I was shocked when I looked at the reviews for "The Rookie". It sounded like a decent cop film...but oh my goodness did it suck...and after more than 20,000 reviews on IMDb I cannot recall saying that a movie sucked before...but this one sure did!The first half of the film isn't bad. In many ways it's like a Dirty Harry Film. Sure, he's in Los Angeles instead of San Francisco and is working grand theft auto duty instead of homicide but otherwise it feels like a Dirty Harry film...especially when Pulovski (Clint Eastwood) has his partner killed early in the story. Pulovski vows to destroy the man behind this...a nasy guy played by Raoul Julia. But to do so, he's stuck breaking in Ackerman (Charlie Sheen)...a rookie.Up until Pulovski gets kidnapped, the story wasn't bad at all. Then, I can only assume the studio hired chimps to finish writing the story. Instead of making any sense at all, the story simply degraded to a juvenile story with a bazillion dollars spent on special effects and explosions. Here are just a few of the incredibly inane and awful moments that made by head ache:Ackerman is shot from about three feet away with what looks like a .357 Magnum handgun. He's shaken up but just fine because he's wearing a bullet-proof vest!! His ribs should have been shattered and there should have been internal bleeding...if he was lucky!Ackerman goes into a bar with about 60 nasty gang members and proceeds to beat them up en masse. Then, he lights the place on fire. There never are any repercussions for this and by the end of the movie, Ackerman is STILL on the police force. Pulovski is handcuffed into a chair and so the psychotic killer lady decides this is the perfect time to have sex with him. Mmmm...yeah.Ackerman realizes his wife is in the house and in danger. So, he just drives his motorcycle THROUGH the door and he and the cycle seem just fine!After Ackerman rescues Pulovski, they drive a Mercedes through the warehouse and out a window from what looks like the 3rd or 4th floor...and are just fine when they land!I could go on and on...but you have the general idea. Tons of stupid and impossible stunts and everything works out just find by the end of the film. Overall, a brain-numbingly bad film...perhaps the worst of Eastwood's career.

So, I hear they don't write interesting roles for women anymore these days? Maybe it's not patriarchy, but just a general lack of ideas. This film doesn't offer much - it's packed with action, but this one rape scene is a showstopper. Yes, it's a dominating woman, but not really PC. That's why I love it.

I really wanted to like this movie because I'm a huge fan of Sheen and Eastwood. I thought the combination of the two would make for a very entertaining action flick. Unfortunately, I was wrong.To me the whole thing felt like a random collection of individual scene ideas mashed together with little to no flow or adhesiveness. That, coupled with a script that doesn't allow Eastwood to go two sentences without a forced, usually unfunny joke, left me scratching my head as to what he was doing with this movie.There were so many hints of "Dirty Harry", but they were abbreviated by campy dialogue and banter. This made Clint's character hard to pin down in my opinion. The action wasn't too bad, but the music paired with it in most sequences made them feel slow and boring. There was no intensity or accelerated pace provided by the music choices.Overall I have to say the explosions were great, dialogue was awful, and any good acting in the film comes only from the top stars. Don't waste your time on this one.

Clint Eastwood is in a class by himself. There are not many actors that can act and direct. This movie, The Rookie, is a classical example of Clint's ability to act and direct. Whether its a western or more urban such as Dirty Harry in San Frsncisco or Wes Boc in New Orleans or a Texas Ranger in A Perfect Day chasing after a hardened criminal, Kevin Costner, who's kidnapped a 7 year old boy whose mother is a Jehovah's Witness. To attack the script and the directing and using those as a means to ridicule Mr. Eastwood as an actor and a director is wrongheaded thinking. Clint Eastwood is an American Icon. By deriding Clint Esstwood one is attacking a shining example of hard work and dedication to ones work--in this case acting.One should view this movie for the entertainment value that the actors involved brought to us. The one actor who really struggled through this movie was Raul Julie who was struggling with his liver disease. Actors are professional and enjoy bringing us there trade for our enjoyment.