Gangster

This is what I was expecting from Michael Mann’s Public Enemies and I was disappointed. John Hillcoat and Nick Cave and a bunch of littleknown actors created a gangster film from the era of prohibition, where the goal is to portray the characters and their stories, rather than visual epicness (on the contrary, the visuals are rather dull and faded, for some incomprehensible reasons). A super bad villain, blood and brutality, friendship, brotherhood, black humor, feminine beauty and tenderness, and a final massacre. All of this blended together to create 100%-pure genre entertainment of a distinctive character. I vacillated between four and five stars, finally settling on five thanks to the festival atmosphere. [KVIFF] (04.07.2012)

Here we have it. And anyone who says otherwise will get punched in the face by Tom Hardy. Very good prohibition gangster movie with a great cast and visuals, it was a truly aesthetic experience. The sleazy Guy Pearce is one of the year’s best antagonists. (14.12.2012)

A slice of family history that only works in its two hours of runtime when it scores points with good actors and brutal violence, but also forgets the characters. Hardy just grunts and LaBeouf builds an empire out of nothing; it’s got the same feelings as Proposition, copying from everywhere, but with a beautiful signature. (26.09.2012)

Considering how precisely this movie was made, I missed something that would suck me into the story so that it could blow my mind with each new scene. The actors were great, the shots were amazing, the atmosphere of the first half of the 20th century was awesome, but the entire movie falls on small details. For example, I thought that the ending was a farce. And the entire shoot-out was like children meeting in the sandpit and sling-shooting pebbles at each other.  Nobody knows who hit whom, some people are lying on the ground, some aren’t and some people are faking being hit. Really strange. Considering that this movie is so incredibly realistic, I’m lacking some sort of an eye for scenes that should have been key scenes and they were a flop instead. A shame. (02.12.2013)

Brainless, plotless, gutless. A flat gangster film for beginners, which is the same as counterfeit whiskey, has all the necessary ingredients, but its taste lacks any of the sophistication of the original. If some people are satisfied with Hardy with a single grimace, Pearce acting on the verge of tolerability and LaBeouf the same as always, then by all means. I expect more from a prohibition gangster film than the familiar sentimental macho poses... (03.07.2012)

A stylish cinema release and a dreamlike cast in an excellent redneck gangster film capturing a specific sultry atmosphere. Actually, the whole thing only reaches the final twenty minutes, because instead of a build-up, it gradually fizzles out; and that to a complete loss. (20.09.2012)

I have always liked the genre and the sight of the cast that participated in Lawless was reassuring to me. I wasn't even warned by some of the critical reactions from my favorite reviewers. After watching it, however, I'm joining in with the biggest critics. The effort of the crew to shoot something great cannot be overlooked, but only the set design can be accepted without reservation. The casting turned out to be a disaster. Shia LaBeouf is unremarkable and incredibly annoying with his good-natured face. In the relevant genre, he is unquestionably the most annoying protagonist I can think of. Tom Hardy is established in genre cinema as an actor portraying tough guys, including economy of speech. But here, he manages with just one expression throughout, pushing his performance towards the boundaries of caricature. Guy Pearce, with his terrible overacting, in my opinion, crosses the line in his portrayal of the main villain. The other actors only fulfill the expectations we have of typical characters from the Prohibition era. Jessica Chastain looks beautifully corrupt, and Mia Wasikowska is a pure soul, pleasing at least the male audience. The film has a sluggish pace, occasionally interrupting the viewer's lethargy with a drastic scene. The western scheme that John Hillcoat tries to graft onto his film seems inappropriate and leads to WTF scenes like a bloody reckoning while the entire police force passively watches. To sum it up, the first half is boring, and the second gets on your nerves. Overall impression: 40%. (08.01.2021)

At last, today marks the end of the ridiculous prohibition in this country. And so in my opinion there’s no better movie than this to close this glorious chapter in our history. The moonshine in the Bodurant brothers’ jelly jars were capable of turning you blind even back then. Hardy is again almost legendarily awesome ("Hmm..."), Shia is continuing in his career as far as possible from beg robots and I dare say this is the best possible direction, Guy Pearce is a disgustingly slippery swine, Oldman devilishly stylish and Jessica Chastain. Hillcoat superbly layers up the story and period atmosphere, adding just the right amount of rawness. Brass knuckles are now officially the weapon of the year. Cave delivered a superb screenplay and excellent music... simply a movie to warm the heart. (27.09.2012)

Do you love Prohibition? Okay, then. Are you ready for some real bloody carnage? Okay, then. Are you interested in something more than just a bloody slaughter? Then you're in the wrong place. Of course, for those interested in a more comprehensive look at Prohibition, I recommend the series Boardwalk Empire. (09.02.2017)

It is excellently mixed both in terms of characters and style, as well as audiovisual composition. It is clear from the very beginning that it will not be a technically inventive and sophisticated film, but rather a slightly intimate and twisted ride that, in some aspects, reminds of Tarantino in the violence, the antagonist and the dialogues. However, it is a classic, linearly told gangster story about friendship and love during the Prohibition era. Some things may not work as they should or are a bit of a safe bet (the musical score, shootouts where we wouldn't expect them, the final carnage). But that the screenplay is unpredictable, you don’t know what will happen in 10 minutes, and this tells me that this thing certainly deserves high ratings and recognition. It is difficult within the genre to create something original based solely on internal, non-technical attributes of a film. At least partially, they have succeeded here. (06.10.2012)

Three and a half stars. If the script had cared as much about the third (and equally interesting) brother as it did about Jack and Forrest, if Gary Oldman had been given more space, and if the incredibly slimy Guy Pearce hadn't been a simple comic-book caricature but rather a believable villain, it would have been even better. But the atmosphere is very pleasant and, thanks to the music, I am rounding up. (16.02.2013)

A lovable comic book movie that isn't based on a comic book. Wondering why it's a comic book movie? No? Let me tell you. For example, aside from the utterly Bond-esque mega-overacting of the über-villain Guy Pearce, the setting of the scenes (when Mia Wasikowska is there, the sun and gentle breeze caresses her face, while conversely all the Bondurant ranch scenes are shrouded in grey or snow, stroking Hardy's boxer all over the places on his body where it hurts), and the overall explicitness, it's especially the framing, which almost eliminates informative shots, for example. The dialogue sequences, too, virtually nowhere stoop to a shot/countershot scheme, and for the conflict sequences, these are dominated by framing containing both the attacker and his victim in the same frame. The stylized characters and their perfect casting keeps the attention even of those who might not give a shit about the fantastic detail and period fidelity of each film location, the legendary sound, the tame script with which Cave ungracefully buries the otherwise perfect Proposition, and the spectacular direction in the action scenes. After that, you don't even mind the severely mismanaged finale, where no one really knows what to do and they don't quite figure out how to hide it. (27.09.2012)

The second film I’ve seen with a screenplay written by Nick Cave, and I’m satisfied again. A great theme and writing, with a stacked cast, all set in my favorite period of American Prohibition. A safe bet. Who cares that Tom Hardy changed his facial expression twice during the whole film? The film was great from beginning to end, I enjoyed it and it’s certainly not the last time I’ve seen it. (18.08.2016)

I was really looking forward to the movie "Lawless", mainly because my favorite actor Tom Hardy starred in it. He is an actor who is unequivocally underrated because his acting abilities are great, although they have not yet been fully recognized in awards. It was him who again managed to elevate the film "The Dark Knight Rises" to a higher level, similarly to what Heath Ledger accomplished with the previous installment. In the case of the movie "Lawless", he didn't succeed as much, but that is largely due to the screenplay. Nick Cave was inspired by a book based on a true story, a book that depicts the harsh period of prohibition. Of course, I'm talking about the 1930s in America, not about 2012 in the Czech Republic. John Hillcoat, along with his trusted screenwriter and composer, directed a gritty film that does not skimp on blood, the wounds look real, both fist and bullet wounds. Slashing is rarely as bestial as in this case and it truly impressed me. However, the story unfortunately focuses on a group of brothers, each very different, and not all of them will appeal to you. Shia LaBeouf acts well, but his character is simply annoying. Jessica Chastain (my current favorite) acts well, but she has little screen time, Tom Hardy is great, but the goal of the film was probably to show how much the human body can endure. Guy Pierce is incredibly slimy, Gary Oldman is aggressive as rarely seen. All the actors are in the right places, but it still doesn't quite hit the mark. There are themes of love, revenge, and the desire to show that there is more than just one among many, the theme of a proper villain. Perhaps there are too many of these themes. If they were narrowed down a bit, it would turn out better, because this film definitely had the potential for it. As it is, it's just a feud between two gangs that ends quite dramatically. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2013/01/little-ashes-nezapomen-na-me-butter.html (05.03.2013)

A full-blooded prohibition-era gangster flick with a top-notch cast dominated by tough guy Tom Hardy and the psychopathic Guy Pearce. It's quite common within the genre for characters on the other side of the law to be portrayed as ordinary likable characters who actually just want to make things better for the family. Here it's something similar, except that the main "lawman" is an extremely slimy and brooding character, which logically deepens your sympathy for the main anti-heroes. No revolution in the genre takes place, but overall it is a decent contribution to the chamber gangster genre. (09.11.2020)

A movie with great potential, whose cast should be a guarantee of an at least above-average feature. But Lawless is a movie in which the story falls so flat that not even a stellar cast could save it. Key parts of the story seem too hastily and sloppily narrated, while other scenes are completely redundant. It all seems to be just moving around in circles, without getting anywhere in particular. Various parts of the story raise questions that don’t get answered and no one worries about how Shia built all that or what the hell Oldman’s character was there for (getting very little space anyway). And so, it all heads towards a grand finale. I thought the movie could still be saved by it, but what I got was such emotionless nonsense that the 3 stars are fully deserved. (05.02.2013)