Imabelle (Robin Givens) looks back from the bed in a red dress
Film review

A Rage in Harlem

1991 · Directed by Bill Duke · 1h 55m

In a sentenceForest Whitaker seems far too nice to be left unsupervised in this much criminal company

Jackson (Forest Whitaker), Goldy (Gregory Hines) and Imabelle (Robin Givens) have twenty-four hours to outrun the law, outsmart the mob and outshoot the competition. Easy Money (Danny Glover), Gus Parsons (Samm-Art Williams) and Big Kathy (Zakes Mokae) are also part of the tangle, alongside Smitty (T. K. Carter) and Coffin Ed (Stack Pierce). Staying clear of the police is only part of the task: there are also mobsters and armed competitors to contend with, and the deadline leaves little room for delay.

Fi1m review

Bill Duke’s crime comedy earns its laughs chiefly through a cast worth spending time with. The violence sometimes spoils the fun, but Forest Whitaker and Robin Givens give this uneven scramble enough charm to recommend.

Bill Duke’s A Rage in Harlem is an enjoyable crime comedy whose cast makes a persuasive case for forgiving its unevenness. John Toles-Bey and Bobby Crawford adapt a novel by Chester Himes, and the film makes room for broad humour alongside some decidedly bloody business. The difficulty is deciding how lightly to take the latter. Across 115 minutes, the actors repeatedly win us back, although the film asks them to rescue more jokes than it should.

Forest Whitaker plays Jackson with a gentleness that makes the surrounding criminal company seem less inviting. We warmed to him almost at once, because he gives this crowded film somebody whose welfare matters. His charm does not feel like a demand for our approval, and he holds our attention without competing for the biggest effect. That steadiness is useful when so much else is pressing for a laugh or a jolt.

Robin Givens is equally valuable as Imabelle, though her assurance creates a different pleasure. She seems comfortable with the film’s unruliness, and her control keeps the performance from disappearing into it. Gregory Hines as Goldy and Danny Glover as Easy Money help make this a cast we are happy to spend time with. Their appeal carries stretches in which the writing keeps everybody busy without finding much comic surprise.

Toyomichi Kurita’s cinematography and Steven Legler’s production design give the film a polish that helps its busy criminal world hold together. There is care in the look, even when the humour gets coarse. Their work makes the film agreeable to watch without making the people seem respectable. That visual assurance is a substantial virtue, though it can only do so much for a joke that has already worn thin.

Curtiss Clayton’s editing gives the film a briskness we mostly enjoy, though speed cannot repair humour that wears thin. Elmer Bernstein’s score makes less of an impression than the actors, who provide most of the warmth. We would welcome more room for them to let a moment settle. The rush is often enjoyable, but weaker stretches would benefit from less insistence on keeping everything lively.

The bloodshed presents a harder problem than an uneven run of jokes. A crime comedy can be nasty without losing its audience, but it needs some consistency about how much a wound is meant to matter. Here the violence sometimes feels excessive for the amusement it produces. Bill Duke gets such appealing work from the cast that the harsher passages can feel like an interruption, and the humour is not always strong enough to recover.

Against the standards of a comic thriller, this is a good evening with some awkward stretches, carried by people who know how to hold a screen. We would recommend it to anyone already fond of the genre, rather than expect it to convert somebody who dislikes jokes mixed with blood. Go for Forest Whitaker and Robin Givens, and allow for a few laughs that never arrive.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

60
Positive
3
Mixed
1
Negative
2

The reviews lean modestly positive on A Rage in Harlem, with praise clustering around its cast and brisk comic-thriller approach. Supporters find it stylish, fast-moving and funny, with enough energy to make its shifts between crime and comedy entertaining. Forest Whitaker’s charm and Robin Givens’ assured performance draw particular approval. Even the less enthusiastic reviews find something to enjoy in the acting, making the cast the clearest point of agreement.

The spread is wide, however, and the balance of humour and violence divides critics. Two favourable reviews note that the adaptation softens the harsher tone of Chester Himes’ novel. Variety finds the bloodshed excessive and the humour wearing thin, though it credits the cast with keeping the film watchable. Empire is more dismissive, finding a disappointing comic thriller despite Whitaker’s endearing performance and Screamin’ Jay Hawkins’s stage appearance.

Radio Times
★★★★ · Joanna Berry
80

Berry describes the film as a stylish, fast-moving and often humorous thriller. She praises the enjoyable cast, particularly Forest Whitaker’s charming performance.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
3 May 1991 · Kenneth Turan
75*

Turan finds the film exuberant and entertaining, while noting that it softens the source novel’s harsher vision. He especially praises Robin Givens’ lusty, controlled performance as Imabelle.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· GA
70*

The critic finds the film mostly enjoyable, praising its snappy, stylish, fast-paced comedy-thriller approach. They note it is lighter in tone than Chester Himes’ source novel.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
3 May 1991
64*

The page is blocked, so the critic’s verdict cannot be established. No specific praise or complaint is available from the accessible text.

Read the full review →
Variety
1 January 1991 · Variety Staff
40*

The review finds the mix of comedy and violence dubious, though the fine cast keeps the film watchable. It praises Robin Givens’s assured screen presence while criticizing the excessive bloodshed and humor that wears thin.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Angie Errigo
30*

Errigo finds the film a tawdry, disappointing comic thriller that falls short of its promise. She singles out Forest Whitaker’s endearing performance and Screamin’ Jay Hawkins’s stage appearance as bright spots.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is A Rage in Harlem worth watching?
A Rage in Harlem is worth watching for crime-comedy fans who enjoy an appealing cast, and we score it 71 out of 100. Forest Whitaker’s gentleness and Robin Givens’s assurance keep us interested, though the jokes sometimes wear thin and the bloodshed can spoil the fun.
How long is A Rage in Harlem, and what is it rated?
A Rage in Harlem runs 1h 55m. It is a crime and comedy film.
Where can I watch A Rage in Harlem in Malaysia?
A Rage in Harlem is not on any streaming or rental service in Malaysia at the moment. It is available in 1 other country; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.
How violent or frightening is A Rage in Harlem, and is it suitable for children?
A Rage in Harlem carries a US R certificate and contains bloody violence that makes it a poor choice for children. We find some of the bloodshed excessive for the comedy it supports, so squeamish viewers should be cautious despite the cast’s warmth and the broad humour.
How does A Rage in Harlem compare to The Ladykillers?
A Rage in Harlem is the more uneven crime comedy; we recommend The Ladykillers for sharper timing and a surer balance of laughter and threat. The latter builds its comedy around criminals inconvenienced by an apparently harmless landlady, while A Rage in Harlem relies more heavily on its cast to carry a busy criminal scramble.
Is A Rage in Harlem based on a true story or a book?
A Rage in Harlem is adapted from a novel by Chester Himes, with John Toles-Bey and Bobby Crawford writing the adaptation. We recommend it for the performances and crime comedy rather than its relationship to the book, so reading Himes first is not a prerequisite. We make no claim for how faithfully it follows the novel.
What should I watch after A Rage in Harlem?
After A Rage in Harlem, try The Ladykillers (1955, Fi1m 86): A criminal household finds its plans inconvenienced by an apparently harmless landlady. Then Jackie Brown (1997, Fi1m 83): Patiently drawn criminals, persuasive attraction and performers allowed time to breathe; and The Guard (2011, Fi1m 78): A caustic crime comedy whose central performance makes the ugliness bearable.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. The Ladykillers (1955, Fi1m 86)A criminal household finds its plans inconvenienced by an apparently harmless landlady.

  2. Big Deal on Madonna Street (1958) · not reviewed yetAn inept gang attempts a robbery with more appetite than preparation.

  3. Jackie Brown (1997, Fi1m 83)Patiently drawn criminals, persuasive attraction and performers allowed time to breathe.

  4. The Guard (2011, Fi1m 78)A caustic crime comedy whose central performance makes the ugliness bearable.

  5. Wild Tales (2014, Fi1m 83)Six sourly funny stories about people taking their grievances much too far.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever