Lawless

Have you ever seen a movie that is great almost entirely because of its cast? Meaning that the story is really nothing too special, but the performances that the actors and actresses bring to their parts make it special.

Lawless is a prime example of this phenomenon. It is set in America in 1931, during the prohibition era. It tells the true story of the Bondurant brothers who essentially own the moonshine business in their respective region. Over the course of the movie, several incidents happen and the law begins to crack down on them. 

Does this sound highly appealing to you? Does it sound exciting?

I agree, it didnt sound that interesting to me either. In fact, after mediocre reviews began to flow in for Lawless I lowered my expectations significantly. It sounded like it would be kind of boring, poorly put together, and not be unique. 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I love going to the movies almost every week. If I were not writing Rath's Reviews, I would have most likely skipped out on this one, and after seeing it I can say that would have been a damn cryin` shame. 

Shia LaBeouf using about half of the available hair-gel reserves
in the western United States...

Gary Oldman's gangster lean is fierce...too bad his character
has almost no relevance in the movie.

As I said earlier, Lawless's story is nothing that is particularly riveting. Now, dont get me wrong, it's not boring by any means. In fact, it is shockingly violent; the movie has a significant amount of the crimson liquid that squirts, bursts, and flows throughout its duration. But this movie works because of one simple reason: the absolutely stellar cast. Shia LaBeouf is already a total superstar and in my opinion, the kid has some serious acting chops. I think it's safe to say that sometime in his acting career he will be giving an Oscar acceptance speech. Not for Lawless mind you, but somewhere in the future. Gary Oldman appears in the film as well, and he is great...for the 5 minutes he is on screen. I am confused as to why the movie paid so much to have him (I imagine he costs quite the pretty penny these days) when he played such a small role. When he is first introduced, the audience is given the feeling that he is a central character to the main plot. Nope. He's basically just a gangster that inspires Shia LaBeouf's character to strive for more with their moonshine business. And then he starts doing business with them. That's it. If I had to voice my biggest complaint about the movie, it would be that Gary Oldman's plot never felt completed. 

Now that's a bad haircut. I dare someone to get it.

So who is the star of the show? Who is the scene stealer? Well, I have two actors for your answer! Tom "Beefcake" Hardy is fantastic just coming off his role as the uber-iconic villain, Bane. At times he comes across as a simpleton with his long accent and unresponsive nature, but if you thought Bane was badass, you havent seen anything until you see Hardy's Forrest Bondurant. It's almost comical at times just how much pain he endures and how much he dishes out. 

And the other fun performance? 

Guy Pearce as the villain, Charlie Rakes. Rakes is some big time Chicago cop (or agent, or something), but he acts like a whiny little girl...that has the ability to strike like a cobra. His character wears male perfume, dresses to the nines, wears ridiculously tight leather gloves that match his outfit, always has a bowtie, and features what might be the worst haircut ever. But the performance that Pearce gives makes us hate this guy. Some movie villains I respect, others I could care less about. But this one? I hated him. My opinion was that he had to die, he was just such scum. Kudos to Pearce.

"Calm down doctor! Now's not the time for fear. That comes later."

"Or perhaps he's wondering why someone would shoot a man
before throwing him out of a plane."

"Oh you think darkness is your ally. But you merely adopted the dark;
I was born in it, molded by it."

"Ah, yes...I was wondering what would break first...
Your spirit, or your body?"

"What a lovely, lovely voice."

"Yes. The Fire rises."

"You don't fear death...you welcome it. Your punishment must be more severe."

"When it is done and Gotham is ashes, then you have my
permission to die."

Ah...gotta love Bane quotes. Try using one in your
day-to-day convos! It's a fun game. 

You may noticed that I only really talked about the cast for this review of Lawless. And there's a reasoning behind that: it is the only thing that needs to be talked about. Put simply, Lawless would be horribly average, probably a 4-6/10 Rath's Review Score, without its cast. It has an average story, average dialogue, average filming...but it's that superb cast that elevates it to a little more glory than it deserves and makes it more enjoyable than I had expected. 

If you have a couple extra hours to kill this Labor Day weekend, you really can't go wrong with Lawless. 

Pros:

• The cast. Shia LaBeouf is fantastic and Hardy and Pearce steal the show and are very fun to watch
• Surprisingly bloody and violent. I usually go into movies knowing their MPAA rating, but I didnt remember to catch the one for Lawless. So needless to say when F-bombs started being thrown and blood started spurting, I was shocked. Good choice to make it R-rated
• Some of the camera shots of the wilderness and nature are really beautiful 
• Tells the story logically for the most part and it wraps up two out of its three plots

Cons:

• Gary Oldman is a big enough actor to where you think he is going to be more relevant. In Lawless, he is not. His plot is the one of the three that I did not think was wrapped up/tied in well
• The pacing is sometimes very slow. It clocks in at 115 minutes but feels like 140 or 160 minutes
• Basically an average story that plays out almost how you would expect it to

Rath's Review Score: 7.5/10