AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
6,4/10
61 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Um grupo de gangsters criados em Boston estabeleceu-se na Flórida durante a era da Lei Seca, enfrentando a competição e a Ku Klux Klan.Um grupo de gangsters criados em Boston estabeleceu-se na Flórida durante a era da Lei Seca, enfrentando a competição e a Ku Klux Klan.Um grupo de gangsters criados em Boston estabeleceu-se na Flórida durante a era da Lei Seca, enfrentando a competição e a Ku Klux Klan.
- Prêmios
- 4 indicações no total
Miguel
- Esteban Suarez
- (as Miguel J. Pimentel)
Zoe Saldaña
- Graciela
- (as Zoe Saldana)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
I went to the theater to watch a Gangster/Mafia movie, and I got one. Mafia movies are by far my favorite type of movie. Live by Night delivered that 1920's gangster look. Ben Affleck does an amazing Irish Mafia member persona. The story was very moving and the characters were likable. There was just enough action in the movie. The tommy gun fight scenes felt like a real 1920's gang shoot out. Live by Night shows a true gangster movie look. Most Mafia movies rely on the story to make their movie good. Live by Night uses action and an amazing story. I had a little trouble with keeping up with the names of the characters but later on I started memorizing their names. Defiantly go see this movie if your a gangster/mafia movie fan. Live by Night will not disappoint you.
I've been a fan of Ben Affleck's directional efforts ever since I saw Gone Baby Gone way back in 2007 in theaters. I also loved The Town and think its his best film to date. Live by Night sort of came out of nowhere but I'm always down for Prohibition era crime films. The film seemed to get lukewarm reviews but there was no way I wasn't going to see this for myself. Overall, I'd say I enjoyed it and its better than what other critics are saying.
The film is set in Boston (and then Tampa) and is the story of the son of a police captain, who becomes a bootlegger and gangster. Be forewarned that there isn't much that separates this from gangster films we've seen before, however Affleck knows what he's doing and I think he does it well. The thing that pops out to me is the dialogue. Its quite clever and witty. There's funny moments and the film isn't always super serious, which is refreshing. Not everything in the script has to be explained as the viewers are expected to follow the message. The suits, cars, glamour, of the 20s and 30s is captured quite well (not that I lived in that era to really know if it was accurate). Some of the dialogue was hard to hear in theaters (the accents probably contributed to this). I think this film will one day warrant a second view anyways.
While I really enjoyed the film, it isn't without faults. It really depends on whether you can forgive the film for that or really see it as a detriment. Some of the characters felt loose and suddenly disappear. This includes Siena Miller, Elle Fanning and Brendan Gleeson. Fates of characters are explained and such but they feel unfulfilled. I thought Fanning's character was just becoming great, but as I said unfulfilled. Miller's character arc was just so odd as well (maybe rushed to fit the story). Well, at least my boy Miguel was in this. The film seems to want to tackle a few foes/events in different parts of the film and doesn't always do it seamlessly, which makes the film seem unfocused. The events of the third act felt rushed together just to come to a resolution. Without going into spoiling there's a head scratching moment near the end that seemed out of left field. I didn't have too many problems with all this and maybe its because I'm partial to Affleck and gangster films.
I enjoyed the car chase and gun battles. I think the comic element of the film kind of swept into the action scenes which made it enjoyable. I liked that the film takes place in Tampa and mixes with the Black and Cuban community as well. Its nice to see a sort of different locality in a gangster film. I'm sure there's much more I want to ramble about but nothings coming to me. Overall, this probably won't be something that'll be a the top of year end lists but its thoroughly enjoyable even through its flaws. Its not Affleck's best but I applaud him for directing and writing films in a time where he's busy being in blockbusters.
8/10
The film is set in Boston (and then Tampa) and is the story of the son of a police captain, who becomes a bootlegger and gangster. Be forewarned that there isn't much that separates this from gangster films we've seen before, however Affleck knows what he's doing and I think he does it well. The thing that pops out to me is the dialogue. Its quite clever and witty. There's funny moments and the film isn't always super serious, which is refreshing. Not everything in the script has to be explained as the viewers are expected to follow the message. The suits, cars, glamour, of the 20s and 30s is captured quite well (not that I lived in that era to really know if it was accurate). Some of the dialogue was hard to hear in theaters (the accents probably contributed to this). I think this film will one day warrant a second view anyways.
While I really enjoyed the film, it isn't without faults. It really depends on whether you can forgive the film for that or really see it as a detriment. Some of the characters felt loose and suddenly disappear. This includes Siena Miller, Elle Fanning and Brendan Gleeson. Fates of characters are explained and such but they feel unfulfilled. I thought Fanning's character was just becoming great, but as I said unfulfilled. Miller's character arc was just so odd as well (maybe rushed to fit the story). Well, at least my boy Miguel was in this. The film seems to want to tackle a few foes/events in different parts of the film and doesn't always do it seamlessly, which makes the film seem unfocused. The events of the third act felt rushed together just to come to a resolution. Without going into spoiling there's a head scratching moment near the end that seemed out of left field. I didn't have too many problems with all this and maybe its because I'm partial to Affleck and gangster films.
I enjoyed the car chase and gun battles. I think the comic element of the film kind of swept into the action scenes which made it enjoyable. I liked that the film takes place in Tampa and mixes with the Black and Cuban community as well. Its nice to see a sort of different locality in a gangster film. I'm sure there's much more I want to ramble about but nothings coming to me. Overall, this probably won't be something that'll be a the top of year end lists but its thoroughly enjoyable even through its flaws. Its not Affleck's best but I applaud him for directing and writing films in a time where he's busy being in blockbusters.
8/10
Ben Affleck's new movie could best be described as "sprawling". In both directing and writing the screenplay (based on a novel by Dennis Lehane), Affleck has aimed for a "Godfather" style gangster epic and missed: not missed by a country mile, but missed nonetheless.
Morally bankrupted by his experiences in the trenches, Joe Coughlin (Affleck) returns to Boston to pick and choose which social rules he wants to follow. Not sociopathic per se, as he has a strong personal code of conduct, but Coughlin turns to robbery walking a delicate path between the warring mob factions of the Irish community, led by Albert White (the excellent Robert Glenister from TV's "Hustle"), and the Italian community, led by Maso Pescatore (Remo Girone). Trying to keep him out of jail is his father ("Harry Potter"'s Brendan Gleeson) who – usefully – is the Deputy Police Chief. Life gets complicated when he falls in love with White's moll, Emma Gould (Sienna Miller). The scene is set for a drama stretching from Boston to the hot and steamy Everglades over a period of the next twenty years.
Although a watchable popcorn film, the choppy episodic nature of the movie is hugely frustrating, with no compelling story arc to glue all of the disparate parts together. The (often very violent) action scenes are very well done and exciting but as a viewer you don't feel invested in a 'journey' from the beginning of the film to the (unsatisfactory) ending. In my experience it's never a good sign when the writer considers it necessary to add a voice-over to the soundtrack, and here Affleck mutters truisms about his thoughts and motives that irritate more than illuminate.
The sheer volume of players in the piece (there are about three film's worth in here) and the resulting minimal screen time given to each allows no time for character development. Unfortunately the result is that you really care very little about whether people live or die and big plot developments land as rather an "oh" than an "OH!".
Affleck puts in a great turn as the autistic central character whose condition results in a cold, calculating demeanor and a complete lack of emotion reflecting on his face. Oh, hang on no, wait a minute sorry I've got the wrong film . I'm thinking about "The Accountant". I don't know whether he filmed these films in parallel. I generally enjoy Ben Affleck's work (he was excellent in "The Town") but for 95% of this film his part could have been completed by a burly extra with an Affleck mask on. In terms of acting range, his facial muscles barely get to a "2" on the scale. Given the double problem that he is barely credible as the "young man" returning mentally wounded from the trenches, then in my opinion he would have been better to have focused on the writing and directing and found a lead of the likes of an Andrew Garfield to fill Coughlin's shoes.
That's not to say there is not some good acting present in their all but brief supporting roles. Elle Fanning ("Trumbo", "Maleficent") in particular shines as the Southern belle Loretta Figgis: a religious zealot driving her police chief father (Chris Cooper, "The Bourne Identity") to distraction. Cooper also delivers a star turn as the moral but pragmatic law-man.
Sienna Miller ("Foxcatcher") delivers a passable Cork accent and does her best to develop some believable chemistry with the rock-like Affleck. Zoe Saldana ("Star Trek") is equally effective as a Cuban humanitarian.
In summary, it's sprawlingly watchable but overall a disappointment, with Affleck over-reaching. One day we surely will get a gangster film the likes of another "Godfather", "Goodfellas" or "Untouchables". Although this has its moments, unfortunately it's more towards the "Public Enemies" end of the genre spectrum.
(For the graphical version of this review please visit bob-the-movie-man.com. Thanks.)
Morally bankrupted by his experiences in the trenches, Joe Coughlin (Affleck) returns to Boston to pick and choose which social rules he wants to follow. Not sociopathic per se, as he has a strong personal code of conduct, but Coughlin turns to robbery walking a delicate path between the warring mob factions of the Irish community, led by Albert White (the excellent Robert Glenister from TV's "Hustle"), and the Italian community, led by Maso Pescatore (Remo Girone). Trying to keep him out of jail is his father ("Harry Potter"'s Brendan Gleeson) who – usefully – is the Deputy Police Chief. Life gets complicated when he falls in love with White's moll, Emma Gould (Sienna Miller). The scene is set for a drama stretching from Boston to the hot and steamy Everglades over a period of the next twenty years.
Although a watchable popcorn film, the choppy episodic nature of the movie is hugely frustrating, with no compelling story arc to glue all of the disparate parts together. The (often very violent) action scenes are very well done and exciting but as a viewer you don't feel invested in a 'journey' from the beginning of the film to the (unsatisfactory) ending. In my experience it's never a good sign when the writer considers it necessary to add a voice-over to the soundtrack, and here Affleck mutters truisms about his thoughts and motives that irritate more than illuminate.
The sheer volume of players in the piece (there are about three film's worth in here) and the resulting minimal screen time given to each allows no time for character development. Unfortunately the result is that you really care very little about whether people live or die and big plot developments land as rather an "oh" than an "OH!".
Affleck puts in a great turn as the autistic central character whose condition results in a cold, calculating demeanor and a complete lack of emotion reflecting on his face. Oh, hang on no, wait a minute sorry I've got the wrong film . I'm thinking about "The Accountant". I don't know whether he filmed these films in parallel. I generally enjoy Ben Affleck's work (he was excellent in "The Town") but for 95% of this film his part could have been completed by a burly extra with an Affleck mask on. In terms of acting range, his facial muscles barely get to a "2" on the scale. Given the double problem that he is barely credible as the "young man" returning mentally wounded from the trenches, then in my opinion he would have been better to have focused on the writing and directing and found a lead of the likes of an Andrew Garfield to fill Coughlin's shoes.
That's not to say there is not some good acting present in their all but brief supporting roles. Elle Fanning ("Trumbo", "Maleficent") in particular shines as the Southern belle Loretta Figgis: a religious zealot driving her police chief father (Chris Cooper, "The Bourne Identity") to distraction. Cooper also delivers a star turn as the moral but pragmatic law-man.
Sienna Miller ("Foxcatcher") delivers a passable Cork accent and does her best to develop some believable chemistry with the rock-like Affleck. Zoe Saldana ("Star Trek") is equally effective as a Cuban humanitarian.
In summary, it's sprawlingly watchable but overall a disappointment, with Affleck over-reaching. One day we surely will get a gangster film the likes of another "Godfather", "Goodfellas" or "Untouchables". Although this has its moments, unfortunately it's more towards the "Public Enemies" end of the genre spectrum.
(For the graphical version of this review please visit bob-the-movie-man.com. Thanks.)
Gangster movies have been a major component to American cinema for quite some time. With established films like The Godfather series, Scarface, among other films, sometimes it can be hard to produce a quality modern day crime film. But Ben Affleck has made an attempt this weekend with the movie Live by Night. Can Affleck's recent resurgence revitalize the gang movie, or does his operation go belly up before it gets started? Robbie K here with another review and as always appreciate the read.
LIKES: Solid acting Incredible Setting and Costumes Very Detailed Description of a mob rising
Summary: Affleck's stoic, monotone, performances continue to find footholds in a variety of parts, and his portrayal of a gangster with a conscience is spot on. Although not the most emotionally dynamic character, Affleck's tactics work in portraying a man struggling with the trials at hand. Chris Messina as his sidekick has more of an edge that helps offset the monotone delivery of the lead role. Other actors do their job of crafting the seedy mob family, being cunning, ruthless, or strong to accomplish their goals. If the acting doesn't sell the gangster setting than the costumes and scenery will do the trick. Live by Night uses the big budget of the film industry to recreate the roaring 20s, complete with old fashioned zoot suits, classic car models, and the nostalgic traditional models of high-end restaurants. I felt I had traveled back in time in this flick, with only the high definition cameras and a recognition of modern day fabric to shatter the illusion. Finally, the other component that sells the crime theme is the attention to detail of starting a crime syndicate. Most other crime movies often have our character in an established family, but Live By Night twists this concept and casts Affleck into raising a satellite family in Florida. Much of the film is focuses on how he establishes business contracts, allies, love, occasionally throwing in some conflict resolution that brings a little excitement to the film.
DISLIKES: Slow pace Awkward Summaries Boring At times Rushed over ending
Summary: Although some of my favorite mafia movies don't have action, they at least have an engaging plot that is suspenseful. Not the case for this movie. Live by Night is slow, often paying a little too much attention to monotonous details for building the empire. The film tried to build the suspense with their overdone explanations that promised some heart crushing moments... only to wrap things up with a monologue from Affleck describing what happened. These mundane, overlapping comments did little for me other than decrease the run time of the movie and I was disappointed at the lack of effort for drama. The result for me was a very boring film not only in terms of action, but in emotional suspense as well. If you look at the classics, the storytellers built up tension that climaxed at those gut-wrenching moments as a character was killed. However in this film, they seldom came close to matching that suspense, the only exception being two moments near the end of the film. And speaking of the ending it felt out of place for me. Live By nights "exciting" climax has a heated battle that fits well into the theme of the movie, but finally relieves the boring moments. Had they ended with the monologue after that it would have been perfect. Yet, the movie didn't stop and added an extra twenty minutes that summed things up, but in a manner that to me was very simplistic, rushed, and lackluster.
The VERDICT:
Live by Night is a gangster movie that felt more like a video guide to starting a bootlegging operation. It certainly has the look and feel of a gangster movie, complete with family drama, but it lacks that edge the mobster classics had. Outside of a few moments, this movie was a little toned down for my tastes, and I didn't like the monologue summaries as they robbed us of some exciting conclusions. Therefore, this reviewer can't recommend this movie for the theater outside of the look of the movie.
My scores are:
Crime Drama: 6.5 Movie Overall: 5.0
LIKES: Solid acting Incredible Setting and Costumes Very Detailed Description of a mob rising
Summary: Affleck's stoic, monotone, performances continue to find footholds in a variety of parts, and his portrayal of a gangster with a conscience is spot on. Although not the most emotionally dynamic character, Affleck's tactics work in portraying a man struggling with the trials at hand. Chris Messina as his sidekick has more of an edge that helps offset the monotone delivery of the lead role. Other actors do their job of crafting the seedy mob family, being cunning, ruthless, or strong to accomplish their goals. If the acting doesn't sell the gangster setting than the costumes and scenery will do the trick. Live by Night uses the big budget of the film industry to recreate the roaring 20s, complete with old fashioned zoot suits, classic car models, and the nostalgic traditional models of high-end restaurants. I felt I had traveled back in time in this flick, with only the high definition cameras and a recognition of modern day fabric to shatter the illusion. Finally, the other component that sells the crime theme is the attention to detail of starting a crime syndicate. Most other crime movies often have our character in an established family, but Live By Night twists this concept and casts Affleck into raising a satellite family in Florida. Much of the film is focuses on how he establishes business contracts, allies, love, occasionally throwing in some conflict resolution that brings a little excitement to the film.
DISLIKES: Slow pace Awkward Summaries Boring At times Rushed over ending
Summary: Although some of my favorite mafia movies don't have action, they at least have an engaging plot that is suspenseful. Not the case for this movie. Live by Night is slow, often paying a little too much attention to monotonous details for building the empire. The film tried to build the suspense with their overdone explanations that promised some heart crushing moments... only to wrap things up with a monologue from Affleck describing what happened. These mundane, overlapping comments did little for me other than decrease the run time of the movie and I was disappointed at the lack of effort for drama. The result for me was a very boring film not only in terms of action, but in emotional suspense as well. If you look at the classics, the storytellers built up tension that climaxed at those gut-wrenching moments as a character was killed. However in this film, they seldom came close to matching that suspense, the only exception being two moments near the end of the film. And speaking of the ending it felt out of place for me. Live By nights "exciting" climax has a heated battle that fits well into the theme of the movie, but finally relieves the boring moments. Had they ended with the monologue after that it would have been perfect. Yet, the movie didn't stop and added an extra twenty minutes that summed things up, but in a manner that to me was very simplistic, rushed, and lackluster.
The VERDICT:
Live by Night is a gangster movie that felt more like a video guide to starting a bootlegging operation. It certainly has the look and feel of a gangster movie, complete with family drama, but it lacks that edge the mobster classics had. Outside of a few moments, this movie was a little toned down for my tastes, and I didn't like the monologue summaries as they robbed us of some exciting conclusions. Therefore, this reviewer can't recommend this movie for the theater outside of the look of the movie.
My scores are:
Crime Drama: 6.5 Movie Overall: 5.0
Producer, director, writer and lead actor: Ben Affleck.
Let's look at those contributions one by one.
Producer. The film looks good. There's an expert team on both sides of the camera. But there's a problem with length. Also, it feels as though the adaptation from Dennis Lehane's novel has not sufficiently transformed what was on the page into cinematic story-telling.
Director. There are excellent action sequences, such as an exciting car-chase and a final shoot-out. As a director of actors Mr Affleck is strong: he elicits particularly striking work from Chris Messina, Elle Fanning, Remo Girone and Sienna Miller. Within scenes there's a reassuring sense of control of pace. But overall, there is a sense of the director being in thrall to the screenplay.
Writer. This is the weakest link. It feels in awe of its source material. I read that an entire strand of the book was removed for the purposes of the film, but this was not enough. The producer and/or the director needed to tell the writer to put it through another draft. Or put it in its current form on Netflix as a two-part drama.
Lead actor. A matter of taste, I guess. Mr Affleck's persona is always of a handsome man who knows he's handsome, and who is very pleased with himself about it. I find this insufferable in large doses. And there is a very large dose of it here. Mr Affleck's performances lack depth -- compare and contrast those of this amazing brother Casey. As far as I'm concerned, Mr B. Affleck is more a male model than an actor: in James Bond terms, he's a George Lazenby rather than a Daniel Craig. His best film performance is his self-parodying turn in 'SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE'. In LIVE BY NIGHT he is serviceable, nothing more. His director clearly couldn't get anything else out of him.
It's instructive to compare Ben Affleck to Clint Eastwood, who also has a limited -- maybe even more limited -- range as an actor. But Eastwood the director usually casts Eastwood the actor brilliantly. DIRTY HARRY, UNFORGIVEN,GRAN TORINO etc: who could be better? By contrast, there are many young actors who could have played the lead in LIVE BY NIGHT, and many writers who could have delivered a better screenplay, especially when guided by a strong producer and director. Time will tell whether Ben Affleck is as good in those last two departments as ARGO suggested he might be. The promise he showed in those areas in that film is not in evidence here.
Let's look at those contributions one by one.
Producer. The film looks good. There's an expert team on both sides of the camera. But there's a problem with length. Also, it feels as though the adaptation from Dennis Lehane's novel has not sufficiently transformed what was on the page into cinematic story-telling.
Director. There are excellent action sequences, such as an exciting car-chase and a final shoot-out. As a director of actors Mr Affleck is strong: he elicits particularly striking work from Chris Messina, Elle Fanning, Remo Girone and Sienna Miller. Within scenes there's a reassuring sense of control of pace. But overall, there is a sense of the director being in thrall to the screenplay.
Writer. This is the weakest link. It feels in awe of its source material. I read that an entire strand of the book was removed for the purposes of the film, but this was not enough. The producer and/or the director needed to tell the writer to put it through another draft. Or put it in its current form on Netflix as a two-part drama.
Lead actor. A matter of taste, I guess. Mr Affleck's persona is always of a handsome man who knows he's handsome, and who is very pleased with himself about it. I find this insufferable in large doses. And there is a very large dose of it here. Mr Affleck's performances lack depth -- compare and contrast those of this amazing brother Casey. As far as I'm concerned, Mr B. Affleck is more a male model than an actor: in James Bond terms, he's a George Lazenby rather than a Daniel Craig. His best film performance is his self-parodying turn in 'SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE'. In LIVE BY NIGHT he is serviceable, nothing more. His director clearly couldn't get anything else out of him.
It's instructive to compare Ben Affleck to Clint Eastwood, who also has a limited -- maybe even more limited -- range as an actor. But Eastwood the director usually casts Eastwood the actor brilliantly. DIRTY HARRY, UNFORGIVEN,GRAN TORINO etc: who could be better? By contrast, there are many young actors who could have played the lead in LIVE BY NIGHT, and many writers who could have delivered a better screenplay, especially when guided by a strong producer and director. Time will tell whether Ben Affleck is as good in those last two departments as ARGO suggested he might be. The promise he showed in those areas in that film is not in evidence here.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe original cut ran closer to three hours, and was intended to be a very character heavy film.
- Erros de gravaçãoAt the movies with his son, Joe muses about the rise of Hitler and suggests that it is unlikely there will be another war. As the credits roll, the production year is MCMXLI (1941).
- Citações
Thomas Coughlin: People don't fix each other, Joseph. And they never become anything but what they've always been.
- ConexõesFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 Movies of 2016 Already Getting Oscar Buzz (2016)
- Trilhas sonorasSugartime
Written by Odis 'Pop' Echols (as Odis Echols) and Charlie Phillips
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Live by Night?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Vivir de noche
- Locações de filme
- 1331 Newcastle Street, Brunswick, Geórgia, EUA(street scenes)
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 65.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 10.378.555
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 33.336
- 25 de dez. de 2016
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 22.778.555
- Tempo de duração2 horas 9 minutos
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 2.39 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
What was the official certification given to A Lei da Noite (2016) in India?
Responda