← Back to Reviews
in
Widows
After a heist gone wrong that ends up getting all the robbers involved killed, the widows of the robbers are forced to get the money that was robbed within a month by it's owner. Along the way the movie explores race , gender and socio-economic relationships in america through the lens of Chicago.
The director is trying to tackle a lot of things through the movie. He is showing how the race relationships exist in Chicago. He is exploring the lives of middle class and lower class people in USA. He is also dealing with the gender relationships and the place of women in a man's world and how they are underestimated and undervalued. He is showcasing the inherent racism in the system and attitudes of politicians towards minority in their very own constituencies. Oh by the way there is a heist in the movie to get the money the widows need.
So, one of the main things about a movie is focus. A movie has to be focused because there is a human being behind a movie in the form its director and its his/her vision that is being put on screen. Unfocused human's aren't worth listening to. First and foremost a movie that is being marketed as a heist thriller should be a great heist thriller first no matter how many topics the director is trying to deal with through the movie. Otherwise it feels like a dinner with no main course and just appetizers. That's exactly the reason why I was disappointed with this movie. Director Steve McQueen bites way more than he can chew. The whole movie felt like it is holding back the thrill of heist just so it can explore other non-thriller themes. I get that a straight up thriller is very generic. But the director should have found a more effective way to covering all the topics he wanted all while maintaining the narrative momentum needed for a heist thriller. This movie is not a thriller. It is a drama with occasional thrills. Even the twists in the movie as unexpected as they were are not good. Unexpectedness is not an accurate scale for measuring the quality of a twist. Having said that one might ask , how does the movie handle the socio-political and race and gender stuff ?Well, It's half baked. The script didn't feel like a cohesive story that is being enhanced with political undertones but rather as a collection of interesting concepts and themes the director wanted to include in a movie and a story was weaved around it. It often times feels like way too many topics were covered in the movie and somewhere in the 2nd or 3rd act, in a matter of 15 minutes the director covers topics ranging from guns in america, abusive parents, sex, poverty and gang violence. That's too much.
The biggest sin the movie commits is that the heist in the movie is not exciting. I don't need romanticized violence in a movie but that doesn't mean I can't expect a great heist in a movie. Smartness can be exhibited even in terrible circumstances and is a way to exhibit human spirit. Just because characters in the movie are desperate doesn't mean they can't be smart.Even the lead up to the heist is very generic. Having seen Chicago I can say that it is one of those very few cities in the world where with in matter of few miles you can witness huge economic disparity. Huge mansions and buildings are just 2 miles away from poverty stricken neighborhoods and director captures that part perfectly. The movie also depicts inherent racism and sexism in a much more nuanced way than many other movies dealing with those subject matters. It also deals with black on black violence competently. But apart from that nothing else in this movie has any flow. The movie just doubles down on meanness of humans to each other especially to women just to make a point and all this is done with no narrative cohesion.
Spoilers
The twist in the movie involves Liam Neeson aka husband of Viola Davis faking his own death during the robbery to help Colin Farrell by robbing his mayoral political opponent's campaign money and killing his partners during the robbery to be with one of their wife whom he impregnated and there by killing two birds with one shot. So in the end even her husband becomes one of the men that is abusing Viola Davis emotionally adding him to long list of abusive male characters in the movie. This in a way justifies her killing Liam Neeson in the end. The problem with the twist is that its way too silly and unrealistic for the rest of the tone of the movie. In a movie like the dark knight these kinds of twists work because it has a guy in a bat suit at the center of it and the whole tone of the movie is hyper realistic. But this movie starts way too realistic to have this kind of silly and generic twists.
This movie also highlights two of the bigger problems with the critics community today and forcing diversity in Hollywood. One of the main reasons why some top movie stars work only with top well respected and acclaimed legendary directors exclusively for the most part is because apart from delivering a quality movie they also help in building buzz and anticipation for the movies. A Quentin Tarantino movie is highly anticipated even before anyone has seen a single shot of the movie. This does contribute to box office. Even with the critics community its the same. They anticipate and review a movie from a legendary director differently than a movie from other directors. Other directors have to work twice as hard to prove that their movie is worth receiving the acclaim. And also there is this weird brain washing that goes on with in critics community where they feel they are some sort of authority whose duty is it to decide which movies are would-be classics and which movies are not. In their quest to full fill their self created destiny they brain wash themselves into thinking that any movie that promotes diversity in current times and a movie by a director whose last movie is acclaimed and won best picture must be good. So, they tend to overlook all its incredible flaws. I was shocked at the rotten tomatoes score for the movie. Hopefully audience rejects this movie there by putting an end to this mob mentality among critics and awards pundits that just because you like a director like Damien Chazelle and Steve McQueen doesn't mean they always make great movies and audience go to them like sheep.
After a heist gone wrong that ends up getting all the robbers involved killed, the widows of the robbers are forced to get the money that was robbed within a month by it's owner. Along the way the movie explores race , gender and socio-economic relationships in america through the lens of Chicago.
The director is trying to tackle a lot of things through the movie. He is showing how the race relationships exist in Chicago. He is exploring the lives of middle class and lower class people in USA. He is also dealing with the gender relationships and the place of women in a man's world and how they are underestimated and undervalued. He is showcasing the inherent racism in the system and attitudes of politicians towards minority in their very own constituencies. Oh by the way there is a heist in the movie to get the money the widows need.
So, one of the main things about a movie is focus. A movie has to be focused because there is a human being behind a movie in the form its director and its his/her vision that is being put on screen. Unfocused human's aren't worth listening to. First and foremost a movie that is being marketed as a heist thriller should be a great heist thriller first no matter how many topics the director is trying to deal with through the movie. Otherwise it feels like a dinner with no main course and just appetizers. That's exactly the reason why I was disappointed with this movie. Director Steve McQueen bites way more than he can chew. The whole movie felt like it is holding back the thrill of heist just so it can explore other non-thriller themes. I get that a straight up thriller is very generic. But the director should have found a more effective way to covering all the topics he wanted all while maintaining the narrative momentum needed for a heist thriller. This movie is not a thriller. It is a drama with occasional thrills. Even the twists in the movie as unexpected as they were are not good. Unexpectedness is not an accurate scale for measuring the quality of a twist. Having said that one might ask , how does the movie handle the socio-political and race and gender stuff ?Well, It's half baked. The script didn't feel like a cohesive story that is being enhanced with political undertones but rather as a collection of interesting concepts and themes the director wanted to include in a movie and a story was weaved around it. It often times feels like way too many topics were covered in the movie and somewhere in the 2nd or 3rd act, in a matter of 15 minutes the director covers topics ranging from guns in america, abusive parents, sex, poverty and gang violence. That's too much.
The biggest sin the movie commits is that the heist in the movie is not exciting. I don't need romanticized violence in a movie but that doesn't mean I can't expect a great heist in a movie. Smartness can be exhibited even in terrible circumstances and is a way to exhibit human spirit. Just because characters in the movie are desperate doesn't mean they can't be smart.Even the lead up to the heist is very generic. Having seen Chicago I can say that it is one of those very few cities in the world where with in matter of few miles you can witness huge economic disparity. Huge mansions and buildings are just 2 miles away from poverty stricken neighborhoods and director captures that part perfectly. The movie also depicts inherent racism and sexism in a much more nuanced way than many other movies dealing with those subject matters. It also deals with black on black violence competently. But apart from that nothing else in this movie has any flow. The movie just doubles down on meanness of humans to each other especially to women just to make a point and all this is done with no narrative cohesion.
Spoilers
The twist in the movie involves Liam Neeson aka husband of Viola Davis faking his own death during the robbery to help Colin Farrell by robbing his mayoral political opponent's campaign money and killing his partners during the robbery to be with one of their wife whom he impregnated and there by killing two birds with one shot. So in the end even her husband becomes one of the men that is abusing Viola Davis emotionally adding him to long list of abusive male characters in the movie. This in a way justifies her killing Liam Neeson in the end. The problem with the twist is that its way too silly and unrealistic for the rest of the tone of the movie. In a movie like the dark knight these kinds of twists work because it has a guy in a bat suit at the center of it and the whole tone of the movie is hyper realistic. But this movie starts way too realistic to have this kind of silly and generic twists.
This movie also highlights two of the bigger problems with the critics community today and forcing diversity in Hollywood. One of the main reasons why some top movie stars work only with top well respected and acclaimed legendary directors exclusively for the most part is because apart from delivering a quality movie they also help in building buzz and anticipation for the movies. A Quentin Tarantino movie is highly anticipated even before anyone has seen a single shot of the movie. This does contribute to box office. Even with the critics community its the same. They anticipate and review a movie from a legendary director differently than a movie from other directors. Other directors have to work twice as hard to prove that their movie is worth receiving the acclaim. And also there is this weird brain washing that goes on with in critics community where they feel they are some sort of authority whose duty is it to decide which movies are would-be classics and which movies are not. In their quest to full fill their self created destiny they brain wash themselves into thinking that any movie that promotes diversity in current times and a movie by a director whose last movie is acclaimed and won best picture must be good. So, they tend to overlook all its incredible flaws. I was shocked at the rotten tomatoes score for the movie. Hopefully audience rejects this movie there by putting an end to this mob mentality among critics and awards pundits that just because you like a director like Damien Chazelle and Steve McQueen doesn't mean they always make great movies and audience go to them like sheep.