Free Fire

Free Fire is an interesting kind of film and I'm not entirely positive I have all that much to say about it. 

Along with my recent review of The Lost City of Z, it comes at a time where we have a lull between the early blockbuster and the official start-of-summer blockbusters.

This one has kinda, sorta had my eye for a while now because of strong early reviews and its interesting premise. Plus I heard some crazy factoid that something like 500,000 rounds of ammo were fired during production. Throw in Brie Larson and Sharlto Copley, and I'll watch your movie. 

In the end, Free Fire ended up being almost exactly what I expected which was a tad disappointing as I was hoping it would blow me away (pun somewhat intended). That doesn't mean it's a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination, but rather one that gets in, does its thing, and gets out, which is admirable too.

Free Fire is definitely for a niche crowd however. The kind that laughs in the face of violence and appreciates some good, dark humor. I'd consider myself a member of that crowd (I belong to many crowds it would seem) and Free Fire, while not directly "up my alley" was still a raucous good time at the movies. Other than the homeless people smoking weed with their dog sitting behind me. No joke. [If you're reading this 16th St Pavilions movie theater: get your s**t together!]

The premise of Free Fire is very straight forward. There are two parties, one of which wants to buy guns, the other of which wants to sell them. They meet and the transaction is going well until it's not and then everyone starts shooting at each other. And that's it (you may be able to see now why I'm having a hard time writing a lot for this one). It's kind of nice to see such a simple plot, but I have to fully admit that I'm not a fan of single scene/location films. I get their whole purpose and I do deeply appreciate the artistry behind them, but they'll just never produce a "classic" film in my eyes. I'd tell you exactly what I don't like about them if I actually knew, but there's just something about being stuck in a single environment for the entirety of a film that I don't enjoy. Who knows? Maybe it's because I get bored? Either way, it's a criticism I have of Free Fire that's completely unfair and I recognize that. For those that have no issue with this type of film making, then please, by all means, ignore this critique. 

Ah fashion. You've come so far...

Not sure why but this picture
makes me laugh almost immediately

Outside of that "personal" issue, the film is well made and lots of fun. It has a good sense of dark humor that's very much in line with a Tarantino film and I found myself laughing a good amount. The action, if you'd want to call it that, is very slow, but that's not a bad thing. Those hoping to see slow motion or John Wick-esque acrobatics will be sorely, sorely disappointed because everyone spends almost the entirety of the film on the ground either ducking for cover or because they got shot in the leg. Free Fire never sells itself as anything different so its understandable going in that there's going to be a lot of people lying down, getting shot and shooting, and yelling over gunfire. Part of that substantial humor is built into this element as eventually many characters begin to move to a state of calmness among the fighting, one even smoking weed like my homeless friends behind me!

The cast of Free Fire is a gem and our main players, Brie Larson, Sharlto Copley, Armie Hammer, and Cillian Murphy, are all outrageous and instantly memorable. Copley in particular is downright hilarious and has some one-liners that I'm sure will become highly repeatable with the cult following this film is sure to gather. Part of it's his South African accent that we all love, but there are genuinely funny character moments from his ego-stroking persona. Murphy, as always, is good too. He's the most level-headed character so there's not much humor for him, but is an important role in the large shootout. Armie Hammer, almost surprisingly, is very engaging in this one as a well-dressed, stoner, badass. His calm demeanor and presence brings its own source of laughs and I think this is the second time I've outright enjoyed him in a film (the other being Man from U.N.C.L.E.). 

And that's about all I have to say about Free Fire. It's a movie worth seeing if you like dark humor, can laugh at violence a bit, want to see an awesome cast, and are okay with "single-locale" films. Even if you're someone like myself who doesn't particularly fit into that last criteria, it's still worth a watch as it's only ~ 90 minutes long and has enough fun and laughs to entertain. 

CONS

• I'm not a fan of single-location films for a few reasons:
• Makes the film feel longer than it is
• Can lead to a film feeling like it's dragging (i.e. not moving forward with it's plot/story)
• You can lose track of certain characters for large chunks of time
• A lot of characters crawling on the ground to get around. Sometimes it was well-added humor, other times it was getting old as you watch it for the 20th time

PROS

• Awesome cast. The core group really stands out. Hammer and Copley are my MVPs
• Darkly funny. Between some one-liners, environmental laughs, and just general approach to violence, this one has a consistent tap on things that shouldn't be funny, but are
• Simple story. Nothing complex about it and allows the film to get right into it
• Good original score
• Fun premise that turns out to be just about what you would expect it to

Rath's Review Score | 7/10