Free Fire (2016) User Reviews (241)

Like Res Dogs but worse

[mistoppi · 5/10 · 27 April 2017]

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.

Average Velocity

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 30 April 2017]

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

Slightly above average, but boring, boring, boring

[muneeb658 · 6/10 · 22 April 2017]

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.

Shoot me now, it would be more enjoyable

[tango-03452 · 6 April 2017]

Firstly, let me make it clear that the only reason we saw this film was that it filled some time we had to kill and finished at a convenient time for us to catch a cross channel ferry. If I were stranded on a desert island, with the only way out being to write a positive and glowing review of this film, I guess I would have to develop a liking for coconuts, sand and raw crabs. This has to be one of the most tedious films ever made - right up there with Aguirre, Wrath of God - and can best be described as 90 minutes of my life I will never get back. The plot? That question is more complex than the plot itself, which is basically, bunch of misfits, criminal deal, one insult and then 80 minutes of people shooting recklessly and all ending up in a bad way. The whole thing could have been over and done with in 5 minutes and saved an awful lot of celluloid. The fact that two of us were alone in a three hundred seat theatre for this debacle says quite enough. Funny? FUNNY? Are you kidding? If you think that was amusing or entertaining, good luck over summer, you'll have an absolute scream watching the grass grow.

Free Fire Review

[Ben-Hibburd · 6/10 · 19 December 2017]

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.

Mad, darkly humored, violent hour+ shootout

[ebeckstr-1 · 7/10 · 17 January 2021]

Well the headline says it all. Free Frre is indeed a mad, darkly humored, violent hour-and-ten-minute shootout. The first 15 minutes does an excellent job of setting up the characters. We learn exactly what we need to know about them going into the rest of the movie and no more. We know that many of them have past acquaintanceships with each other, we know that no one trusts anyone, and we know that probably none of them are any good. Throughout the course of the flick we learn that this is one of those movies where reloading weapons is an afterthought, as everyone seems to have guns with 3000 magazines.

This must have been a very challenging movie to edit, more so than it needed to be because It suffers from a lack of establishing shots - it becomes fairly difficult to keep track of where everyone is at times - and I think the very, very ending, while okay is surprisingly conservative given the rest of the movie.

Nonetheless, it's insane, over the top, violent fun. If you like the John Wick movies and can handle 90 minutes without Keanu Reeves then you might have fun with this flick.

Unevenly paced, messily edited, sometimes confusing and not very well structured,

[Offworld_Colony · 7/10 · 17 February 2020]

Free Fire is also, on many occasions, truly laugh out loud funny, I mean some of the line readings and stings of dialogue are really funny. The film is extremely well shot, the cinematography is lovely and the set design carefully messy.

It's a creative and unique affair seeming to all take place at floor level. It's not particularly deep or meaningful or clever. But it is simple and it is fun. Which is already two over most other blockbusters. And it clearly shows Sharlto Copley as the memorable offbeat leading man he has the potential to be when given the right material.

A very entertaining and actually quite funny movie

[barbagvido · 7/10 · 15 October 2017]

Free Fire is a movie about this group of criminals that has a meeting with another group of criminals for an arms deal. But, because of one idiot on each side, things go south and all hell breaks loose.

So, basically, the whole movie is like a really long action sequence. The whole plot of the movie is that shoot- out and that's it. Nothing more. Don't go into it expecting anything beyond the surface. The characters are kinda unlike-able and likable at the same time. They are awful people so it's hard to connect, but they keep you interested with witty dialogues. The performances are pretty great (especially Sharlto Copley) and the action is fun. Not really intense because you don't really care about these people, but it's fun. You don't really want desperately for anyone to survive, but there are some that you'd like to see get killed more than others. Although not intense, it's chaotic nature, black comedy and fun action are sure to keep you entertained. It's nothing extraordinary, but you can check it out if you're interested.

A wonderful example of a guilty pleasure movie

[Stootomlin · 8/10 · 16 March 2017]

I watched this at a Cineworld Unlimited showing. Before it played, there was a little intro from Ben Wheatley the director. He described the movie as a fun action film, with lots of violence and lots of swearing, and that it was mercifully short. I'm not sure I can characterise it much better than that. So I'm not going to try.

When I saw the trailers for this film, I turned to my wife and said "I really hope this whole film is contained in the one room, if they do that, then it will have to stand and fall on the script, the characters and the acting, rather than just rely on some special effects and the action". I am pleased to report, I got my wish.

The setup is simple. We're in 1978, a group of Irish men (presumably IRA) are trying to buy guns in American, Boston to be precise, so they ship them back to Ireland, and use them to shoot the British. The 'brains' of the outfit are Chris and Frank played by Cillian Murphy and Michael Smiley respectively. The (and I'm using this next word in the loosest possible way) 'muscle' (but in all fairness, they certainly don't seem to have any brains) are Stevo and Bernie.

On the other side, we have the sellers, headed up by Vern, played by Sharlto Copley, and Ord played by Armie Hammer.

Both parties seem to have been brought together by the only woman in the film, Justine played by Brie Larson.

So, we have a briefcase full of cash, and a van full of guns, all we have to do is swap one for the other. What could go wrong?

Let's just say that there is a disagreement over someone's actions, and things quickly spiral out of control.

I'm not going to get into details, because to be honest, there aren't very many, and if you've read any of my other reviews I don't like to spoil. We can just say that bullets start flying, left, right and centre, and we have a film.

The films hangs on the humour of the situation. The one liners, the insanely inappropriate comments, the wonderful character interactions.

The exchanges between Frank and Ord are wonderful.

Vern is hilarious, and his reactions to Chris chatting up Justine are a great running joke. It really will make you giggle, often at things you'd wish didn't make you laugh. Watching people get shot shouldn't be funny, but in this context, it just is.

This is the ultimate Mexican standoff. Luckily none of the characters have a particularly good aim, so the ridiculousness lasts exactly 90 minutes, and that feels just about right. There is only so much chaos, bursts of gunfire interlinked with witty banter that an audience can take.

This isn't a great film by any stretch of the imagination, but it is a wonderful example of a guilty pleasure movie. Lots of action, lots of jokes, and a little more intrigue then you originally expect. Oh, didn't I say it doesn't play out quite as simply as you'd assume? No? Well it doesn't, it actually keeps you on your toes, that is when you're not rolling around on the floor.

Remember to listen carefully, because some of the best jokes come in the middle of gunshots, or are said in a ridiculously over the top South African accent.

Well worth 90 minutes of anyone's time.

Tarantino, Ritchie, Woo, Scorsese, they're all here . . . with lots of guns

[Mr-Fusion · 7/10 · 4 May 2017]

By no means an "important" movie, but a good way to kill a Thursday afternoon in an empty theater. "Free Fire" makes no pretense at anything other than a sustained warehouse shootout intermixed with snatches of dialogue (snarky banter for the most part). Its cast of reprobates in gaudy '70s wear is really what makes this fun (in particular the foxy Brie Larson, and both Armie Hammer and Sharlto Copley providing yuks).

I really did grow to like these people (some more so) and that helps when the whizzing bullets start to lose their appeal (I say that as an ardent admirer of cinematic gun-play); enough so that the loss of one character was a real disappointment. We never got to hear the John Denver story!

7/10

Free Crawling

[tenshinhan_san · 2/10 · 3 June 2017]

That is what they should have called this film.

Some action and a lot of crawling, like watching paint dry.

I wanted to like it but it was just too ridiculous and tedious.

No likable characters really, I wasted my time watching this and I urge you not to do the same.

Shame really, with such a great cast and a good performance it still wasn't enough to save it.

A movie with more than a whiff of cordite about it.

[bob-the-movie-man · 8/10 · 6 April 2017]

As I write this, I'm really struggling to evaluate whether the latest film of Ben Wheatley ("High Rise") is a masterpiece or just pulp trash. It's certainly a brave and highly distinctive venture, with that you can't argue.

Set in Boston in 1978, an arms deal is going down in a deserted warehouse. Brokered by Justine (Brie Larson, "Room") an IRA team headed by Frank (Michael Smiley, "The World's End") with his business guy Chris (Cillian Murphy, "Inception", "Batman Begins") are on the buying side. As 'roadies' they've brought with them a couple of crack- head friends Stevo (Sam Riley, "Brighton Rock", "Maleficent") and Bernie (Enzo Cilenti, "The Martian") who are far from stable.

On the selling side is South African dealer and "international a-hole" Vern (Sharlto Copley, "Elysium"), his suave and wisecracking protector Ord (Arnie Hammer, "The Man From Uncle") and Vern's right hand man Martin (Babou Ceesay, "Eye in the Sky"). What connects all of these individuals is that no-one likes or trusts anyone else.

Unfortunately, one of Vern's van drivers is John Denver-lover Harry (the excellent Jack Treynor, "Sing Street") who has very recent personal history with Stevo. The fuse is lit, and when the two meet chaos ensues: in the words of Anchorman's Ron Burgundy, "That escalated quickly"!

And, for a 90 minute film, that's basically it. If you think after viewing the trailer "there must be more to the film than this".... you're wrong!

However, what there is of it is enormously entertaining. Played ostensibly for laughs, with very very black humour and an F-word and a gunshot in every other sentence, some of the characters – notably those played by Sharlto Copley, Armie Hammer and Brie Larson – have some hilarious dialogue. The star turn for me though was Jack Treynor who was just so impressive as the 'lost at sea' brother in the delightful "Sing Street" and here delivers a stand-out performance as another brother on a mission... this time a mission of vengeance. You are waiting throughout the film for the inevitable showdown between Harry and Stevo - - and when it comes it is both bloody and memorable.

A cracking 70' soundtrack, put together by the Portishead duo of Geoff Barrow and Ben Salisbury, involves 70's classics by Credence Clearwater Revival, John Denver and The Real Kids and it's hammered out at top volume over the action. The downside of this effect is that - for my old ears at least - it sometimes make some of the dialogue hard to follow.

As a policing exercise, the film clearly has merit. In the same manner as Schwarzenegger's "Running Man" put criminals in an arena to cull them, so this must have reduced the crime rates in both Boston and Belfast no end! While some may not approve of the levels of violence on show, it is all done in a highly cartoonish way: like a "Tom and Jerry" cartoon, or "Home Alone", everyone seems to get shot multiple times and yet (in the main) is still active and mobile. All of this makes criticism of the performances something of a waste of time, but I would comment that some of the acting is of the "over the top" variety: surprisingly, I found some of Oscar winner Brie Larson's scenes falling into this category and snapping me out of the narrative at times.

But overall, my evaluation is now done and I am rooting on the side of it being a brash and exhilarating minor masterpiece. Yes, it's one- dimensional. Yes, it is virtually impossible to feel any empathy with any of the characters, as they are all universally loathsome. But it's a movie whose flaws are forgivable based on the characterisation and the cracking good script by long-term collaborators Ben Wheatley and Amy Jump.

Tight as it is within its 90 minute running time, I doubt you will be bored.

(For the graphical version of this review, please visit bob-the-movie- man.com. Thanks).

Really disappointed

[tmfc-65132 · 6/10 · 27 June 2017]

I was really looking forward to this film because it has Sharlto Copley, Martin Scorsese as executive producer and it looked similar to reservoir dogs. How was this not good. The main reason was it felt empty, nothing had any consequence and the characters felt generic.

I liked Sharlto Copley in this he did a pretty good job as did Cillian Murphy but everyone else was not good at all. Armie Hammer felt annoying all the way through and so did Brie Larson. Their characters just felt really unlikeable to me. Everyone else in this just felt cringey and worthless.

The worst part of this movie though is there are no consequences at all. Everyone gets shot at least 5 times in this and they just keep crawling around on the ground. This takes away any tension as no one dies until the end really.

I would recommend you don't watch this but instead just go and watch reservoir dogs.

An unbelievably boring display of gun violence and not much else

[thefendiprint · 3/10 · 24 May 2017]

When I first saw the trailer for this film a few months ago, I was very intrigued considering I am a fan of Brie Larson and the trailer actually made it look like a fun time. Not to mention I am a huge fan of A24 films.

However, after finally seeing it, I can say that this movie is a snooze. If you enjoy watching a group of terrible people shooting at each other for an hour and a half without any depth or conclusion, then this is the movie for you.

I wanted to like this film, but it honestly would have worked so much better as a short film. Watching people curse and shoot at each other for 90 minutes gets very boring and tedious after a while. Save your money on this one. I would only recommend this if you are a die-hard fan of shootout movies or if you're able to see it for free on the Internet.

Otherwise, avoid at all costs!

How did this film get so many big names?

[Gordon-11 · 14 June 2017]

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.

Wheatly's most traditional effort is also his most successful, this is an entertaining and subversive film that's simple but effective.

[Pjtaylor-96-138044 · 7/10 · 2 April 2017]

The always polarising Ben Wheatly has never been one to conform, but here his most traditional work is also perhaps his most successful. He and long-time writing partner Amy Jump craft a tale of an arms deal gone wrong and the ensuing shootout that erupts. There's really not much else to it, the ninety-one-minute feature takes place almost entirely inside a dingy warehouse with a few characters locked in a long-term gun battle. Thankfully, while its swift runtime does drag a little, the film always manages to hold your attention and is consistently entertaining.

The set-up is simple but effective. A rag-tag group of would-be businessmen come to a meeting in an abandoned warehouse where another similarly disorganised gang await with the intention of selling them several assault rifles. The deal gets off to a frosty start straight away, but it doesn't take long before things go awry (not in the way I expected, might I add) and the bullets start flying. Once the inevitable first shot is fired, after a well-done first act that establishes the characters and tone whilst sewing several seeds of anticipatory tension, the feature kicks it up a notch with a simultaneously broadly chaotic and intimately low-key initial skirmish. After that, Wheatly wisely plays with the pace of the piece by purposefully peppering long stretches of perpetual pot-shots with powerful explosions of meaningful confrontation. He also includes a couple of small but significant sidesteps to his own formula, which introduce life back into the central situation whenever it threatens to become stale. It's a different kind of shootout, too, with less blood but perhaps more pain; it's not long before every character is unflatteringly crawling around the dirty floor, contorting their bodies to hide behind the various slithers of cover available, and almost everyone has at least one wound to contend with. The film clearly relishes its action cinema roots while trying its best to stray away from their conventions, and as such manages to constantly find a fine balance between a realistic grit and a genre charm. The characters can be lacking, though, with only a couple of them actually feeling rounded. The majority just feel like extensions of the writers' own voices, occasionally spewing uncharacteristically calm and cruel barbs that are just as painful as the high velocity lead. The humour that stems from the characters themselves can be quite successful, but when the feature takes a step back and tries to force humour into a grim situation it can feel a tad artificial. The writing duo do enjoy their black comedy, but it's relatively rare here so when it does show up it can sometimes feels callous and out of place. Still, the fact that the feature is never afraid to be fun means that it's always a good time and never becomes dour.

Since it takes up so much of the runtime, I'll now talk about the action. The gunplay seems to be mostly practical, leading it to feel tactile and tangible, and attention is paid to the amount of ammo used, too. It's common for characters to reload their weapons or scramble for another clip, and even things like gun-jams occur. These moments never feel like plot devices, rather more like simple realities of actually using these weapons, and lend a believability to the piece that adds to its overall tension. Each bullet hits its target with true impact, sending dust and debris spewing everywhere, and characters are effected by every aspect of the environment which truly compounds them in the space. No-one has auto-aim enabled either, leading to characters missing crucial shots even when it'd be beneficial to the plot for them not to, which makes everyone seems human no matter their level of weapon expertise. Direction-wise, Wheatly makes good use of action lines to minimise confusion and edits cleanly around the gunshots for maximum impact. The camera work is mostly clean and controlled. Unfortunately, the infrequent moments of close-up action don't work nearly as well. The camera is way too close and shakes about too much, making it hard to discern what's happening. Luckily, these scenes aren't long and don't have too much impact on the larger plot. Still, it would have been nice to see them handled with as much care as the gunplay. The actors all do a great job with their material, and the writing is generally very strong overall.

In the end, 'Free Fire (2016)' is a consistently entertaining film that does drag a little but still manages to keep you engaged with its realistic edge and its genre charm. The writing is decent, the direction is clean, the acting is convincing and the action is enjoyable. It may be Wheatly's most traditional effort, but it's also perhaps his most successful. 7/10.

An absolute blast

[IMDbcoco · 7/10 · 9 December 2020]

This was a real hoot.

The characters wanting to play 'big time' fell well short of their own expectations and aspirations. A great deal of hapless, witless stuff goes on to great comic effect.

I love hilarious, rediculous stuff and easy going action.

I smiled and laughed all the way through.

Lots of funny quips and action.

[draciron · 7/10 · 23 August 2017]

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.

Ever watched a 80 minute long shootout, this might be your first time.

[ronnievanrijswijk · 7/10 · 30 September 2017]

I bought this movie on DVD because i was attracted by the cover art and the idea of an 1970's style action comedy, so why not. Although i read a few reviews here from people who called it boring, i immediately thought STOP READING STOP READING. Don't ruin the whole movie because of a few negative reviews, first of all (with out trying to spoil anything) the movie is basically one big shootout filled with absurd situations and silliness. And i could imagine that some viewers might not like the idea of a whole feature film build around a shootout, but i can honestly say that they did a good job on keeping the whole thing interesting. If you enjoy gangster comedies or anything in the vain of Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, i would say give it a try.

An absolute blast!

[moorestahl · 10/10 · 18 April 2019]

I really don't understand all the negative reviews ??? I personally, absolutely love this movie. It's a Tarantino style film but with its own unique flavour from start to finish. Wonderful dialogue, gritty set and guns guns guns! Comedy...Acton...and a fantastic cast.

Inspirited by an actual F.B.I report on a Miami shootout

[uzach · 6/10 · 7 October 2019]

Enjoyed this so much when i watched it at the cinema that I had to watch it again, didn't have the same spark it did the first time but i still really liked it.

With so many great characters all locked in a small warehouse with a disaster situation and its black comedy edge it makes a great watch but I do think this will be a Marmite film where you either love it or hate it.

Solid performance from the cast and a great story all set in one location with more gun fire then a Texas shooting range, add in some 70's black comedy and the awesome Armie Hammer, Cillian Mrphy and Sharlto Copley and you got a kick-ass film.

Direct-To-Video at best.

[TheOneThatYouWanted · 3/10 · 25 May 2017]

Overall this is a very weak film thanks to the directing and lack of a storyline or even a script. I would not be surprised if you told me this film took two days to film and a week to edit, it is just that poorly done. Don't be fooled by the gun action in the trailer, the actors are literally crawling around on their hands and knees for the whole second half of the film. I wanted to like this movie, I really did. Most of the actors in this film are usually great. And the guy who directed this did Kill List, which is freaking brilliant so yeah.. I'm not sure how this film turned into a joke but sh!t happens I guess. Final score, skip it.

One hell of a bang at TIFF

[GODZILLA_Alpha_Predator · 8/10 · 9 September 2016]

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.

Bang and Zing!

[ferguson-6 · 7/10 · 16 April 2017]

Greetings again from the darkness. Searching back through more than a decade of film reviews, I can confirm that the phrase "slapstick shootout" has not previously been part of my movie lexicon … which is a relief since it could never be more accurately placed than in description of this latest from the husband and wife filmmaking team of director Ben Wheatley and writer Amy Jump (prior works include High-Rise, Kill List and a few others). The zingers are plentiful – both in bullets and dialogue. It's unlikely you've ever laughed as much during such a violent/gory/graphic assault on the senses (especially auditory).

Set in 1978 Boston, which allows for added humor via music, attire, hairstyles and vehicles, the basic premise is a meet-up for the deal between an IRA faction and a gun-dealer, with the brokers and "muscle" of each side along for the ride. When cases of AR70's are presented instead of the ordered M16's, the deal gets a bit shaky until cooler heads prevail. That is until one of the gun-runners recognizes an IRA guy as the one who disrespected his 17 year old cousin the night before. It's at this point that the film cranks to a frenzy that would make the Mayhem commercial guy proud. It's the visual definition of a cluster.

A stand-off and shootout occurs (with side deals and betrayals) over the next hour and yet the early comical dialogue somehow becomes next level great despite bullets whizzing through a terrific setting in an abandoned umbrella warehouse. Unlike in some movies, these bullets inflict pain (and the subsequent cries and wails). The characters continue to banter and threaten one another, all while dragging their lead-induced injuries across the dusty floor between various forms of protective shields strewn about the warehouse.

Normally I would concentrate on the major characters, but most everyone involved in the deal-gone-bad has at least a couple of memorable lines and moments. The gun-runners are led by Sharlto Copley as Vernon, a cocky, mouthy South African whose dialect sounds an awful like New Zealander Murray in the classic TV gem "Flight of the Conchords". In a movie that seems impossible to steal, Copley comes the closest and his Vernon would make a perfect Halloween costume and annoying party guest. His cohorts are Marion (Babou Cesay), Gordan (Noah Taylor, Max 2002) and Jack Reynor (Sing Street, 2016). The IRA group is led by uptight Chris (Cillian Murphy), Stevo (a hilarious Sam Riley, Mr Darcy in Pride and Prejudice and Zombies), Frank (Michael Smiley) and Bernie (Enzo Cilenti). The two deal brokers are the ultra-debonair Ord (Armie Hammer) and the lone female Justine (Brie Larson). It's a terrific cast having a ridiculously good time with a creative and rollicking script.

Know going in that the film is a very hard R-rating for violence, drug use (in the middle of the shootout), and a bounty of flowing F-words. It's neither for the faint of heart nor those who take their standoffs too seriously. Director Wheatley employs a vast array of unusual camera angles to ensure the action never looks boring, and his use of secondary and tertiary sound (especially with dialogue) is expert and dizzying at times. Don't expect too many layers or sub-plots. It's simply a shoot 'em up romp capitalizing on black comedy to the nth degree. John Denver might not have approved of the use of his song, and just remember, "We can't all be nice girls".

90 POINTLESS MINUTES

[grahame12 · 1/10 · 14 July 2018]

Nothing but bang bang, bang, bang for 90 minutes for absolutely no reason. Guns that never emptied, shots missed at point blank range and people still crawling round shot up like a cullender. A shoot-up can be worth watching, but not this one.