Lawless - Cinema Review

Lawless makes me increasingly worried about film marketing, as the only reasons i went to see it in the first place were so i could stop seeing the bloody trailer for it everywhere i looked. That said, i don't think the trailer represents it particularly well. I didn't enter the film with low expectations, the promise of Gary Oldman, Tom Hardy and Guy Pearce's fantastic performances definitely sparked some intrigue. I wish i could say director John Hillcoat also drew me in, as the director of one of my favourite films The Road, but i only noticed his contribution in the closing credits.
Some film critic i am.

Thankfully i can say that Lawless is a very good film and if you like any of the actors involved or simply, a good historical crime-drama well told, then i can highly recommend it. I can't measure the setting's and costume's accuracy since i simply don't know history that well, but it works sufficiently to engage you in what feels like a real, developing world. You really notice when the characters leave the dusty, quiet town and enter the significantly larger and modernised inner cities, and similarly whenever characters from either setting enter the other, they blatantly stand out and the film uses this to full effect.

When the youngest Bondurant brother (played by Shia Labeouf...better than you might think) and his friend (Dane Dehaan) enter Chicago attempting to make sales and impress their superiors in the liquor bootlegging business, the aforementioned settings, costumes and cinematography drill in the idea that these guys are way out of their depth and cranks up the tension effectively. On the flipside when Floyd Banner (Gary Oldman) swaggers into Franklin County, where the brothers live, you feel like the devil himself has arrived, and whilst Oldman isn't in the film as much as the persistent trailer suggests, he is masterful in every second that he is.

While it's safe to say Gary Oldman keeps the fear factor tightly by his side, in terms of sheer animosity and seething hatred for a character, Guy Pearce plays the downright slimey Agent Rakes brutally well. A corrupt government officer who brings tyranny to the small town and systematically wades deeper and deeper into dealing with his own dirty work. His hypocritical, uptight, aristocratic mannerisms make him easily detestable but all the more unnerving when he lets free his sinister side, and as the film progresses, his arc, or rather his descent is particularly intense.

Tom Hardy on the other hand is becoming a joy to watch in almost any film, though i wonder if he's trying to create a signature of only playing characters with a humourous verbal tick. It's tempting to say he steals the show but amongst an array of great actors i can only conclude that he is a highlight. Portraying a dangerous and violent thug one minute and a weary but protective father-figure the next, he's a thoroughly engrossing character and will keep you entertained if Labeouf rubs you up the wrong way.

Speaking of whom, i have to say performs well here, and has a clear, meaningful arc throughout the story. Yes he is playing an oafish young guy, awkwardly chasing a girl but it all supports his growth as a character and by the end of the film you have a significantly changed man as he grapples with the harsh realities of his family trade...and if you still don't like the guy, there's a scene where he gets beaten half to death ok?

I would like to say Lawless is flawless but unfortunately it just isn't. It's a tried and tested formula, executed very well but it doesn't bring a great deal new to the table. I suppose being an adaptation from a book based on real events you aren't going to have many bold experimentations happening, but despite this, i feel there are an awful lot of films of a similar nature standing not too far behind. A pitfall it does avoid however is predictability and i can scarcely say more than that without spoiling some of the finer moments.

There are some somewhat dry spells in terms of atmosphere when i feel the film is doing the equivalent of flicking through pages to find a good bit. I was personally disappointed to see a montage towards the later parts of the film, even if i can't imagine a better way to display those events concisely. There is also a rather clichéd expositional voiceover from Labeouf's character at the end of the film which feels more than a little patronising and unnecessary, not to mention out of place when i'm fairly certain the film didn't begin with any narration.

These points don't spoil the film and certainly on a first viewing they can be entirely overlooked, i do wonder however if there isn't a great deal of this film's success riding on the star power (for want of a phrase with reduced cheese) and the fact it features two characters from The Dark Knight Rises and a younger audience favourite for those strange fans of the Transformers movies. Perhaps that's just cynicism talking, i'm not going to let cynicism talk today.

A brief disclaimer here. My film reviews thus far have been dubbed "Cinema" reviews because i understand the cinema experience can alter perceptions of a film and a good cinema film may be different to a good film in general or on dvd say. With that in mind, i apologise for any mistakes i make regarding plot points and character development. I have a pathetically bad memory and don't have the luxury of seeing a film multiple times, but i hope to give you a reasonable idea as to whether a film is worth seeing at a cinema, and i will of course review some films in general/on dvd (at some point).