Set in an unnamed African country, this is about a young boy who, following the slaughter of his father and brother by government forces, is forced to join rebels led by a local warlord (Idris Elba). A powerful film, for sure, but it is unremittingly grim and violent and I personally found it just too one dimensional - 6/10.
This is the first film actually made by Netflix and, following a limited run at Curzon, it will be screened on Netflix later this month.
This is the story of two young lads who find a cop car they think is abandoned then take it for a joy ride which turns out to have serious consequences. This is a really good little indie thriller that has the feeling of impending doom about it. The two child actors James Freedson-Jacksonare and Hays Wellford are really good and lets face it , what's not to like about Kevin Bacon ?. I'm not sure what they were thinking when they named the movie because it's a naff title but the film itself is well worth a watch.
Just seen Macbeth. Fassbender and Cottilard are great as is Sean Harris and Paddy Considine. I read it for my GCSE's when I didn't appreciate or understand it. It took a while to get into it but beautifully produced/directed. The scene with lady Macbeth and the 'out damned spot' segment is outstanding.
Was off putting when at least 6 people walked out mid film! Not sure if they thought it would be a musical or what. Really surprised. The problem was with them rather than the film!
It' the LFF so going to some films I wouldn't ordinarily get to. This one is a holocaust-set story about a Jewish Auschwitz prisoner who's a 'sonderkommando' (which means he has the job of shepherding the new arrivals from train to, ultimately, ashes).
The lead character is pretty much central to the frame for the whole movie. It's shot on 35mm which means the image is almost a square, and the camera rarely points at anyone other than Saul.
The sound is therefore crucial for letting the audience know what's happening around him. It's quite an astonishing film but an exceptionally difficult watch. It's never as graphic as Schindler's List, but it's equally as disturbing and doesn't have that film's redeeming sequences. It won an award st Cannes and is getting five star ratings across the board, but it's no kind of fun to watch.
This is a movie about a man who is always angry, he doesn't seem to give anyone a chance.
It is one of Robin Williams final movies and watching it seems almost obvious now that he was either one of the greatest actors to live or he was already struggling with life in order to portray the lead character so well.
It is the story of man filled with regret and demons that tear at him and rather than face them he deflects them with anger.
This is until the ever gorgeous Dr (Mila Kunis) gives him a diagnosis that he has 90 minutes to live.
Robin Williams character spends the movie desperately trying to show he still loves his loved one's but battles his anger management issues.
Mila Kunis plays Doctor Mila Kunis in a typical Mila Kunis way.
Peter Dinklage plays the brother of Robin Williams character and does it well in places and not so well in a few others, but it's not really about him.
Robin Williams plays the role so well you can see it is coming from a man with pain and suffering in his heart.
The only time he is not believable is when he tries to smile and there is a scene with some very dodgy CGI.
All in all the movie was delivering a message, life is too short to be angry all the time as you don't know what's coming despite what has already been before.
I welled up in places, I felt emotion during some scenes and at the end I felt that I had been on that same journey with the cast.
8/10 It is a movie I'll remember for the right reasons. It touched me. I would have rated higher however the acting of the supporting cast was not nearly on par with R.Williams or even Mila Kunis!
This film has it's heart in the right place but sadly it fails on too many levels. It does have a few funny moments ( especially the scene in the shop with James Earl Jones ) but not enough to sustain the film. Robin Williams doesn't quite feel right for the role and perhaps with a slightly more prominent lead actor this could have been better.
I hate not finishing films. Once I've started I will very very rarely turn one off even if it's thie biggest pile of shite, and I've seen Sharknado and Sharknado 2:the second one. However, I managed, no I endured half of Southpaw last night before turning it off. Shockingly bad.
Roger Ebert is a remarkable man. Not just because he was probably the most famous film critic in the world but because the last years of his life when he had no lower jaw because it was removed because of cancer yet he still managed to write film reviews and his blog thanks to help from doctors and his wonderfully loving family. This film talks about his frosty relationship with his TV film reviewing partner Gene Siskel and the work he did with directors Russ Meyer and Martin Scorsesi but really this is about the last years of his life and it's very sad. He was a great and prolific writer but not the most natural TV presenter but because of the respect he had among his peers that didn't really matter. RIP Roger Ebert A brilliant documentary.
Anyone seen Black Mass? I thought it was very good but I'm quite surprised that many people are saying it is a boring film. It kept my attention all the way through and I didn't feel it was two hours long. Johnny Depp and Joel Edgerton both played their parts very well. 8/10.
First i have to confess that before watching this i didn't have a clue who NWA was. The Hip Hip / Rap scene passed me by or more accurately i avoided it because i really can't stand rap. F. Gary Gray lazily presumes the audience is already familiar with these people and that annoyed me. I did not have a clue who the members of NWA were and i think that put me at a massive disadvantage when watching this film. The characters aren't the most likable of people. They seemed to spend the majority of the film scowling and arguing about money rather than making music and it this grated on me ( but not as much as the music) . Only in the last half an hour of the film do we actually see any form of compassion or humanity from the band members . It wasn't until the film showed a few real film footage clips near the end did i realise how well they did with the casting as the actors as they really do look like the real artists. Sadly that wasn't enough for me to like this film but i'm sure fans of NWA would totally disagree.
If you start a film review with "I didn't have a clue who NWA were" and "I hate rap" your opinion is already invalid because it's going to be biased. No the filmmaker wasn't going to waste time introducing each character like some kind of reality TV show, it was hard enough fitting the 10 year story into a 2 and a half hours. I don't know anyone else who's given this film anything less than even 7/10 so this review is complete rubbish.
Saw The Martian last night. Robinson Crusue bang up to date. Not totally sure why I enjoyed it so much. For once 3D did add something. Visually as you'd expect it was awesome. Just had a nice feel to the whole thing. 7/10
First i have to confess that before watching this i didn't have a clue who NWA was. The Hip Hip / Rap scene passed me by or more accurately i avoided it because i really can't stand rap. F. Gary Gray lazily presumes the audience is already familiar with these people and that annoyed me. I did not have a clue who the members of NWA were and i think that put me at a massive disadvantage when watching this film. The characters aren't the most likable of people. They seemed to spend the majority of the film scowling and arguing about money rather than making music and it this grated on me ( but not as much as the music) . Only in the last half an hour of the film do we actually see any form of compassion or humanity from the band members . It wasn't until the film showed a few real film footage clips near the end did i realise how well they did with the casting as the actors as they really do look like the real artists. Sadly that wasn't enough for me to like this film but i'm sure fans of NWA would totally disagree.
If you start a film review with "I didn't have a clue who NWA were" and "I hate rap" your opinion is already invalid because it's going to be biased. No the filmmaker wasn't going to waste time introducing each character like some kind of reality TV show, it was hard enough fitting the 10 year story into a 2 and a half hours. I don't know anyone else who's given this film anything less than even 7/10 so this review is complete rubbish.
So because you disagree with my review it was rubbish? My view is invalid because i'm biased? So does that make anyone who likes rap view invalid because they are biased . What nonsense. There are plenty of reviews that gave it less than 70% and they did because it was their opinion which is what a review is - opinion. Just because it's not the same as yours doesn't make it wrong.
First i have to confess that before watching this i didn't have a clue who NWA was. The Hip Hip / Rap scene passed me by or more accurately i avoided it because i really can't stand rap. F. Gary Gray lazily presumes the audience is already familiar with these people and that annoyed me. I did not have a clue who the members of NWA were and i think that put me at a massive disadvantage when watching this film. The characters aren't the most likable of people. They seemed to spend the majority of the film scowling and arguing about money rather than making music and it this grated on me ( but not as much as the music) . Only in the last half an hour of the film do we actually see any form of compassion or humanity from the band members . It wasn't until the film showed a few real film footage clips near the end did i realise how well they did with the casting as the actors as they really do look like the real artists. Sadly that wasn't enough for me to like this film but i'm sure fans of NWA would totally disagree.
If you start a film review with "I didn't have a clue who NWA were" and "I hate rap" your opinion is already invalid because it's going to be biased. No the filmmaker wasn't going to waste time introducing each character like some kind of reality TV show, it was hard enough fitting the 10 year story into a 2 and a half hours. I don't know anyone else who's given this film anything less than even 7/10 so this review is complete rubbish.
So because you disagree with my review it was rubbish? There are plenty of reviews that gave it less than 70% and they did because it was their opinion which is what a review is - opinion. Just because it's not the same as yours doesn't make it wrong.
Whilst I don't agree with him calling your review rubbish he has a point about introducing the characters. Tbf as well they sort of did introduce the characters at the start of the film anyway, short of showing them each being born I'm not sure what else you wanted them to show.
You'll be pleased to know though that rumours are the DVD release will be a 4 hours directors cut, I'm sure there'll be a lot more in depth background of each of them in that version.
First i have to confess that before watching this i didn't have a clue who NWA was. The Hip Hip / Rap scene passed me by or more accurately i avoided it because i really can't stand rap. F. Gary Gray lazily presumes the audience is already familiar with these people and that annoyed me. I did not have a clue who the members of NWA were and i think that put me at a massive disadvantage when watching this film. The characters aren't the most likable of people. They seemed to spend the majority of the film scowling and arguing about money rather than making music and it this grated on me ( but not as much as the music) . Only in the last half an hour of the film do we actually see any form of compassion or humanity from the band members . It wasn't until the film showed a few real film footage clips near the end did i realise how well they did with the casting as the actors as they really do look like the real artists. Sadly that wasn't enough for me to like this film but i'm sure fans of NWA would totally disagree.
If you start a film review with "I didn't have a clue who NWA were" and "I hate rap" your opinion is already invalid because it's going to be biased. No the filmmaker wasn't going to waste time introducing each character like some kind of reality TV show, it was hard enough fitting the 10 year story into a 2 and a half hours. I don't know anyone else who's given this film anything less than even 7/10 so this review is complete rubbish.
So because you disagree with my review it was rubbish? There are plenty of reviews that gave it less than 70% and they did because it was their opinion which is what a review is - opinion. Just because it's not the same as yours doesn't make it wrong.
Whilst I don't agree with him calling your review rubbish he has a point about introducing the characters. Tbf as well they sort of did introduce the characters at the start of the film anyway, short of showing them each being born I'm not sure what else you wanted them to show.
You'll be pleased to know though that rumours are the DVD release will be a 4 hours directors cut, I'm sure there'll be a lot more in depth background of each of them in that version.
First i have to confess that before watching this i didn't have a clue who NWA was. The Hip Hip / Rap scene passed me by or more accurately i avoided it because i really can't stand rap. F. Gary Gray lazily presumes the audience is already familiar with these people and that annoyed me. I did not have a clue who the members of NWA were and i think that put me at a massive disadvantage when watching this film. The characters aren't the most likable of people. They seemed to spend the majority of the film scowling and arguing about money rather than making music and it this grated on me ( but not as much as the music) . Only in the last half an hour of the film do we actually see any form of compassion or humanity from the band members . It wasn't until the film showed a few real film footage clips near the end did i realise how well they did with the casting as the actors as they really do look like the real artists. Sadly that wasn't enough for me to like this film but i'm sure fans of NWA would totally disagree.
If you start a film review with "I didn't have a clue who NWA were" and "I hate rap" your opinion is already invalid because it's going to be biased. No the filmmaker wasn't going to waste time introducing each character like some kind of reality TV show, it was hard enough fitting the 10 year story into a 2 and a half hours. I don't know anyone else who's given this film anything less than even 7/10 so this review is complete rubbish.
So because you disagree with my review it was rubbish? There are plenty of reviews that gave it less than 70% and they did because it was their opinion which is what a review is - opinion. Just because it's not the same as yours doesn't make it wrong.
Whilst I don't agree with him calling your review rubbish he has a point about introducing the characters. Tbf as well they sort of did introduce the characters at the start of the film anyway, short of showing them each being born I'm not sure what else you wanted them to show.
You'll be pleased to know though that rumours are the DVD release will be a 4 hours directors cut, I'm sure there'll be a lot more in depth background of each of them in that version.
Yep, played on Thursday, with David Lindley a very talented multi musician.
I've seen clips. Reid is wearing a kind of military style white crocheted hat and the drummer takes a huge toke of a joint a split second before his cue. It was a track from River, I believe. Might have been the song Dean.
First i have to confess that before watching this i didn't have a clue who NWA was. The Hip Hip / Rap scene passed me by or more accurately i avoided it because i really can't stand rap. F. Gary Gray lazily presumes the audience is already familiar with these people and that annoyed me. I did not have a clue who the members of NWA were and i think that put me at a massive disadvantage when watching this film. The characters aren't the most likable of people. They seemed to spend the majority of the film scowling and arguing about money rather than making music and it this grated on me ( but not as much as the music) . Only in the last half an hour of the film do we actually see any form of compassion or humanity from the band members . It wasn't until the film showed a few real film footage clips near the end did i realise how well they did with the casting as the actors as they really do look like the real artists. Sadly that wasn't enough for me to like this film but i'm sure fans of NWA would totally disagree.
If you start a film review with "I didn't have a clue who NWA were" and "I hate rap" your opinion is already invalid because it's going to be biased. No the filmmaker wasn't going to waste time introducing each character like some kind of reality TV show, it was hard enough fitting the 10 year story into a 2 and a half hours. I don't know anyone else who's given this film anything less than even 7/10 so this review is complete rubbish.
So because you disagree with my review it was rubbish? My view is invalid because i'm biased? So does that make anyone who likes rap view invalid because they are biased . What nonsense. There are plenty of reviews that gave it less than 70% and they did because it was their opinion which is what a review is - opinion. Just because it's not the same as yours doesn't make it wrong.
Yawn at the simplistic 'it's invalid because you disagree' argument. I'm not saying you're not entitled to your opinion but if you're going to go to the effort of writing film reviews and rating them, at least do it from an objective standpoint. I would never start a review on Star Wars but saying "I hate Star Wars" because the review will never be fair from that point on. If you don't like hip hop then cool, that truly is your opinion, but make the review about how good the film is, not how much you like the music genre that influenced the film. Anyone with even basic knowledge of NWA would admit that the film is a moving, and accurate portrayal of the group and era. 4/10 is laughable.
First i have to confess that before watching this i didn't have a clue who NWA was. The Hip Hip / Rap scene passed me by or more accurately i avoided it because i really can't stand rap. F. Gary Gray lazily presumes the audience is already familiar with these people and that annoyed me. I did not have a clue who the members of NWA were and i think that put me at a massive disadvantage when watching this film. The characters aren't the most likable of people. They seemed to spend the majority of the film scowling and arguing about money rather than making music and it this grated on me ( but not as much as the music) . Only in the last half an hour of the film do we actually see any form of compassion or humanity from the band members . It wasn't until the film showed a few real film footage clips near the end did i realise how well they did with the casting as the actors as they really do look like the real artists. Sadly that wasn't enough for me to like this film but i'm sure fans of NWA would totally disagree.
If you start a film review with "I didn't have a clue who NWA were" and "I hate rap" your opinion is already invalid because it's going to be biased. No the filmmaker wasn't going to waste time introducing each character like some kind of reality TV show, it was hard enough fitting the 10 year story into a 2 and a half hours. I don't know anyone else who's given this film anything less than even 7/10 so this review is complete rubbish.
So because you disagree with my review it was rubbish? My view is invalid because i'm biased? So does that make anyone who likes rap view invalid because they are biased . What nonsense. There are plenty of reviews that gave it less than 70% and they did because it was their opinion which is what a review is - opinion. Just because it's not the same as yours doesn't make it wrong.
Yawn at the simplistic 'it's invalid because you disagree' argument. I'm not saying you're not entitled to your opinion but if you're going to go to the effort of writing film reviews and rating them, at least do it from an objective standpoint. I would never start a review on Star Wars but saying "I hate Star Wars" because the review will never be fair from that point on. If you don't like hip hop then cool, that truly is your opinion, but make the review about how good the film is, not how much you like the music genre that influenced the film. Anyone with even basic knowledge of NWA would admit that the film is a moving, and accurate portrayal of the group and era. 4/10 is laughable.
4 out of 10 is not laughable it's exactly what I rated it . The reason I said I didn't like rap was a caviate as to why I gave it a bad rating. In hindsight I would have a avoided it like the plague it but sadly I didnt. Reviews aren't all about what you find good about a film. I found very little about this to compliment. You did and that's fine.
Just got in from seeing Suffragette. Oh dear, what a missed opportunity. With such an important topic and the lead character supposedly coming from inner city London, this film, to be successful, should have been raw and wrenching your emotions. It failed on both counts.
The problem was twofold a) the film got the Hollywood treatment. I know films have to make money but to totally steal it's soul was criminal, and, b) it was miscast. Messrs Mulligan, Duff and Wishaw always came across as middle class actors trying to 'do cockney' (Duff does have working class roots but you wouldn't know it from this.). The only two plus points were Bonham-Carter and the actual black and white footage at the end which was the only point I had to pretend that there was something in my eye.
I'm disappointed and a bit angry with this treatment of the Suffragette story. If it gets nominated for Oscars I'll be beside myself.
Just got in from seeing Suffragette. Oh dear, what a missed opportunity. With such an important topic and the lead character supposedly coming from inner city London, this film, to be successful, should have been raw and wrenching your emotions. It failed on both counts.
The problem was twofold a) the film got the Hollywood treatment. I know films have to make money but to totally steal it's soul was criminal, and, b) it was miscast. Messrs Mulligan, Duff and Wishaw always came across as middle class actors trying to 'do cockney' (Duff does have working class roots but you wouldn't know it from this.). The only two plus points were Bonham-Carter and the actual black and white footage at the end which was the only point I had to pretend that there was something in my eye.
I'm disappointed and a bit angry with this treatment of the Suffragette story. If it gets nominated for Oscars I'll be beside myself.
Gutted to hear this too be honest, I wanted to see this, I love a bit of history, this film took a bit of a slating on IMDB, shame they couldn't have done the lead character justice with a decent portrayal.
Just got in from seeing Suffragette. Oh dear, what a missed opportunity. With such an important topic and the lead character supposedly coming from inner city London, this film, to be successful, should have been raw and wrenching your emotions. It failed on both counts.
The problem was twofold a) the film got the Hollywood treatment. I know films have to make money but to totally steal it's soul was criminal, and, b) it was miscast. Messrs Mulligan, Duff and Wishaw always came across as middle class actors trying to 'do cockney' (Duff does have working class roots but you wouldn't know it from this.). The only two plus points were Bonham-Carter and the actual black and white footage at the end which was the only point I had to pretend that there was something in my eye.
I'm disappointed and a bit angry with this treatment of the Suffragette story. If it gets nominated for Oscars I'll be beside myself.
Gutted to hear this too be honest, I wanted to see this, I love a bit of history, this film took a bit of a slating on IMDB, shame they couldn't have done the lead character justice with a decent portrayal.
Ok, good luck with the film reviews. 4/10 is laughable though.
There are plenty of reviews I don't agree with in this thread, and I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone tells me Sicario is overrated! But I rarely argue; it's rare for someone to be out-and-out wrong as it's opinion based. In this instance, Beds is representative of a huge amount of potential viewers, and if he feels the characterisation wasn't good enough to convey who they were, or the story wasn't engaging enough to transcend the music divide, I bet he's not alone. He doesn't write reviews particularly objectively because he doesn't need to. If you read enough you'll know if you have a similar take as him or not.
PS I certainly wouldn't forgive bad characterisation because of the constraints of the running time.
For me, honest and forthright reviews are always very welcome. It's a very subjective area and views will always differ - sometimes radically and there is no 'right or wrong' ratings.There are some film critics whom I respect but with whom I sometimes, rightly or wrongly, strongly disagree.
In general terms, it's always good to hear what people think of a film and to put it into the mixer.
Well I'm going to see 'Compton' tomorrow, personally I think NWA are a bunch of dicks but I expect to enjoy the film. I like true life stories of how people have fought against whatever has been put in there way & strived to success. As you will have worked out I can't stand rap but 9 Mile was an awesome film, I think Eminem is complete twat but I can appreciate & respect where he has come from & the work he has put in to get where he is. Will share my opinion on the NWA film after watching
Well I'm going to see 'Compton' tomorrow, personally I think NWA are a bunch of dicks but I expect to enjoy the film. I like true life stories of how people have fought against whatever has been put in there way & strived to success. As you will have worked out I can't stand rap but 9 Mile was an awesome film, I think Eminem is complete twat but I can appreciate & respect where he has come from & the work he has put in to get where he is. Will share my opinion on the NWA film after watching
Saw this Korean jewel of a film at the London Film Festival called Assassination. Three people picked for an assassination mission and are in turn being hunted themselves. Set during Second World War but over in the Pacific theatre so different than our usual view of the period. Beautifully shot, very tense, wonderful action but not over kill. Like a foreign Tarantino film and so many little twists make this a delightful affair. if you can find this showing any where I really recommend it. 8/10
Comments
Set in an unnamed African country, this is about a young boy who, following the slaughter of his father and brother by government forces, is forced to join rebels led by a local warlord (Idris Elba). A powerful film, for sure, but it is unremittingly grim and violent and I personally found it just too one dimensional - 6/10.
This is the first film actually made by Netflix and, following a limited run at Curzon, it will be screened on Netflix later this month.
Cop Car
This is the story of two young lads who find a cop car they think is abandoned then take it for a joy ride which turns out to have serious consequences.
This is a really good little indie thriller that has the feeling of impending doom about it. The two child actors James Freedson-Jacksonare and Hays Wellford are really good and lets face it , what's not to like about Kevin Bacon ?.
I'm not sure what they were thinking when they named the movie because it's a naff title but the film itself is well worth a watch.
7 out of 10
Was off putting when at least 6 people walked out mid film! Not sure if they thought it would be a musical or what. Really surprised. The problem was with them rather than the film!
It' the LFF so going to some films I wouldn't ordinarily get to. This one is a holocaust-set story about a Jewish Auschwitz prisoner who's a 'sonderkommando' (which means he has the job of shepherding the new arrivals from train to, ultimately, ashes).
The lead character is pretty much central to the frame for the whole movie. It's shot on 35mm which means the image is almost a square, and the camera rarely points at anyone other than Saul.
The sound is therefore crucial for letting the audience know what's happening around him. It's quite an astonishing film but an exceptionally difficult watch. It's never as graphic as Schindler's List, but it's equally as disturbing and doesn't have that film's redeeming sequences. It won an award st Cannes and is getting five star ratings across the board, but it's no kind of fun to watch.
This is a movie about a man who is always angry, he doesn't seem to give anyone a chance.
It is one of Robin Williams final movies and watching it seems almost obvious now that he was either one of the greatest actors to live or he was already struggling with life in order to portray the lead character so well.
It is the story of man filled with regret and demons that tear at him and rather than face them he deflects them with anger.
This is until the ever gorgeous Dr (Mila Kunis) gives him a diagnosis that he has 90 minutes to live.
Robin Williams character spends the movie desperately trying to show he still loves his loved one's but battles his anger management issues.
Mila Kunis plays Doctor Mila Kunis in a typical Mila Kunis way.
Peter Dinklage plays the brother of Robin Williams character and does it well in places and not so well in a few others, but it's not really about him.
Robin Williams plays the role so well you can see it is coming from a man with pain and suffering in his heart.
The only time he is not believable is when he tries to smile and there is a scene with some very dodgy CGI.
All in all the movie was delivering a message, life is too short to be angry all the time as you don't know what's coming despite what has already been before.
I welled up in places, I felt emotion during some scenes and at the end I felt that I had been on that same journey with the cast.
8/10 It is a movie I'll remember for the right reasons. It touched me.
I would have rated higher however the acting of the supporting cast was not nearly on par with R.Williams or even Mila Kunis!
The great thing about movies however is whether you connect with them.
I enjoyed the movie as I was touched by it and my opinion therefore differs to those who weren't as connected.
Had I not been a 5 or 6/10 would probably have been more appropriate.
Life itself
Roger Ebert is a remarkable man. Not just because he was probably the most famous film critic in the world but because the last years of his life when he had no lower jaw because it was removed because of cancer yet he still managed to write film reviews and his blog thanks to help from doctors and his wonderfully loving family.
This film talks about his frosty relationship with his TV film reviewing partner Gene Siskel and the work he did with directors Russ Meyer and Martin Scorsesi but really this is about the last years of his life and it's very sad.
He was a great and prolific writer but not the most natural TV presenter but because of the respect he had among his peers that didn't really matter. RIP Roger Ebert
A brilliant documentary.
9 out of 10
7/10
You'll be pleased to know though that rumours are the DVD release will be a 4 hours directors cut, I'm sure there'll be a lot more in depth background of each of them in that version.
He gave it a try and didnt enjoy it.
It's personal taste afterall.
In hindsight I would have a avoided it like the plague it but sadly I didnt. Reviews aren't all about what you find good about a film. I found very little about this to compliment.
You did and that's fine.
Just got in from seeing Suffragette. Oh dear, what a missed opportunity. With such an important topic and the lead character supposedly coming from inner city London, this film, to be successful, should have been raw and wrenching your emotions. It failed on both counts.
The problem was twofold a) the film got the Hollywood treatment. I know films have to make money but to totally steal it's soul was criminal, and, b) it was miscast. Messrs Mulligan, Duff and Wishaw always came across as middle class actors trying to 'do cockney' (Duff does have working class roots but you wouldn't know it from this.). The only two plus points were Bonham-Carter and the actual black and white footage at the end which was the only point I had to pretend that there was something in my eye.
I'm disappointed and a bit angry with this treatment of the Suffragette story. If it gets nominated for Oscars I'll be beside myself.
PS I certainly wouldn't forgive bad characterisation because of the constraints of the running time.
In general terms, it's always good to hear what people think of a film and to put it into the mixer.