It's really slow


I'm watching it now and I'm trying to like it. The man lived a very interesting life.

There are three problems:

Pacing: It is highly focused on 1981 and the rest is flashbacks, but the flashbacks aren't really that interesting and way too sporadic.

Too much focus on the writer, Stone. I don't care about his personal life, his dating that woman down the hall, his ex-wife, and his financial issues.

It's rather dull. There isn't a lot of passion or drama here. I don't feel connected to the characters enough. There is really zero suspense.

Harvey is great and gives an understated performance. Worthington actually does a decent enough job though I wonder if he was miscast.

In summary, it's an average movie about an incredible story.

reply

I noticed that this one just popped up at Redbox the other day. I'm sure I'll eventually see it for the cast and subject matter, but it's disappointing to hear it's slow-paced.

Worthington is a better actor than he's given credit for. Go watch him in Sabotage with Arnold; it's a small role but he disappears into it. I didn't even realize it was him when I first saw the film. Or watch him in Manhunt: Unabomber. He did well there as an FBI agent.

reply

I liked it enough. Keitel is absolutely amazing in anything he does.
He and the actor playing the younger Lansky held the film together.

I wholeheartedly agree about the
writer character! Who cares about him and his messed up life and motel hookup!!

More could have been done about Lansky early years. The content was glossed over IMO.

Watch it for Keitel. The writer guy WAS totally miscast.

reply

[deleted]

Did no one posting here actually finish the movie? His "hotel hookup" is actually quite important to the story...

reply

Agreed, it was important, and the story wasn't slow at all.

Probably the commenters are among the wrongheaded individuals who know too much about organized crime and actually admire and try to valorize the individuals. They're fans of movies like Scarface and so on. A sickness really.

reply