Extraction (2020)

Extraction (2020)

7/10

Starring

Chris Hemsworth

Rudhraksh Jaiswal

Randeep Hooda

Golshifteh Farahani

Directed by Sam Hargrave

Extraction is available on Netflix, and during this lockdown, it’s been one of the few things truly worth watching. I must be honest, the hype about this movie made me watch it with a lot of skepticism of, “how good can it truly be?” When I finally saw it I was amazed by how much invested I was in the movie, and how I found myself carried away forgetting that, the good guys always win in the end.

The story isn’t particularly groundbreaking, and it is definitely below the standard I’d expect from the Russo brothers. That said, the violence, stunts, and action scenes more than make up for the story’s shortcomings.

My main issue with the plot is the double-cross. You can kind of see it coming. The person who does it hints at it earlier in the movie, so when it finally happens, you’re just like, “Oh, okay.”

Chris Hemsworth is absolutely magnificent in this movie. The way he handles the close-up fight scenes, including the shooting and knife work, is reminiscent of the John Wick movies. The cinematography, especially the single-camera close-up shots, is top-notch.

The plot is straightforward: Two crime lords are at war. One is in prison, still pulling strings, while the other kidnaps the imprisoned crime lord’s son. Desperate, the father orders his henchman to find a way to rescue his son—or face losing his own family.

The henchman hires a team of mercenaries led by Tyler (Chris Hemsworth) to retrieve the boy (Rudhraksh Jaiswal). The rescue goes smoothly at first, but the crime lord isn’t just any player—he controls the army and special forces in India. He sends them, along with every hoodlum he can muster, after the mercenaries.

As if that wasn’t enough, another player enters the fray, also after the boy. What was supposed to be a simple extraction turns into a chaotic bloodbath, with a staggering body count.

Rudhraksh Jaiswal delivers a fantastic performance, holding his own alongside Hemsworth.

Kudos to director Sam Hargrave. Known for his work as a stunt coordinator with the Russo brothers, this was his directorial debut, and it’s impressive from start to finish.

Extraction has all the elements of a blockbuster. Even though it’s owned by Netflix, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a sequel in the works.

It would be exciting to see another mission or mercenary story featuring Hemsworth and Jaiswal again.

The Willoughby (2020)

The Willoughby (2020)

4/10

Starring the voice of

Will Forte

Maya Rudolph

Alessia Cara

Directed by Kris Pearn

I didn’t enjoy this animation. While the story initially seemed to offer something different, it quickly turned into the same predictable narrative that was easy to guess.

The animation style felt lazy to me. I understand that the intention was to make it look silly and wobbly, reflecting the characters’ quirks, but it just didn’t work for me.

Then there’s the editing and some noticeable continuity issues. It left me wondering whether the movie deliberately left certain loose threads untied or if it was just sloppy directing. For instance, there’s a scene where the orphan police knew the nanny, and the complexity of Tim and his stance felt rushed. It seemed like there was more to the nanny’s character, but over-editing cut it all out.

Another example is the mother cutting the father’s mustache and his bizarre reaction—it felt like something significant was happening, but the movie just skipped over it.

As for the story, the Willoughby family was once known for great achievements, generation after generation. But this current generation is very different. The parents are a self-absorbed pair who neither love nor care for their four children. They starve them, lock them up, and avoid them as much as possible.

The eldest, Tim, takes it upon himself to care for his siblings: the confident and determined Jane and the resourceful twins, both named Barnaby (because the parents couldn’t bother to give them separate names).

One day, a baby is left at their doorstep. When the children bring the baby inside, the parents go berserk. Tim decides to handle the situation, which leads Jane to take the baby outside and leave it somewhere she believes it will be cared for. This experience gives Jane an idea: send their parents away on a vacation.

The kids plan it well, but what they didn’t plan for was the arrival of a nanny sent to care for them.

How the Willoughby children handle this unexpected obstacle and how things turn out for them in the end is what the movie is about.

I don’t understand how this Netflix animation has such high critical and audience ratings. Maybe there’s something I’m missing. From my perspective, this animation is a complete dud, and the story does not make me want to see the movie again. It is a very forgettable plot, so I am not going to expect to see a sequel of this movie anytime soon.

Charlie's Angels (2019)

Charlie's Angels (2019)

6/10

Starring

Kristen Stewart

Naomi Scott

Ella Balinska

Elizabeth Banks

Directed by Elizabeth Banks

Charlie’s Angels is an okay movie—something you can watch and pretty much enjoy, but it has its setbacks. The movie isn’t well-paced; there are moments when the action moves fast and evenly, but other times the pace slows to the point of dullness.

The fast-paced action and comedic flow are worth noting, though, especially since Elizabeth Banks is at the helm of this flick. She added enough twists to keep you guessing, and just when you think you’ve figured it out, it slips away again. The problem with the twists is that they feel awkward because the reasoning behind them is pretty weak.

Banks should still be proud of her Charlie’s Angels. She wrote the screenplay, directed, and produced the movie through her own production company. She delivered an action flick with huge explosions, enjoyable fight choreography, and well-timed comedic moments. The movie’s main challenge, as mentioned earlier, is its uneven pacing. Other than that, I don’t see why it wasn’t a box-office hit.

Banks’ performance is, as expected, classy and natural. The three leads—Kristen Stewart, Naomi Scott, and Ella Balinska—gave performances that were strong enough to warrant another installment. It’s unfortunate that this movie likely won’t get a sequel.

The plot is familiar, sticking closely to the Charlie’s Angels formula. This movie serves as a continuation of the previous two theatrical releases and the TV series. We know Charlie runs the Townsend Agency, a private detective firm, and Charlie’s Angels are female operatives managed by his lieutenant, Bosley. This movie dives deeper into the organization, explaining how it’s been running seamlessly for decades.

In this story, the agency is after a futuristic device that’s supposed to revolutionize homes. The problem? The same device can be hacked, weaponized, and turned lethal. Elena (Naomi Scott), one of the developers, notices this issue and reports it, only to be ignored.

She’s contacted by Bosley, who arranges a meeting with her. The meeting is covertly watched by two of Charlie’s best Angels, Sabina (Kristen Stewart) and Jane (Ella Balinska). What starts as a secret meeting quickly turns into a massive blowout with an unexpected casualty.

Banks’ character steps in to steady the situation, and it becomes clear that something bigger is happening. The new mission is to pull the devices off the market, stop whoever put a hit on Elena, and uncover how the meeting’s secrecy was compromised.

As noted earlier, the movie wasn’t a box-office success, and Banks was vocal about critics being less receptive to a film with strong female leads. Comparing this movie to the earlier Charlie’s Angels (2000) and Full Throttle (2003), the difference is clear. Those earlier films, starring Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore, Lucy Liu, and Bill Murray, leaned heavily into comedy and didn’t take themselves too seriously. In contrast, Banks’ version is more serious, with comedy taking a back seat—and for that, I applaud her effort.

Green Book (2018)

Green Book (2018)

8/10

Starring

Viggo Mortensen

Mahershala Ali

Linda Cardellini

Directed by Peter Farrelly

As the movie starts, what first grips you is Viggo Mortensen’s character. Mortensen appears larger than life and now sports an Italian accent. If, like me, you watched the movie for what it is before realizing it’s a biographical story of two friends, Tony Lip and Don Shirley, you’ll be captivated by the dynamic between the two characters. Viggo’s portrayal of an Italian-American is one of his best performances.

The story of this comedy-drama keeps you engaged throughout—no dull scenes or slow moments. It’s a finely crafted movie that holds your attention. At over two hours long, you won’t even notice the time passing. The story has a feel-good, happy ending, so yes, it’s a predictable ride, but one worth taking.

The movie draws inspiration from the true story of a tour through the Deep South in America during the early 1960s. This tour involved African-American classical and jazz pianist Don Shirley (Mahershala Ali), who traveled with his band (all white). To ensure his safety, Italian-American club bouncer Tony Vallelonga (Viggo Mortensen) was hired as his driver and bodyguard.

I wasn’t around in the 1960s, so I can only imagine how deep-rooted racism was at the time. Movies like this make me grateful for the progress made in securing the freedoms we enjoy today. Shirley’s tour was risky, and he needed someone who could drive and protect him. The title, Green Book, refers to a guidebook from the era that listed safe stops—hotels, diners, and restaurants—where Black travelers could go without fear of harassment.

The movie portrays the growing relationship between Tony and Shirley, as well as the challenges Shirley faced as a Black man touring the Deep South. It highlights situations many of us would prefer never to experience.

Green Book was both a critical and commercial success, grossing over $320 million on a $23 million budget. Director Peter Farrelly, known for comedies like Dumb and Dumber (1994), There’s Something About Mary (1998), Osmosis Jones (2001), and Dumb and Dumber To (2014), successfully tackled a more nuanced genre with this film.

Mahershala Ali’s performance earned him Best Supporting Actor awards at the Academy Awards, BAFTA, Critics’ Choice Movie Awards, and Golden Globes.

Let’s be honest—over the past decade, the Oscars haven’t always been the go-to for discovering great movies. When I heard about Green Book winning Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay at the Academy Awards and Golden Globes, I still wasn’t convinced to watch it. It was only last week, during the COVID-19 lockdown, when a good friend recommended it, that I finally watched it. What a privilege! It’s one of the most captivating and funny movies I’ve seen in a long time.

It’s a great film to add to your lockdown watchlist.

My Spy (2020)

My Spy (2020)

5/10

Starring

Dave Bautista

Chloe Coleman

Kristen Schaal

Ken Jeong

Directed by Peter Segal

The girl in this movie is cute, and Dave Bautista is… not. While he charmed us in Guardians of the Galaxy, his charm didn’t quite win me over here.

The movie kicks off with an action scene, then shifts into a slower-paced spy tale that feels a bit like Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Kindergarten Cop (1990). It’s another classic scenario of a big, heavily built man partnering with a young child.

The twist here is that the child, Sophie, is in on the secret—she knows who the spy is, and she’s incredibly smart.

I wasn’t sold on the premise that JJ (Bautista) is considered a mediocre CIA agent because he’s too obvious. If that’s the case, why send someone with poor blending skills to be a spy? It felt silly, especially when a 9-year-old girl could identify him and his partner and even track them down to their base of operations.

The movie’s decision to keep the action subdued and the comedy understated was, for me, a missed opportunity. On the plus side, the girl absolutely stole the show with her performance. The dramatic moments gave the movie a much-needed edge, and her acting was the main reason I stuck with it. Without her, I might have given up early on.

The fun part of the movie is watching Sophie outshine the spy at his own game. Their bond develops naturally, which makes it easier to enjoy the ride. Bautista and the young actress share solid chemistry, which helps carry the film.

The primary reason for JJ being in Sophie’s life (and that of her single mother) is to catch Sophie’s uncle. While this serves as the main plot, the film leans heavily on the relationship between JJ and Sophie since they share the most screen time.

In the end, the movie is just okay and not great, but not terrible. The musical score could have been stronger, and the filmmakers should have leaned more into either intense action or pronounced comedy. The script itself needed significant polishing.

It’s a bit of a stretch to believe JJ could form any meaningful bonds with others, but the connection between him and Sophie works because of the time they spend together.

This is one of the many movies pulled from theatrical release due to the COVID-19 pandemic and picked up by Amazon for distribution. If you’re curious, you can find it streaming there, but it is not worth it if you can find something else to watch.

Coffee & Kareem (2020)

Coffee & Kareem (2020)

2/10

Starring

Ed Helms

Terrence Little Gardenhigh

Betty Gilpin

Taraji P. Henson

Directed by Michael Dowse

Coffee & Kareem is a cumbersome waste of an action comedy from Netflix, attempting to blend the buddy cop genre with the dynamic of a 12-year-old and an adult officer. Unfortunately, it’s a poorly written movie, with humor so crude it becomes downright off-putting.

When Coffee & Kareem begins, it might remind you of the 2019 comedy Good Boys. Initially, it feels similar, but as the story progresses, it quickly becomes irritating and unnerving. The vulgarity from the children in just the first five minutes was so excessive that it made me uncomfortable.

I decided to stick with the movie after recognizing Betty Gilpin from The Hunt (2020)—I had been curious to see her in another role. Sadly, despite her efforts, along with those of the rest of the cast, the film turned out to be a disappointing outing.

The premise—about a 12-year-old on the run with his mother’s boyfriend after witnessing a murder—sounds promising on paper but fails to deliver.

The story follows Kareem, a boy who despises his mom’s new boyfriend, Coffee, a police officer. This hatred grew when he came home and saw them having sex, he decided then he had to do something to end their relationship. So, he started asking around and was able to track down someone who could “take care of” Coffee. However, when Kareem attempts to arrange this, he witnesses a murder. Gunshots draw Coffee into the scene, and the two are forced to flee from the bad guys. Coffee, already dealing with a bad reputation at the police department, finds himself in even deeper trouble. Add to that, Kareem’s mother is not happy to find out that her son was on the run with her boyfriend.

The writers of this movie decided to abandon any sense of innocence, replacing it with crude jokes and relentless vulgarity. This choice made the film difficult to watch, and at times, I wanted to turn it off. Ultimately, curiosity got the better of me, but I regret sitting through it.

With its excessive bad language and gratuitous violence, this is a movie I wouldn’t recommend to anyone. The movie has no point, there is basically nothing about this movie that you can hold on to and say, “that can happen.”  The lack of realism makes it even harder to enjoy the movie or have a memorable experience. Do you know how bad a movie has to be, that your brain immediately formats the memory of you seeing it?

Payback (1999)

Payback (1999)

7/10

Starring

Mel Gibson

Gregg Henry

Maria Bello

David Paymer

Directed by Brian Helgeland

Payback is a fantastic film—they don’t make movies like this anymore. It’s about the determination of a man who refuses to be cheated out of what’s rightfully his. When a man has nothing to lose, he can bring down an empire. That’s the essence of Payback—a man who brings hell to everyone because he wants the money that was stolen from him. Keep in mind, that money was his share from the money he and his partner had stolen from someone else.

The person who drives this movie home is Mel Gibson. It’s sad that the director, Brian Helgeland, didn’t get to finish the movie he started. He originally aimed for a darker tone (which both Gibson and the studio didn’t like, so he was let go). After some heavy reshoots (which significantly increased the budget), good editing, and a rewritten script, the final theatrical cut is the one for me. They made the movie easy to follow by adding narration from Gibson’s character, Porter.

The action in the movie is top-notch and enjoyable. What makes this film stand out is how it stayed true to the comedic crime thriller it set out to be, without wasting time on a sex scene or a prolonged romantic subplot. That’s what makes Payback fun to watch and rewatch.

So who is Porter? Porter is a criminal who carries out heists with his partner, Val Resnick, and his wife, Lynn. During one heist, Val convinces Lynn to shoot Porter in the back. That’s where the movie begins—Porter recuperating from two gunshot wounds to the back. Val and Lynn expected him to die, but Porter survived.

He returns to his hometown to seek revenge on Val and Lynn and to get his money back. Upon his return, he finds that Lynn is now a shadow of herself, wasting away, and Val has moved up in the criminal world. He’s paid the necessary sum to join a criminal empire known as "The Outfit."

None of this deters Porter, who goes after Val and "The Outfit" for his share of the money he and Val stole—$70,000. It’s an amount he has to constantly remind everyone about.

The comedic tone and the somewhat happy ending are definite pluses for this movie.

The film is based on a 1962 book called The Hunter by Richard Stark. The script closely follows the main story arc of the book, with a few added characters, an increased money amount, and changes to the names of the lead (from Parker to Porter) and some other characters.

I’ll definitely be watching Payback again.

Snatch (2000)

Snatch (2000)

7/10

Starring

Benicio del Toro

Dennis Farina

Jason Flemyng

Vinnie Jones

Brad Pitt

Rade Sherbedgia

Jason Statham

Directed by Guy Ritchie

Having the same design, directing style, theme (British crime comedy), and almost the same actors (compared to his first Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998)), Snatch is Guy Ritchie’s second take at filmmaking. He is also the writer and director of this movie, and while his first film was an instant classic, this one doesn’t stray far from it.

He assembled a cast of seasoned actors for this movie, and each took their role as their own. Like in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, the plot is just as complex. It feels like you’re watching two different plots unfold before your eyes.

We’ll start with the heist, which ends with Franky going to London on behalf of a jeweler to sell a diamond. Elsewhere, we have Turkish, a boxing promoter trying to arrange a fight. Things don’t go well for Turkish when circumstances force him to sell the match to another promoter. His fighter has to take a dive, which were the agreed terms.

As you would expect, things don’t go according to plan. In the two stories, numerous double-crosses lead to chaos, gunshots, and many deaths, including injuries. Instead of intertwining the stories directly from the start, as you might expect (since that’s how he did his first movie), Ritchie allows each story to grow and gain a foothold before letting actions from one story influence the other. It continues like this for much of the movie.

Just like Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels ended with you wondering what would happen next, Snatch ends in much the same way. Another thing that makes the movie fun is how Ritchie never seems to focus on one person as the lead.

The movie was a box-office hit, and we get to see a lot of guns and blood, much like in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Although I’m not sure which movie had more gunshots, it seems like Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels had the most shooting. Ritchie’s obsession with gun violence later became a defining style of screenplay for him. Snatch was both a critical and commercial success.

After watching Ritchie’s first film, you’ll definitely want to see this one too. Both are worth watching and admiring.

If you see other Ritchie movies, you will notice the editing style, which focuses on guns getting loaded. This like the other early Ritchie British movies are memorable and worth seeing.

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998)

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998)

8/10

Starring

Jason Flemyng

Dexter Fletcher

Nick Moran

Jason Statham

Steven Mackintosh

Vinnie Jones

Sting

Directed by Guy Ritchie

There are some movies that become classics, maybe because of the actors, the writing, cinematography, musical score, directing, or everything that constitutes the movie itself. Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is a cult classic that falls into the category of “everything that constitutes this movie is why it’s a classic.”

The movie ensures that you're focused on everyone—no one person steals the screen as the lead. Everyone has a role to play in this marathon of events, which leads to a mountain of dead bodies and injuries. This British crime comedy doesn’t mess around and leaves you wondering: What will Tom do first, pick up his call or drop the package?

The plot is complex, although it wraps up very nicely. Since Ritchie doesn’t shine the focus on just one person, you have to keep track of everyone in the movie, which makes the whole experience more inviting. At first, it feels like you’re watching three different stories, all tied to a group of friends trying to pay off a debt.

The group of friends trying to pay off the debt consists of Eddy, Tom, Soap, and Bacon. The four of them raised the minimum needed to get into a card game arranged by a gangster named Harry. At the end of the rigged game, they owe £500,000. Harry sends Bug Chris to make sure the boys know he intends to collect his money within a week.

The men decide to rob to get the money, but that doesn’t work out well. Before long, we’re tied up in a chase. So, where do the two smoking barrels come in? Well, Harry wanted these antique guns and sent some of his men to get them for him. But they messed up so badly that the guns moved around a lot.

The action scenes are intense, and the movie isn’t afraid to let blood splatter all over the place. This is the movie that brought Jason Statham fame and introduced the world to Guy Ritchie, who directed and wrote this masterpiece. The movie was well-received by all who saw it and was a box-office hit, making more than twenty times its production cost.

If you haven’t seen this movie by now, I wonder why you’ve chosen this, of all the classic movies you could miss in a lifetime. This one deserves to be on your list, it is worth seeing more than once in fact.

The Phantom (1996)

The Phantom (1996)

6/10

Starring

Billy Zane

Treat Williams

Kristy Swanson

Catherine Zeta-Jones

Directed by Simon Wincer

In the 90s, two superhero movies caught my eye: one was The Shadow (1994), and the other was The Phantom (1996). For me, The Phantom fares better than The Shadow. It takes its time to dive into the villain and makes his reach stronger than that in The Shadow.

It doesn’t try to bore you with the mysticism behind what led to The Phantom; it gives a brief intro and then goes straight to business.

The movie was directed to use old-style action sequences that require stunts, and a huge plus for the movie is the cast. Each actor held their own and delivered the fun needed to make this movie watchable numerous times.

The movie is based on The Phantom, a long-running comic strip by Lee Falk, which he started in 1936 and is still ongoing as of 2020. The film is loosely inspired by three of The Phantom stories: The Singh Brotherhood, The Sky Band, and The Belt.

The Phantom has no special powers and relies on his intelligence and skills to get by. There is a myth about him, calling him immortal, which is because many other people have carried the mantle before the one we are watching in this movie. The Phantom is a skilled marksman and good in hand-to-hand combat.

In this plot, the movie is set in 1938, around the time of the 21st Phantom, Kit Walker (Billy Zane). As the Phantom, he has been keeping his side of the world safe in the Bengalla Jungle. His path crosses with a villain named Xander Drax (Treat Williams), who wants to attain ultimate power.

Drax builds his criminal empire in New York while sending his men after the three Skulls of Touganda, which he needs to attain ultimate power.

Drax has a problem with newspaper owner Dave Palmer, who has been investigating Drax thoroughly and his ties to a group best known by their spider-web tattoo. Drax orders Sala (Catherine Zeta-Jones) to kidnap Diana Palmer (Dave’s daughter) to use her as leverage to end her father’s investigation when he hears that Diana is heading to Bengalla. She’s going there to investigate the spider-web meaning.

The Phantom comes to her rescue when she is kidnapped by Sala, and we learn that his alter-ego, Kit, used to date Diana. After assuring her safety, he heads to New York to stop Drax.

I prefer the story here to that of The Shadow, and enjoyed how eccentric some of the cast were. The Phantom is easy to follow and digest. As a pulp-adventure movie, it is fun to watch.

The Shadow (1994)

The Shadow (1994)

6/10

Starring

Alec Baldwin

John Lone

Penelope Ann Miller

Peter Boyle

Ian McKellen

Directed by Russell Mulcahy

Before the whole cinematic universe of Marvel and D.C., there were many other adaptations of superheroes in the 90s. Some of these, like this movie, were based on characters that didn’t exist in either the Marvel or D.C. universe at the time.

Based on the pulp fiction character of the same name, created in 1931 by Walter B. Gibson, the movie’s plot goes like this: The Shadow, a somewhat gun-blaring superhero detective, mostly deals with kingpins and gangs. In this movie, he has to face an evil with powers beyond his own.

The Shadow is skilled in marksmanship and hand-to-hand combat. He also has the power to cloud people's minds and make his presence invisible. He can hypnotize and possesses some level of telekinesis.

As a whole, the movie is fun for the following reasons:
The musical score by Jerry Goldsmith is to be admired. It’s well-crafted to suit each scene. Another plus is the CGI; at every point in the movie, the graphics don’t fail to deliver. One moment that comes to mind is when The Shadow has to step out from the wall after his coat is pinned. It’s done well.

The movie’s main plot starts in Tibet, where we see how Lamont Cranston (Alec Baldwin) became The Shadow and moved to New York after a seven-year disappearance from everyone who knew him. He’s wealthy, lives alone, and doesn’t work.
Everything about him seems fine—his identity is safe, and he has control over things in New York. All of that changes when he meets his love interest, Margo Lane (Penelope Ann Miller). Her presence in his life and the emergence of a new evil, beyond The Shadow’s own powers, threatens the world. He’s the man who has to stop this evil and end it.

The pitfalls of the movie lie in the writing (storyline). You begin to notice this in the movie’s first opening scene, where we see how Cranston became The Shadow. Even for a movie from the 90s, The Shadow has a very silly initial ten minutes, which can make anyone not want to see what follows. This doesn’t improve much later on, even though the visual style keeps you glued. At times, the writing makes you wish someone else had control of it.

Another waste in the movie is the villain and everyone in the realm of evil. Regardless of how powerful the movie tries to make them seem, their presence doesn’t portray that on screen.

Casting Alec Baldwin might have felt like a miscast in the initial ten minutes of the origin story in Tibet because his portrayal of a lost soul was hard to believe. The moment we have him back in New York, wearing suits and playing the superhero The Shadow, his acting power and presence shine.

This is the movie that made Alec Baldwin shy away from A-list movies and stick to B-movies instead. This happened because the movie did poorly at the box office and was not well received.

For its nice visual style, cinematic excellence, and amazing score, this movie is a keeper. That said, the lack of good writing makes this movie drop from being a classic to a fine movie to watch.

The Gentlemen (2020)

The Gentlemen (2020)

6/10

Starring

Matthew McConaughey

Charlie Hunnam

Henry Golding

Michelle Dockery

Colin Farrell

Hugh Grant

Directed by Guy Ritchie

The movie starts with one long exposition, like an essay that drags too long to state the reason for which the title implies. But when it finally gets the ball rolling around thirty minutes in, the movie brings back the old feeling of Guy Ritchie's style of filmmaking. This is not like his Sherlock Holmes or Aladdin style with all the colors. The movie goes back to his time in 1998 with Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, but it’s a far cry from how good that 1998 classic was.

When the movie does pick up, I found myself not liking the humor much, nor enjoying the lack of action, but I did find the intricate details with which he builds his story interesting.

He (Ritchie) tries very hard to leave no stone unturned and build his character Mickey (Matthew McConaughey) to be the bad-ass he wanted to portray. The person that captures the screen for me is not McConaughey, but Charlie Hunnam, who plays Raymond. It was like he was built for the role, and he made the movie far more bearable than the rest of the cast could.

The movie starts with an idea, making you wonder what led to such a situation. Then it leaves that thought lingering in your mind as it shifts over to a man named Fletcher (Hugh Grant). Fletcher is not critical to the story the movie tells; he’s more like a narrator. He approaches Raymond with a proposition: get me $20 million or I’ll sell this story to the movies. He already has a script written, and when Raymond looks like he’s not biting, Fletcher decides to tell him the story he’s going to sell to the film studio. It’s this story (which Fletcher tells while showing Raymond evidence in the form of pictures and video recordings of Mickey’s deals) with Raymond adding some corrections that we get to watch.

The story revolves around the time when Mickey (a crime boss) wants to get out of the cannabis game. He approaches a billionaire and proposes selling his business to him for nine figures (hundreds of millions). Other criminals also want in on the game and make their own offer to Mickey.

Mickey turns the offer down, not wanting to seem weak, but focuses on the person he has already approached. Things in his business start to affect his plan to retire when one of his cannabis farms gets hit, and the trail isn’t looking too promising. The problem further escalates when one of his men kills a Russian. Mickey is trying to handle all of this, and let’s not forget the pending thought the movie drops in the opening scene.
Mickey is now trying to resolve everything and just balance things out, aiming for his retirement.

This balancing act is what the movie focuses on and how Raymond tries to prevent leaving a mess behind.

It’s a good enough movie to recommend, but you have to do so with a warning: “Not so great, but if you can survive the first thirty minutes, it’s not so bad.”

The movie has good audience reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. The returns from the box office for this movie are a good tale for Matthew McConaughey, whose movies haven’t been doing well lately at the box office.