Reviews provided by RottenTomatoes
Glenn Lovell, San Jose Mercury News: This is the Eastwood of old, and the fact that he can still pull off such heroics tells us how far he had to stretch to play nervous and frail. Read more
Wesley Morris, Boston Globe: Even as it ends in a flurry of absurd plot twists, Blood Work holds you in a vise. Read more
Terry Lawson, Detroit Free Press: For a movie about a heart, this is all saggy flesh and bare bones. Read more
Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: If it's not entirely memorable, the movie is certainly easy to watch. Read more
Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper: [A] strong piece of work. Read more
Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune: Has a lot of the virtues of Eastwood at his best. Read more
A.O. Scott, New York Times: What Blood Work lacks in speed and surprise it almost makes up for in doughty professionalism. Read more
Jan Stuart, Newsday: Blood Work is laughable in the solemnity with which it tries to pump life into overworked elements from Eastwood's Dirty Harry period. Read more
Tom Keogh, Seattle Times: Set to the steady, unassuming rhythm of a procedural mystery, this thriller never loses its taut discipline even during the story's more-chimerical developments. Read more
Eleanor Ringel Gillespie, Atlanta Journal-Constitution: The movie has plenty of twists and surprises. Read more
Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times: You don't know whether to admire the film's stately nature and call it classicism or be exasperated by a noticeable lack of pace. Or both. Read more
Eric Harrison, Houston Chronicle: Clint Eastwood's most accomplished movie in nearly a decade. Read more
Steven Rosen, Denver Post: A vital, exciting work. Read more
Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: A sturdy, if dawdling, old-fashioned adding-up- the-clues mystery that turns out to be one or two notches cleverer than you expect. Read more
Rick Groen, Globe and Mail: Blood Work needs a transfusion... Read more
Philip Wuntch, Dallas Morning News: Although the identity of the action thriller's culprit is painfully evident early in the movie, Mr. Eastwood's direction is skillful enough to keep the suspense percolating. Read more
Ella Taylor, L.A. Weekly: The pacing is glacial, the screenplay is stiff as a board, and things heat up only in the movie's final scenes. Read more
Peter Rainer, New York Magazine/Vulture: It's mostly a pro forma police procedural spiced by a baroque twist that Eastwood doesn't really know what to do with. Read more
Rex Reed, New York Observer: A welcome relief from a summer of freaks, fools and flying saucers. Read more
James Berardinelli, ReelViews: Blood Work is one of those crime thrillers where the filmmakers can't see the forest for the trees. Read more
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: The strength of the picture, directed by Eastwood, is that it has three intersecting story arcs: The investigation, the health issues, and the relationship that builds, step by step. Read more
Charles Taylor, Salon.com: It's not an important picture, and probably not even a memorable one, but I had a good time. Read more
Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: Far-fetched and trite. Read more
Peter Howell, Toronto Star: Clint's aim may not be as straight as it once was, but it's still true. Read more
Mike D'Angelo, Time Out: A perfectly competent potboiler, made with Eastwood's usual professionalism, that ultimately feels rather anemic. Read more
Mike Clark, USA Today: There are certain old friends who are fun to have around, but Blood Work does its best to reduce Clint Eastwood to something like the houseguest you struggle to tolerate after he overstays his welcome. Read more
Todd McCarthy, Variety: Eastwood returns to the crime beat one more time with rudimentary potboiler material. Read more
J. Hoberman, Village Voice: A bracingly no-nonsense, highly professional policier -- as proudly old-fashioned as its curmudgeon hero. Read more
Ann Hornaday, Washington Post: The actors manage to make it all seem plausible enough. Read more
Michael O'Sullivan, Washington Post: It's always nice to see Clint. Read more