Griff Lees
Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.
toddg-473-289818
Blood Ties tells the story of two brothers, one cop and one convict, making their way through their dysfunctional lives in the early 1970's. Director Guillaume Canet gives the audience an unabashed view of what life looked like then, including the bad hair, tacky clothes, and even the awful paint colors on most interior walls. He observes, rather than explains, and lets the viewer absorb the uncomfortable interactions between the characters, rather than force those moments onto those watching. He even incorporates music of the period into the story, in a Scorsese like way.Clive Owen plays Chris, who is just released from prison and is having hard time adapting back into society, trying to keep on the straight and narrow and not violate the terms of his parole. This is not helped by the allure of getting sucked back into the world of violent crime, as many of the people he runs into in the real world are criminals and/or ex cons. Adding to his stresses are his cold ex-wife, played by Marion Cotillard, who demands years of back child support payments soon after Chris's release. Having seen Owen in mostly strict dramatic roles, this role, while also dramatic, gives Owen a chance to smile a bit, exploring a range of emotions and embracing his inner rebel, reminiscent of a Nicholas Cage.On the flip side of the family, Billy Crudup plays Chris's brother Frank, a cop trying to reconnect with his ex, played by Zoe Saldana. His life is difficult as well, with a somewhat meek personality not particularly suited for law enforcement, and trying to help Chris fit back into the real world. The cast is rounded out by James Caan, playing the brothers' ailing dad, and Mila Kunis, playing Chris's young love interest. The expectation of this movie should be set in that the audience is watching a drama, not an action or cops-and-robbers movie. Having said that, I found Crudup's performance understated, but that may have been the vibe that director Canet was looking for.
lois-lane33
Probably one of the biggest if not the biggest box office flop that has been produced in recent memory. I think they also inflated the budget figures for this movie-maybe so they could justify lavish suites and rented Lambos for everyone involved with the project-who knows. I think what they tried to cash in on was the idea that all things concerning the 1970's cinematographically are a guaranteed shoe in for financial success-based on the idea that the demographic for film goers revolves mostly-now-around people born after the 1970's: when the truth of the demographic is probably more along the lines of most fans of film who will either go to see a film like this or buy a DVD like this are frequently older than 80's baby boomer's. I also have never witnessed such a weak performance from Clive Owen. Maybe he was just taking dull direction from a director dealing with a lifeless script. Again-who knows. I didn't watch the film past the 30 minute mark because nothing had really happened in that time period-as in it was essentially uneventful and boring the entire time I was watching it. I think there were also scripting errors: as in at one point Clive Owen's character bangs his head repeatedly against a wall right in front of his boss (after his boss tells him to stop talking and get back to work) after he was given a job-after being released from prison-and then CO's character just walks of the job by way of taking off in the friends car. Good-bye job. One phone call and that would be it for CO's character. Basically the film would just end there-if it was following anything remotely resembling reality aka the 1970's. A surprisingly poor effort like a trip to Total Dullsville.
Leftbanker
I mean this literally. I realized when I started to watch this that I had already seen it several months ago yet I couldn't remember a thing about it. The first question you have to ask when you see a period piece movie is do they really need to set the film in this era. I don't get it for this movie; there' no time like the present.There were way too many personal angles to be addressed in a two hour movie (it felt like a lot more). If you want to tell this kind of story you should do it on TV. This is only my opinion but trying to make a movie that's supposedly all about acting is a huge mistake if your story is weak. This is especially true when Clive Owen is part of the cast as he's pretty thin on talent.The only reason that I am writing this review is so that I won't try to watch this a third time.
drunkardswalk
I don't get it. We are supposed to be engaged by the complex relationship and moral dilemmas of these two brothers. But most of the other reviewers (and presumably the filmmakers) don't seem to be bothered by the fact that one of them is a murderous sociopath. This is kind of a deal breaker for me in terms of empathy. And yet, the same brother chooses to spare the life of a man who is an obvious existential threat to his family. Stupid script, hackneyed premise, overstuffed soundtrack, and ridiculous casting, including two lead female actresses (Cotillard and Kunis) who look so similar as to be occasionally confusing. Amateur foreign film making masquerading as a tribute to 70's American crime drama. Viewers would do better by sticking with the real thing, for instance: Mean Streets (art); The Friends of Eddie Coyle (slick); Superfly (genuine American trash). Any of these would be a much more fulfilling and enjoyable use of 2 hours.
