stuff, nor would you shoot it straight to the top of an Eastwood or Reynolds best list. However, it is still very entertaining, funny and often charming too. If I was a fan of either Eastwood or Reynolds and had not seen this because of bad reviews, I'd suggest you give it a legitimate shot with an open mind. You just might be pleasantly surprised like I was.

@_At first, there was a script of one thriller comedy in the frame of the American gangster movies of the 1930s. And when it comes from a writer / director who has the good name of (Blake Edwards) then you have to expect a sweet comedy, a delicious cartoon feel, and some wicked parody too. But this script never saw the light fully, because the man quitted the project quickly, and after a while he changed his name on the credits to (Sam O. Brown) ??!! It is (Edwards)'s only time to do such a thing during a great career of more than 40 movies and TV shows he wrote ! &_(Clint Eastwood) was a big star at the moment. And he was chosen to co-star the movie with the era's other star, and maybe his competitor, (Burt Reynols). Though (Eastwood), who achieved some success since 1971 as a director, wanted to make this movie a something of his own; as if a Dirty Harry in the 1930s, with artsy melancholic sense. You read matters like how he forced the director to put his eyes always in shadows like it's a remake of The Third Man or something! Let alone that he insisted on the typical serious (Eastwood)'s image in a movie that maybe was designed to mock at this very image as a cold blooded, super violent, good guy. To understand the original spoof-driven nature of the movie, just look at the massive street fight where (Eastwood)'s character attacked the entire gang single-handedly to destroy all of them; it's the usual (Eastwood)'s action, however designed as a hurly-burly live-cartoon sketch. I bet, that was (Edwards)' idea, as one of his gifted extravaganzas, or what remained of it here anyway !Therefore when you observe the name of (Joseph Stinson), who wrote (Sudden Impact – 1983) the previous hit of (Eastwood), next to the name of the departed (Edwards), along with your feeling sometimes that (Eastwood)'s scenes seem so (Eastwood)'s; you'll easily understand that it's not quite a coincidence ! By the way, back then, this (Eastwood)'s slight narcissism was hardly noticed, but within no time, it would be more than tangible, especially when he wouldn't act unless in movies directed by him or – at least – directed by his friends like Buddy Van Horn who directed (The Dead Pool – 1988) and (Pink Cadillac – 1989) for him. So that kind of Eastwood by Eastwood condition, which would have him completely later, left its early bad effects on this poor movie !#_(Burt Reynolds) broke his jaw while he was shooting his first scene, the first scene of the movie also, then he got too many medicines along with painkillers, hence the lively star lost 20 KG in no time, and maybe they changed some parts in the script to handle that carefully. So if you doubted that the one who was moving in a wolf disguise was no (Reynolds), then you were probably right !Now we have 3 scripts, or 3 ways to make one movie, or 3 unfinished movies that must be all in one by director (Richard Benjamin). But actually : @ + & + # = *?%!%$%^%#{@! WAW!!, this could be unexpectedly the right formula of success, the secret code of a box office hit or another classic. However, it turned out to be a petty concurrent mishmash !The final result was, at best, one of the violent buddy-cop movies of the 1980s, yet running in the 1930s, and being less enjoyable than its likes. Despite some action comedy and little funny lines, the script looked so disassembled, Eastwood's comedy looked fabricated and tasteless, the time that the 2 stars shared on screen was less than 15 minutes, and then there was that scene where (Reynolds) was talking about the greatness and the difficulty of being a cop; like we're in a serious movie or wannabe one! Basically we didn't even know the reason why (Reynolds)'s character left the force and turned into detective !!I think that the movie's last line is the fairest review it can get : (You'll always be "shorty" to me) as it failed in fulfilling its main promise concerning 2 great icons in one hot action comedy, or making anything perfect anyway. It's simply a case of a movie with too short of everything !

This movie is part of a 3-for-1 DVD set of Clint Eastwood movies. None of them arise above the "B" movie genre.Set in the 1930s, here Clint Eastwood is Lieutenant Speer, normally very laid back, to the point where he can watch others beating each other up with no involvement, until ... they cause his coffee or drink to spill. Then he becomes a fighting machine.Burt Reynolds is his friend and investigator Mike Murphy, who is constantly the butt of "short" jokes next to Eastwood.Other notables include Jane Alexander, Madeline Kahn, and Rip Torn. Plus, the singer Irene Cara of "Flashdance" fame plays a singer Ginny Lee.As a movie, overall, it isn't very good. The story is confusing, almost impossible to figure out who is doing what and for what reason. There are lots of fights and lots of shooting, but hardly anyone gets hit with bullets. But as a dark comedy it works pretty well, for the actors in it.