Set in Boston in 1978, a meeting in a deserted warehouse between two gangs turns into a shoot-out and a game of survival.Set in Boston in 1978, a meeting in a deserted warehouse between two gangs turns into a shoot-out and a game of survival.Set in Boston in 1978, a meeting in a deserted warehouse between two gangs turns into a shoot-out and a game of survival.
- Awards
- 3 wins & 9 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
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.
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.
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.
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.
This is a rather light but exciting mix of action and comedy. There are a few very believable characters and a couple that get a bit too one dimensional and that's where it lets viewers down. The ending is a little predictable, but some of the scenes extremely memorable. This isn't going to make the top films every made, but if you have a couple hours this movie is well worth watching. Warning this IS a movie that is pretty much an hour and a half long shootout. So if you are squeamish about gunfights this is probably not the movie for you.
Did you know
- TriviaBen Wheatley has stated a big reason he set the film in the 70s is so there would be no mobile phones.
- GoofsThe 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.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Film '72: Episode #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
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Trò Chơi Sống Còn
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- £5,500,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $1,799,312
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $994,431
- Apr 23, 2017
- Gross worldwide
- $3,719,383
- Runtime
- 1h 31m(91 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content