IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,3/10
52.493
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Boston, 1978: Ein Treffen zweier Gangs in einer verlassenen Lagerhalle verwandelt sich in ein Feuergefecht und ein Spiel des Überlebens.Boston, 1978: Ein Treffen zweier Gangs in einer verlassenen Lagerhalle verwandelt sich in ein Feuergefecht und ein Spiel des Überlebens.Boston, 1978: Ein Treffen zweier Gangs in einer verlassenen Lagerhalle verwandelt sich in ein Feuergefecht und ein Spiel des Überlebens.
- Auszeichnungen
- 3 Gewinne & 9 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I have never written a review on IMDb, but I decided to because I was so annoyed while watching this movie last night after reading the featured glowing user review.
I don't need a fantastic action movie to make me happy. I just need a good movie. Drama, thriller, comedy, action, you name it: so long as it's good.
This movie is only slightly above average. It failed to make me care about any of the characters, and I'd probably need two hands to count the number of times I sat in the theater thinking to myself "pick up the pace!", "Hurry up!", "oh, they missed AGAIN?", and "WHEN is something going to HAPPEN?"
I honestly went in quite excited for a quirky, norm-defying flick based around the interactions of several characters. You have a star- studded cast: Cilian Murphy, Brie Larson, Sharlto Copley; it will be DECENT at least, right?
No. The characters have no depth. The actors play their characters well, but it doesn't feel like these are people that could actually exist. It just feels like you're looking at a drawing an artist put together of imaginary characters, who only exist on that paper. Most of the time the characters simply yell at each other from different positions in the room and then fire shots that fail to hit anything from their seemingly endless reserves of ammo. If they're gun dealers/criminals, why can't they shoot? Why do they fire with wild abandon instead of aiming?
Even the setup for the situation is illogical, which is another thing that irritated me. No one can accomplish anything unless it serves the plot. Everyone can fire bullets everywhere BUT their target, until it serves the plot. It's exasperating.
If you're a fan of movies which are paced far too slow, leave obvious logical holes in order to advance the plot, have exasperatingly stupid and drawn-out gunfights, and leave you feeling unfulfilled, irritated, and wondering why you wasted 90 minutes of your time when you could have been watching something better, this is the movie for you. If not, then avoid it.
I don't need a fantastic action movie to make me happy. I just need a good movie. Drama, thriller, comedy, action, you name it: so long as it's good.
This movie is only slightly above average. It failed to make me care about any of the characters, and I'd probably need two hands to count the number of times I sat in the theater thinking to myself "pick up the pace!", "Hurry up!", "oh, they missed AGAIN?", and "WHEN is something going to HAPPEN?"
I honestly went in quite excited for a quirky, norm-defying flick based around the interactions of several characters. You have a star- studded cast: Cilian Murphy, Brie Larson, Sharlto Copley; it will be DECENT at least, right?
No. The characters have no depth. The actors play their characters well, but it doesn't feel like these are people that could actually exist. It just feels like you're looking at a drawing an artist put together of imaginary characters, who only exist on that paper. Most of the time the characters simply yell at each other from different positions in the room and then fire shots that fail to hit anything from their seemingly endless reserves of ammo. If they're gun dealers/criminals, why can't they shoot? Why do they fire with wild abandon instead of aiming?
Even the setup for the situation is illogical, which is another thing that irritated me. No one can accomplish anything unless it serves the plot. Everyone can fire bullets everywhere BUT their target, until it serves the plot. It's exasperating.
If you're a fan of movies which are paced far too slow, leave obvious logical holes in order to advance the plot, have exasperatingly stupid and drawn-out gunfights, and leave you feeling unfulfilled, irritated, and wondering why you wasted 90 minutes of your time when you could have been watching something better, this is the movie for you. If not, then avoid it.
In 1970s Boston a contingent of IRA men schedule a meeting with arms sellers in a derelict factory only to become embroiled in an argument that finishes in a shoot-out
One constantly thinks that director Ben Wheatley is on the brink of great things. With FREE FIRE you might have thought he'd hit the international target. Set in America ( Though amazingly it's shot in Brighton. England ) and classed as a blackly comical thriller in the style of Tarantino you'd have thought it might have done better at the box office but fails slightly on two levels
Firstly Tarantino is a brand name and unless your name is Quentin Tarantino it's a mistake with hindsight to emulate this style of film making because you're just going to slip in to parody. In fact even Tarantino parodies Quentin Tarantino these days with very mediocre results. You want to pitch a film ? Then please don't use the initials QT
!!!! SUGGESTIVE SPOILERS !!!!
Secondly there's very little story at all . I was very surprised as to how soon things kicked off. I was expecting an hour of insults and plot turns involving double cross and triple cross followed by lots of shooting. The reality is more than two thirds of the run time is taken up by the gun battle which intermittently stops for characters to throw insults at one another before reloading again. The fact that so many of the characters get shot multiple times and they continue to shout insults does become both boring too incredible to be taken seriously , so much so that's it's a surprise when anyone is shot dead
That said FREE FIRE isn't really a film to take seriously . You might enjoy with a bag of pop corn and will probably enjoy it more round lads flats with a six pack which might explain why it has underperformed at the box office. One might have also expected more when one of the executive producers is Martin Scorsese
One constantly thinks that director Ben Wheatley is on the brink of great things. With FREE FIRE you might have thought he'd hit the international target. Set in America ( Though amazingly it's shot in Brighton. England ) and classed as a blackly comical thriller in the style of Tarantino you'd have thought it might have done better at the box office but fails slightly on two levels
Firstly Tarantino is a brand name and unless your name is Quentin Tarantino it's a mistake with hindsight to emulate this style of film making because you're just going to slip in to parody. In fact even Tarantino parodies Quentin Tarantino these days with very mediocre results. You want to pitch a film ? Then please don't use the initials QT
!!!! SUGGESTIVE SPOILERS !!!!
Secondly there's very little story at all . I was very surprised as to how soon things kicked off. I was expecting an hour of insults and plot turns involving double cross and triple cross followed by lots of shooting. The reality is more than two thirds of the run time is taken up by the gun battle which intermittently stops for characters to throw insults at one another before reloading again. The fact that so many of the characters get shot multiple times and they continue to shout insults does become both boring too incredible to be taken seriously , so much so that's it's a surprise when anyone is shot dead
That said FREE FIRE isn't really a film to take seriously . You might enjoy with a bag of pop corn and will probably enjoy it more round lads flats with a six pack which might explain why it has underperformed at the box office. One might have also expected more when one of the executive producers is Martin Scorsese
This film tells the story of two gangs in the United States of America, who meet in a warehouse to do a transaction on heavy firearms. Their deal quickly goes haywire when a fight breaks out, and a shootout ensues.
"Free Fire" is exactly what it says. The story is basically a free for all, shoot all you like as if there's no tomorrow kind of affair. It could have been an intense crime film, but it is not. The thing is that the plot has nothing else, just shooting. I really wonder how the film manages to carry on for ninety minutes, when all it shows is one person shooting another. I keep thinking to myself why don't the characters just die already, and end the horrible film right away! I wonder why this film with a non existent plot can attract so many actors and actresses who are famous.
"Free Fire" is exactly what it says. The story is basically a free for all, shoot all you like as if there's no tomorrow kind of affair. It could have been an intense crime film, but it is not. The thing is that the plot has nothing else, just shooting. I really wonder how the film manages to carry on for ninety minutes, when all it shows is one person shooting another. I keep thinking to myself why don't the characters just die already, and end the horrible film right away! I wonder why this film with a non existent plot can attract so many actors and actresses who are famous.
Ben Wheatley certainly has a twisted sense of humour, evident in films such as Sightseers and High-Rise, and he brings it to proceedings once again in Free Fire, a relentlessly entertaining action comedy. Featuring an impressive ensemble cast, Free Fire was a film that had been on my radar for a while.
Boston, 1978, and two gangs set a meeting in an abandoned warehouse for an arms deal. It doesn't all exactly go to plan and it's not long before a full on shootout between the two gangs occurs, leading to bullets flying all over the place and a game of survival for everyone involved.
Free Fire wastes no time in getting into things and when the entire cast are together, the film really does fire on all cylinders. Ben Wheatley's film is by no means the best film I'll ever see but it is the perfect choice for an entertaining time at the cinema, making sure it doesn't overstay its welcome with a swift ninety minute runtime.
Wheatley collaborates once again with Amy Jump to write the film and the result is a quick screenplay that delivers plenty of wit and humour, as well as a shootout that the films builds itself around, which becomes farcical due to the sheer amount of incompetent characters the film plays host to.
A screenplay like this deserves a cast to do it justice and Free Fire has exactly that in the shape of an ensemble cast to get excited about. Cillian Murphy has one of the more prominent roles and he manages to bring the coldness we are so used to seeing from him to the role of Chris. Brie Larson gives the film its singular female character and she's certainly no pushover, Larson playing Justine with a sense of grit and superior intellect over her male counterparts. Then there is Armie Hammer, who shines as the overly sarcastic and suave Ord.
The man who steals the film from everyone else though is Sharlto Copley as Vernon, an arms dealer who runs his mouth a little too much. Sure, his South African accent makes him sound funnier but there is no doubt that Copley's Vernon gets the majority of the film's quips., and he absolutely revels in them. There's some fine support from Jack Reynor and Sam Riley on show too as a couple of warring members from their respective gangs.
For a fun night at the cinema, I can't recommend Free Fire enough. If you're someone who is easily offended by foul language or doesn't like loud noises though, I feel as if you'd take an instant dislike to this film, which would certainly be your loss.
Boston, 1978, and two gangs set a meeting in an abandoned warehouse for an arms deal. It doesn't all exactly go to plan and it's not long before a full on shootout between the two gangs occurs, leading to bullets flying all over the place and a game of survival for everyone involved.
Free Fire wastes no time in getting into things and when the entire cast are together, the film really does fire on all cylinders. Ben Wheatley's film is by no means the best film I'll ever see but it is the perfect choice for an entertaining time at the cinema, making sure it doesn't overstay its welcome with a swift ninety minute runtime.
Wheatley collaborates once again with Amy Jump to write the film and the result is a quick screenplay that delivers plenty of wit and humour, as well as a shootout that the films builds itself around, which becomes farcical due to the sheer amount of incompetent characters the film plays host to.
A screenplay like this deserves a cast to do it justice and Free Fire has exactly that in the shape of an ensemble cast to get excited about. Cillian Murphy has one of the more prominent roles and he manages to bring the coldness we are so used to seeing from him to the role of Chris. Brie Larson gives the film its singular female character and she's certainly no pushover, Larson playing Justine with a sense of grit and superior intellect over her male counterparts. Then there is Armie Hammer, who shines as the overly sarcastic and suave Ord.
The man who steals the film from everyone else though is Sharlto Copley as Vernon, an arms dealer who runs his mouth a little too much. Sure, his South African accent makes him sound funnier but there is no doubt that Copley's Vernon gets the majority of the film's quips., and he absolutely revels in them. There's some fine support from Jack Reynor and Sam Riley on show too as a couple of warring members from their respective gangs.
For a fun night at the cinema, I can't recommend Free Fire enough. If you're someone who is easily offended by foul language or doesn't like loud noises though, I feel as if you'd take an instant dislike to this film, which would certainly be your loss.
Free Fire is unfortunately Ben Wheatley's first misfire. Whilst the film isn't terrible by any stretch of the imagination, it does have a-lot of issues. Firstly the overall concept is an interesting idea. A 90 minute shoot-out in a single location sounds like a great idea. And for the first 30-40 minutes the film was highly entertaining. But when a character asks another "how long has it been" you know the film is starting to wear thin.
The film is loaded with an extremely talented cast featuring Cillian Murphy, Brie Larson, Sharlto Copley, Michael Smiley. They all give boisterous, lively performances but their characters are paper thin. For the type of film this is I didn't need any character background, but a little bit of development and growth would've given the film a little more direction.
One of the biggest issues I had with the film was that it meandered for the majority of the second half. This caused me to lose interest in the film as the overall intensity dropped. Another issue I had was the tone of the film, whilst it does have some good moments of levity, the film played itself far too straight. Going in I has expecting and action film with plenty of moments of dark humour, but that was few and far between. And a-lot of the jokes didn't land for me.
Free Fire was an over-all disappointment made even more-so by the fact I'm a huge fan of Ben Wheatley. In the end Free Fire was an interesting experiment that seemed better in concept rather than in its execution.
The film is loaded with an extremely talented cast featuring Cillian Murphy, Brie Larson, Sharlto Copley, Michael Smiley. They all give boisterous, lively performances but their characters are paper thin. For the type of film this is I didn't need any character background, but a little bit of development and growth would've given the film a little more direction.
One of the biggest issues I had with the film was that it meandered for the majority of the second half. This caused me to lose interest in the film as the overall intensity dropped. Another issue I had was the tone of the film, whilst it does have some good moments of levity, the film played itself far too straight. Going in I has expecting and action film with plenty of moments of dark humour, but that was few and far between. And a-lot of the jokes didn't land for me.
Free Fire was an over-all disappointment made even more-so by the fact I'm a huge fan of Ben Wheatley. In the end Free Fire was an interesting experiment that seemed better in concept rather than in its execution.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesBen Wheatley has stated a big reason he set the film in the 70s is so there would be no mobile phones.
- PatzerThe idea that Chris' own ammo, which he brought to use trying out the M-16's he ordered, wouldn't work in the SC-70's that Vernon delivered is false. Both rifles are chambered in the same 5.56x45mm NATO round, and also fire .223 Remington, so any such ammo Chris might have brought would work in either rifle.
- VerbindungenFeatured in Film '72: Folge #45.8 (2016)
- SoundtracksDo the Boob
Written by John Felice
Published by Bug Music Ltd (GB), a BMG Company (c) 1977
Used with permission. All rights reserved.
Performed by The Real Kids
Licensed courtesy of Norton Records
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizielle Standorte
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Trò Chơi Sống Còn
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 5.500.000 £ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 1.799.312 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 994.431 $
- 23. Apr. 2017
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 3.719.383 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 31 Min.(91 min)
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen