Free Fire

Free Fire starts off well. Music is amazing and it gets you excited about the movie, and the dialogue works amazingly well. It's the perfect kind of dialogue. If you're an aspiring screenwriter it might make you think oh right, that's how you're supposed to do it.

The beginning may feel a bit stretched out, but when s##t hit the fan, I almost started to miss that slow, dialogue-heavy beginning of the movie. Mostly because after that, most of the movie seemed more like just shooting without any kind of actual point to it. It desperately needs something more story driven there.

The entirety reminds me of Reservoir Dogs, but like a weird, simpler version missing the charm Tarantino put in his work - apart from the dialogue of course. The set-up is good, but the story isn't close to as great as it could be. There's so much potential that seems to be wasted since it comes to the weird part where the film is mostly shooting and throwing in bits of great dialogue every here and there. It's hard to keep track of, especially when most of the characters look the same and the names are thrown in there so casually you barely remember three of them. Also the structure makes the movie feel way longer than it is.

Free Fire has potential, but it needs some better way to wrap things up, and better way to keep the audience invested in the characters. This way it's just watching and wondering who's going down next and what the hell is even happening.

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.

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.

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.

Boston, 1973. Members of the IRA and an arms dealer come to an abandoned warehouse to make a deal to buy some machine guns. Everything is supposed to go smoothly until one member from the one group draws out a gun and shoots the other because of a previous incident. And all hell breaks.

Ben Wheatley's previous film, High Rise, I was not a fan of. High Rise felt too disturbing with heavy-handed messaging while lacking a coherent plot. Free Fire is by far a major improvement with hilarious dialogue, fun and well-written characters and non-stop action. I saw the movie at TIFF today and was pleasantly surprised. Wheatley turns this empty warehouse into a war zone with each of these character taking cover behind various objects and firing blindly. Unlike a lot of generic action movies where characters seem to magically dodge bullets, no one is safe and everyone eventually gets scraped or hit by bullets. This leads to some fun sequences of characters crawling on the ground to get from one cover to the next.

Surprisingly the two standouts are Cillian Murphy and Armie Hammer. Both were surprisingly funny in subtle ways. Sharlto Copley once again plays another weird but yet still hilarious and fun character. I also give strong shout-outs to Sam Riley and Jack Reynor. And Brie Larson is bad-ass as she holds her own weight against her male co- stars.

If I can say one negative it's that this isn't a movie with a lot of depth. It's not flat but don't expect this to be too much of a complex film. It is just simply about the these 2 trigger-happy groups trying either to kill or survive. It is more of a black comedy/thriller.

Free Fire is definitely one of the most fun and exciting action movies you will see so it is definitely worth a shot to watch once it releases in theatres.