Laws of Man

Let me save you some time, don't watch this.

I decided to watch it based upon other reviews saying it's good, and the description sounded interesting. Well, unfortunately, all the other raving reviews are by people who are extremely intoxicated - or have the worst taste in movies ever. I cannot enjoy this, it's pretty terrible.

The acting is wooden at best, the plot and story isn't terrible, that's what first drew me to the movie after all. Unfortunately the pacing and actions of the characters is pretty ridiculous, almost cartoonish at how bad it all is, the characters are barely 1 dimensional, the pacing is delayed and awkward, almost uncomfortable at times, nothing flows or feels real. The cinematography and sound is completely awful, like someone is using an old camera they found in their parents closet, which of course isn't doing the already struggling actors any favors.

A good director could possibly take this movie and make it good with a lot of work and re-takes. Sadly, it's pretty clear that isn't the case here, there is no chemistry at all. I've been more drawn into and invested in high-school and college theater productions than I am to this movie.

I got halfway through and I had to stop. I hope this review saves someone else from wasting their evening.

"Laws of Man" begins with promise, offering an engaging story, immersive 1960s visuals, and strong performances from Jackson Rathbone and Jacob Keohane. Dusty roads and rundown towns set the tone, but the narrative derails midway with unnecessary scenes and an unsatisfying, inconsistent ending. Characters like Frank and Benjamin Bonney feel believable, but others, like Callie and Armstrong, lack credibility, and Cassidy's role is confusing. While Frank's dialogue fits the setting, Tommy's lines and behavior fail to convince as a U. S. Marshal. Emotional impact fades after a strong start, and the missed opportunity to use music for added immersion further weakens the experience. Ultimately, poor story choices and pacing issues leave little rewatchability or lasting impression.

Believe i watched it all the way through, but...i'm glad that i did... i know part of the reason, at LEAST, was the cast...i don't remember the last time i saw Harvey Keitel in anything... but i was real glad to see that he was part of the cast... and then there's Keith Carradine...Graham Greene...and i'd be remiss if i didn't mention Forrie Smith, who plays Lloyd on Yellowstone... it was whack central as far as tone and characterizations go...trying to get that 60s feel in the mix...it didn't do a bad job of that, either...making much of it come off as comedic, as far as i was concerned...so i laughed through a lot of it...it has an unexpected turn in the last act, though...which, to a large degree, made it worthwhile sticking around... if any of this sounds appealing and you don't feel like you have anything better to watch(i did. But i just couldn't resist the draw of this cast), then i'd say go for it...interestingly enough, the other reviewers seemed to feel the same way i do...all two of them... ; - )

Pretty interesting film in general. It's wacky like a Tarrantino flick, just on a much lower budget.

A flavorful assortment of characters and actors to portray them. I certainly wasn't expecting Harvey Keitel to be a roaming hippie/preacher.

I'm so exhausted with remakes, sequels, prequels and Marvel, that this came off as something rather refreshing.

By no means is this film perfect, it has it's problems. The gun fire looked animated and off put recoils or lack of recoil from the actors and rarely were there any shell casings. Though the film does come with a number of shootouts with outlandish characters that seem like they were out of mad max. It was fun.

Probably deserves a 7/10, but I appreciate originality... The few times we see it anymore.

I love noir westerns, such as No Country for old men and the trailer definitely feels in that vein. I don't know the lead actors, I remember seeing Harvey Keitel in the trailer and that pretty much sold me. This is in no way rivaling the Coen Brothers, make no mistake, which would be stretch for any of the modern filmmakers. I will say that the plot got me going for most of the film. The last part was a bit confusing and I have seen this in other films as well when the writer tries to tie it all together neatly. Nonetheless, the acting is alright as well as the cinematography. I don't understand how other reviewers seem so critical. It's a decent flick and worth to watch.