User reviews

'Widows' quickly became one of the my most anticipated films of the latter half of 2018. It is hard to go wrong with such a sterling cast, most with great performances under their belt. Having Steve McQueen, of '12 Years a Slave' (not everybody liked that film, highly appreciated it personally) fame, directing and 'Gone Girl' (love both book and film) author Gillian Flynn penning the script also promised a lot, as well as some great ideas.

On the most part, 'Widows' was a very good film and of the five films seen in the cinema in the past week (the others being 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald', 'The Grinch', 'The Girl in the Spider's Web' and 'Robin Hood') it was by far the best of the five. Not for everybody, with a measured pace and a lot going on subplots and character--wise, but for me it kept me engrossed right from its violent and hard-hitting opening sequence. At the same time, 'Widows' disappointed slightly, because it was capable of greatness. Most of it actually was great and it very nearly became one of my favourite films of the year, even though not perfect it still is in the better half with that being said, just a few things brought it down.

Its biggest fault was the final 25-30 minutes, which actually strictly speaking should have been the most exciting part of the film. Instead this portion of the film felt very rushed, strained credibility, was reliant on too convenient coincidences and ended too patly with things left in the air. The resolution of the big twist, which won't be spoiled, was particularly underwhelming.

That to me was pretty much the only majorly wrong thing, though also thought the sparsely used (a good choice actually) music was pretty forgettable and the political subplot was not as compelling or as meaty as the others, somewhat undercooked.

However, it is remarkable that 'Widows' had as many characters, subplots and themes as it did and it still managed to be as engrossing as it was. Although others will disagree, with there being complaints of incoherence and trying to do too much (didn't find that personally, and the latter has been a recurring issue in some films seen recently), 'Widows' didn't feel over-stuffed and it wasn't confusing to me. While deliberate, the pace didn't feel that slow, because the meaty character writing in very much a character-driven film and how adeptly a vast majority of the subplots were done were so well done. Also the length did not bother me, at just over two hours, compared to quite a number of films that actually is not that long, so the overlong complaint is puzzling. There was some good suspense and a few nice unexpected twists. The dialogue is tight and really crackles in the best moments, also provoking much thought and having a lot to say about its heavy and relevant themes (like the connection between money and power) done insightfully and without preaching.

McQueen's direction is very much bravura in quality, not as brutal as in '12 Years a Slave' (which is a different film), though there are brutal moments, but it is every bit as honest and punchy. The production values, particularly the photography, are slick and stylish, with many audacious touches like the car-bonnet mounted shot.

As far as the acting goes, that is one of the areas where 'Widows' most excels, containing some of the best ensemble acting of the year. Viola Davis' powerhouse performance, intense yet soulful, is the one that dominates but there are particularly superb performances from Elizabeth Debicki, one to watch, and Daniel Kaluuya at his most chilling. Brian Tyree Henry also sports creepy moments. Colin Farrell gives one of his best performances since 'In Bruges', Liam Neeson is charismatic in his relatively short screen time and Robert Duvall is great value. The biggest surprise here was McQueen getting a good performance out of Michelle Rodriguez, shying away from her trademark tough girl image and who has never been better. Loved the dog too.

Summarising, very good and nearly great, it would have been the latter if the last half an hour or so was as good as the rest of the film and wasn't a let down. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Standout acting, especially from Viola Davis, cannot save this movie from thematic incoherence. So many themes are touched here-heist movie, loss, race, power politics, sexism, domestic abuse, sex work, etc.-that none seem fully formed. This would be a great novel, miniseries or other long form, but loses cohesion in a standard movie length.

01/24/2019 Immediate viewer immersion is guaranteed. A couple of slow spots, building the storylines foundation, but once that's done, your hooked. I really enjoyed this easy to watch movie, a pleasant change from the standard fare we're forced to watch. Bon Appetit

It would be hard NOT to recommend this film simply based on the top of the line actors here. Seeing Viola Davis and Liam Neeson as passionate lovers might be worth the whole film. Michelle Rodriguez for once doesn't play the Michelle Rodriguez character (someone else does); you might almost mistake her for America Ferrara initially. Duval plays in a familiar register but he does it well; Farrell is workmanlike but in an unfamiliar role. Etc.

As for the story, it is wound tight for most of the film, including scenes of violence worthy of (and not always far from) Tarantino. There is also a theme - almost overdone these days - of women discovering themselves through transgression. And there are some very sexy scenes.

Strangely though, the film goes seriously off-track at the end, almost as if the screenwriters ended up in a hurry or just didn't care anymore. Except for one applause-worthy moment, the ending feels cursory and leaves some pretty obvious questions unanswered. Which is downright strange for such an otherwise tightly written film. To put it another way, for much of the film it's 8 or 9 star, then in the close it's 3 or 4.

I'm surprised honestly some of the high-powered talent here didn't demand some rewrites. As it is, you'll probably enjoy much of it (unless you can't stomach violence) and certainly if you're the kind of viewer who just lives for a few good moments between real pros, you've got them here. But it's an incomplete experience in the end.

Could have been a five star, but needed to fill some holes where things were left a bit inconclusive. Check out Erivo in "Bad Times at the El Royale" especially her singing. a. Not much background on where the money to be stolen was acquired; why small denomination cash; why the obvious wall safe behind a painting. How monies moved or disposed of. Especially after the heist how it was handled. b. Too many left hanging bits 'n pieces like disposing of a bunch of bodies. Also, a hospital should do what w/a gunshot victim - report to police who do forensics on bullet; ask questions; tie in w/recent crimes. c. Normally forensics by police should have looked into crime scenes which leave behind plenty of evidence. But maybe the writer/director wasn't interested in making that a realistic part of the story. d. Lots of contingencies like extra vehicles; cleaning up evidence at the end seemed glossed over which was disappointing. e. Not clear how the women finished their pact; how their lives were concluded.

If you are considering "inheritence planning" there are probably a number of things you might be toying with: what happens to your house; how to best transfer your investments; who gets the dog; etc. But probably "a grudge" is not on the list. But that's the problem faced by teacher's union rep Veronica (Viola Davis). As you might presume from the film's title Veronica, together with fellow widows Linda (Michelle Rodriquez), Alice (Elizabeth Debicki), Amanda (Carrie Coon), are left in a tight spot when a gang's robbery of a local black hoodlum's stack of cash goes badly wrong. The leader of the gang, and Veronica's husband, is Harry Rawlings (Liam Neeson), and his certain set of skills are not enough to save him.

The victim of the robbery, Jamal Manning (Brian Tyree Henry), is running for local office in the upcoming elections against Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell), trying to take over the role as part of a long dynasty from his grouchy father Tom (Robert Duvall). Where Jamal might be better with words, Jamal's brother Jatemme (Daniel Kaluuya, "Get Out") has a more physical approach to resolving issues.

What Harry has left behind for Veronica is a notebook containing the details of their next job, and Veronica gathers the female group together to carry out the raid to help save them from a "bullet in the head".

I really enjoyed this film. It's the ying to the yang of the disappointing "Ocean's 8" from earlier in the year. Yes, it's YET another film that focuses on female empowerment and with a strong black presence within the cast. But what for me made it stand out above the crowd was the quality of the writing and the assuredness of the directing.

Although based on the ancient UK TV series by Lynda La Plante, the script is written by "Gone Girl" screenwriter Gillian Flynn, and is excellent. It really doesn't EXPLAIN what is going on, but shows you a series of interconnected scenes and lets you mentally fill in the blanks. While you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand the overall story arc, I must admit that even now I'm not 100% sure of some of the nuances of the story. Harry, for example, seems to be a hardened career criminal, and yet he seems to be revered by the political leaders on both sides, even though he seemed to have loyalty to noone. The script cleverly uses flashbacks and has enough twists and turns to keep you on your mental toes.

The characters also worked well for me, with each having a back story and motivations that were distinctly different from each other. Alice (helped by Debecki's standout performance) is particularly intriguing coming out of an 'interesting' relationship. Is she just following the path of her unpleasant mother (Jacki Weaver)? Some of the actions might suggest so.

As for the direction, Steve McQueen (he of "12 Years a Slave"), delivers some scenes that could justly be described as "bold". A highpoint for me was a short drive by Jack Mulligan and his PA Siobhan (an excellently underplayed Molly Kunz) from a housing project, in a neighbourhood you might worry about walking through at night, to the Mulligan mansion in a leafy and pleasant street. McQueen mounts the camera on the bonnet (hood) of the car, but you can't see the interior other than occasional glimpses of the chauffeur. All you can hear is Mulligan's rant to his Siobhan. I thought this worked just brilliantly well. The heist itself well done and suitably tense with an outcome that continues to surprise.

If there's a criticism then the ending rather fizzles out, leaving a few loose ends flapping in the breeze.

As for the performances, it's only been a couple of weeks since my review of the excellent "Bad Times at the El Royale" and I named as my second film of the year for my (private) "Ensemble Cast" award. And here hot on its tail is the third. There are such strong performances across the cast that it's difficult to pull out specifics: as you start looking at the list you pull out more and more and more names...

• As referenced above, I loved Elizabeth Debecki's performance. Both vulnerable and strong all in one package.
• Colin Farrell, for me, gives his best performance in years as the son caught within the shadow of his overpowering father. A confrontational scene between Farrell and Robert Duvall is particularly powerful.
• Daniel Kaluuya is truly threatening (possibly slightly OTT) as the psycho fixer.
• For the second time in a month Cynthia Erivo stands out as a major acting force, as the hairstylist cum gang member Belle.
• Jon Michael Hill, excellent as a fire-breathing reverend with flexible political views.

It would not surprise me to see Best Supporting Actor nods for any combinations of Debecki, Farrell, Kaluuya and Erivo for this.

I must admit that I'm not the greatest fan of Viola Davis: I find her performances quite mannered. But there's no doubting here the depth of her passion and with this lead performance she carries this film.

Final Thoughts: I loved this as an intelligent action movie that's a cut above the rest. Which is a surprise, since from the trailer I thought it looked good but not THAT good! It comes with my recommendation for an exciting and gripping two hours at the cinema.

(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on Facebook. Thanks).

Arguably the most ambitious heist movie since Heat (1995), just as did Michael Mann's genre (re)defining epic, Widows has aspirations far beyond the limits of its generic template. Written by Steve McQueen and Gillian Flynn, and directed by McQueen, the film is based on the 12-episode ITV series, Widows (1983), written by Lynda La Plante. McQueen's first two films, Hunger (2008) and Shame (2011), were two of the finest films of 2008 and 2011, respectively, but I didn't like his third, 12 Years a Slave (2013), and likewise, Widows has left me distinctly underwhelmed. Operating firmly within a genre framework, the film essentially tries to filter the basic heist template through a feminist pseudo-MeToo prism, taking in such side-issues as political corruption, police homicide, Black Lives Matter, institutional racism, American gun culture, hegemonic masculinity, and the importance of wealth. McQueen approaches genre much like Michael Mann, as opposed to, say, Quentin Tarantino, using the generic template as a launch-pad to examine various socio-political issues, as opposed to using it as a destination in and of itself. The problem, however, is that he tries to pack far too much into too short a space of time. Whilst I can certainly appreciate and celebrate how progressive the narrative is, placing a black woman at the centre of a genre traditionally dominated by white men, the film still needs to work as a genre piece, or no amount of moralising, didacticism, polemics, or political grandstanding can save it. And this is where Widows fails most egregiously - the core genre elements are as far-fetched and ridiculous as anything you're likely to see out of mainstream Hollywood, which serves to undermine and dilute the serious topicality for which McQueen is obviously striving.

Telling the story of a team of women (Veronica (Viola Davis), Linda (Michelle Rodriguez, Alice (Elizabeth Debicki) , and Belle (Cynthia Erivo)) who attempt to pull off a heist originally planned by their now deceased husbands, set against the backdrop of an election for the alderman of Chicago's 18th Ward, contested by Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell) and Jamal Manning (Brian Tyree Henry), Widows is pure pulp.

McQueen's first genre film, he approaches it with the same seriousness with which he approached political protest, sexual addiction, and slavery. Obviously not interested in making a generic crime thriller, he and Flynn use the material as a vehicle for a racially-tinted critique of both powerful men (who are mainly, but not exclusively, white) and the corrupt systems that enable them. By creating a canvas depicting life at various social strata in Chicago - from the inherited white privilege of Jack to the materialistic social trappings so important to Veronica, from the poor black neighbourhoods of Jamal to the "everything is a transaction" philosophy of high-powered real-estate - the film attempts to address a plethora of racial, political, and gender issues.

And herein lies one of the film's biggest problems. Rather than trying to deal with one or two core issues with something resembling thoroughness, it instead tries to deal with upwards of about seven, and ends up saying little of relevance about any. There's gender, economics, politics, racism, police corruption, prostitution, gun culture, materialism, and because of this proliferation, several themes receive so little attention, you wonder why they're there at all. Gun culture, for example, is really only addressed when Alice is assigned the task of buying the team's weapons. Asking where she is supposed to go to get guns, she is told simply and unironically, "this is America", a wink-and-a-nod point which relies almost entirely on the audience's left-leaning political affiliations. Another example is racially-motivated police homicide. Several years prior to the film, Veronica and Harry's (Liam Neeson) teenage son, Marcus (Josiah Sheffie), was shot and killed by a white police officer at a routine traffic stop. And that's about it. Marcus does factor into the film's big twist (kind of), but the racial overtones of his killing are never brought up again, and it remains unclear what McQueen is trying to say with this underdeveloped subplot.

Which is not to say, of course, that none of the film's themes are foregrounded. Gender, for example, is built into the plot, especially in relation to notions of subverting the patriarchal status quo ante. As they prepare the heist, Veronica tells the team that their greatest strength is the element of surprise, because "no one thinks we have the b---s to pull this off". Later, she reminds them they have "to look and move like a team of men". Whilst on the heist itself, they have to disguise their voices so no one realises they are women. Similarly front-and-centre is the theme of race relations, something introduced in the opening frames - an above-the-bed shot of Harry and Veronica engaged in some very heavy petting. Whilst promoting the film, Viola Davis has spoken a lot about how unusual it is to open a film with an interracial pseudo-sex scene, and she's right about that; interracial couples are still relatively rare on-screen, especially sexually active older couples.

Another excellent shot that carries huge thematic importance, this time in relation to city-wide macroeconomics, can be seen when Jack and his assistant, Siobhan (Molly Kunz), travel from a poor black neighbourhood to the affluent white suburb in which his campaign headquarters is situated. Filmed in one of McQueen's patented single-takes, what's especially interesting here is that after Farrell and Kunz get into the car, we can hear them, but we can't see them - Sean Bobbitt's camera remains fixed on the bonnet, with only a portion of the windshield and one of the side-mirrors visible. Meanwhile, we see the city rapidly change in real-time in the background, taking only a couple of minutes to go from skid row to millionaire's row. McQueen's unusual camera placement forces the audience to acknowledge just how thin the line is, geographically speaking, between rich and poor. At the same time, of course, the ideological divide is massive.

Of vital importance to this particular theme (the vast differences between the haves and have-nots) are the Mulligans. Robert Duvall plays former alderman Tom Mulligan as a closet racist (and sometimes he doesn't bother with the closet); an old-school politician who believes that whoever can grease the most palms and line the most pockets should become the most powerful. An angry vestige of a dying era, Tom resents the fact that a Mulligan must slum it to win black votes.

A less signposted, but equally as important theme is the corruption, dishonesty, and mercenary-like behaviour endemic to all levels of society. Really, the only man who isn't corrupt in some way is Bash (Garret Dillahunt), Harry's loyal-to-a-fault working-stiff chauffeur, but even he (like Veronica and the rest of the widows) lives off the proceeds of crime. The system may be built on a foundation of toxic patriarchy (a very different thing to toxic masculinity), but the women are no angels in this milieu; no one is immune to the corrupting influence of socio-political norms.

For me though, the whole thing was underwhelming and predictable, with a twist that's as ridiculous as they come, and a narrative that relies far too much on coincidence and movie-logic. The widows need to disguise their voices on the job? Good thing that Belle's daughter has a gizmo that does exactly that! A highly successful modern-day thief who writes everything down longhand? A team of people (irrespective of gender and race) who become experts in something as complex as pulling off a major heist in a matter of weeks? For all its real-world social and political concerns, I never once bought into the central premise, that these four women could actually pull this off, and that undermines everything else. Additionally, unlike the Baltimore of The Wire (2002) or the LA of Heat, McQueen's Chicago doesn't feel lived in; it feels like someone's idea of a city rather than an actual depiction of that city.

Just because a film addresses certain themes doesn't mean it earns a free pass ("look, Hollywood cares about poor people; we better not criticise the ridiculous plot"), and from a narrative standpoint, Widows is pretty ludicrous. With the plot often feeling contorted to support the themes, rather than the themes arising from the plot, McQueen's didactic and polemic concerns seem to have overridden his abilities as a storyteller. More a vehicle for protestation than anything else, that it tries to cover so many topics makes the whole experience emotionless, as if the filmmakers were dispassionately working off a checklist of issues on which to touch, rather than allowing the plot to organically lead into those issues. Because the central heist narrative can't stand on its own, the very real criticisms that the film is so concerned with enunciating are flattened and neutered. The socio-political commentary, for the most part, is never really integrated into the narrative - so you end up with a film that feels like its preaching at you rather than talking to you. If it had embraced its genre a bit more, and eased back on the homiletics, it would have worked much better, not just as a genre exercise, but, perhaps more importantly, as political commentary. As it is, it's a very good-looking but unoriginal, and at times, downright dumb movie, that seems to always assume its intellectual superiority to the audience.

Caught Widows at TIFF this month and I can tell after watching that this is going to be an Oscar favourite next year. After a group of criminals dye in a heist gone wrong, their widows, Veronica, Alice and Linda, are forced to collect the money to repay their husband's debt. From there the women have to find their individual strength to survive especially when most of the men in their world are either cut-throat criminals or corrupt politicians. And that is just the basics of Widows. This story has far more to tell when you look at it under the surface.

Widows is thematically about how people move on and rebuild themselves in a broken society. The core group of women have had their lives be defined by their husbands' actions for better or for worse. From sexism, race relations, entitled privileges, politics to infidelity, director Steve McQueen is exploring so many of these subjects in his heist thriller. In less capable hands, so many of these themes and messages could feel force-fed and overbearing but McQueen makes them engaging in every single scene he shoots. Scenes will cut from calm, quiet moments to establish the nature of the widow's late marriages to sudden bursts of violence, action and tension to get your heart racing. Along with shots filled with dark and cool, light color palettes, McQueen shows on screen how divided the world is between those who feel they deserve wealth and power and those are mistreated by it. And through this divided perception, the women begin to take ownership of their lives and reassess what their marriages were really built on.

While Widows is a thematically dark and serious story, Gone Girl author-turned-screenwriter Gillian Flynn gives the characters a lot of subtle humour and sharp witted dialogue that actually makes the film surprisingly fun to watch. And to its credit that Flynn, along with McQueen as the co-writer, gives so many of these characters, especially the star women, unique layers that makes no one feel like a blank slate.

While it is an ensemble piece, Viola Davis is definitely the most awards-worthy to watch. As the lead widow Veronica, Davis brings so much to her character without even having to say a word. Davis displays this feeling that Veronica has to build a wall to block the emotional pain she is suppressing in order to keep the other widows in line for the upcoming heist. But once in moments when she is alone, you see Davis unleash that emotions very suddenly and then very quickly go back into being a commanding presence. Michelle Rodriguez gets a break from the usual action films to show dramatic range in her character Linda. While I wouldn't call it a break-out, it establishes that Rodriguez can play more then just the usual action heroine. Collin Farrell also does great bringing complexity to the corrupt politician Jack Mulligan who is seeking to escape his cruel father's legacy. But Widows is also filled with a lot of surprising stand-outs in terms of acting performances. Elizabeth Debicki does a lot with her character Alice that could have been one-note. Debicki shows Alice go on a transformation from a young, frail socially-dependant housewife to a character that is done being mistreated and seen as vulnerable. While Cynthia Erivo doesn't show up until late in the film, she makes a very strong impression once she joins the crew. And Brian Tyler Henry and Daniel Kaluuya bring a lot to their villain roles. Henry is calm, confident but also intimidating as the kingpin-turning-politician Jamal Manning, particularly in a scene with Davis. However it is Kaluuya as Jamal's brother Jatemme, who is just absolutely terrifying. With just a stare, Kaluuya'c character makes you feel small and scared knowing what horrible things he will do next. The one thing I will criticize is that I felt both Jon Bernthal and Carrie Coon were both underutilized in their roles.

Widows has a lot going on in its two-hour runtime and there some plot twists that make it feel a little incoherent but does very little to impact the film's near perfect quality. Widows is a film that is one of the most thrilling of this year and still has a very compelling and ambitious story that McQueen and Flynn have put on screen.

In Chicago, Veronica (Viola Davis) becomes a widow when her husband Harry Rawlings (Liam Neeson) is killed while stealing $2M from ruthless criminals Jamal Manning (Brian Tyree Henry) and Jatemme Manning (Daniel Kaluuya). The Manning brothers want their money back from Veronica. Jatemme is running for office against equally corrupt politician Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell) who is following in his father Tom Mulligan (Robert Duvall)'s footstep. Harry has left behind a notebook with his next target and Veronica decides to hit it with the other widows from Harry's job, Linda (Michelle Rodriguez) and Alice (Elizabeth Debicki). In need of a driver, Linda recruits her friend Belle (Cynthia Erivo).

I really don't like the start. The first act is essentially introducing the Mannings and Mulligan with their political rivalry. It'd be fine if the movie is about them but it should be about the women. One of the themes of the story is that the women are dismissed as secondary people and the movie starts off by treating them as secondary characters. It is a bad start. Once they get going with the ladies, the movie gets better. I really like their stories. There is a big twist reveal but it comes way too early. The Mannings and Mulligan rivalry may be important but really unnecessary for the women. This would be a much more compelling story if it gets streamlined and concentrated on the ladies. Director Steve McQueen has great skills but sometimes simplicity is better. This is about the women and not about the men.

Steve McQueen's (12 Years a Slave/Hunger) follow up to his Best Picture winner is a heist film told from the female perspective. Inspired by a British series McQueen saw on the BBC in the 80's, this American remake transports the story of a failed robbery & the men who lost their lives committing it to our shores & opens the tale w/side elements of politics & gangsterism to give the film a more deeper set of aesthetics to play with. Enter the women of the tale, who are the wives, girlfriends or significant others to the criminals who initially bought the farm, now being pressured by the pair of crime lord brothers who were robbed to make good on the failed theft. When the lead thief's detailed robbery diary pops up, our main heroine, played by Oscar winner Viola Davis, comes up w/a plan to pull the next score themselves in order to pay their debt & have something for a rainy day. What could have been a typical masculinization of a gang of chicks kicking ass & taking names becomes a dialectic between the realities of crime whether socio-political, racial or in this case gender & the notion of taking your foes for granted. A brilliant cast featuring Michelle Rodriguez, Elizabeth Debicki, & newcomer Cynthia Erivo hit all the right notes in this tense, smart thriller which is damn well near perfect.

I'm reminded of an interesting experience four years ago, at TIFF 2014. Over-hearing what some people were saying online on film forums, and in line waiting for Antoine Fuqua's The Equalizer, many were discussing "Is this a Festival film?".

It was arguably the most elitist thing I've heard about a film (and I've been to film school, where elitists thrive) because I always thought of film as something that engages everyone, and festivals are an amazing way to create awareness and engagement from the casual film-goer to those aforementioned elitists.

Why Director Steve McQueen's Widows reminded me of this experience is because the two films, on the surface, have much in common. Both Fuqua and McQueen enjoyed tremendous critical success with some of their previous films, even directing actors to Oscar-winning roles. Both men are a strong proponent of this generations' growing diversification in terms of directors; mentors to help young minority filmmakers find their own voice. Both men, when releasing these respected films in the Equalizer and Widows, based the films off an older television show, and created films that have much more of an action or thriller atmosphere than their previous resume.

And both, in my opinion, played it safe.

When I reviewed The Equalizer, I thought it unfortunately fell back on action movie tropes and convenience; that Fuqua, who had pushed the boundaries of drama and action before, didn't take any chances. McQueen, sadly, took a page out of that book with Widows.

The story follows four women, lead by Veronica (the amazing Viola Davis) who come together after Veronica's husband, Harry (Liam Neeson) and his crew of criminals are killed during a heist. Veronica then gathers most of the widows as they need to pull off another job to help settle things in their life, and with an angered gang leader, who was the individual Harry robbed. 1.jpg If Davis and Neeson aren't enough of a draw for you (and they should be, as they most definitely carry the film) then might I add that this is one of the greatest ensembles put together I have seen in a long time. Icons like Robert Duvall, big names like Colin Farrell, new stars like Elizabeth Debicki and Daniel Kaluuya, action mavens like Michelle Rodriguez, and some of the best actors television has offered in recent memory with names like Jon Bernthal (Walking Dead, Punisher), Carrie Coon (Fargo) and Brian Tyree Henry (Atlanta). This was the draw for me. I couldn't believe what a collective McQueen had assembled.

I can only assume they believed in the project, however, after viewing the film, I no longer believe. I felt so many of the characters were stereotypes, archetypes or any other kind of type. Tom Mulligan (Duvall) and Jatemme Mannin (Kaluuya) stuck out the most. Both characters, who were antagonists were simply there to be hated, and in every way did McQueen play up the villainous tropes. Mulligan was just a mean-old-coot with all the characteristics we've come to hate about this burgeoning America; he was rich, white, racist and politically corrupt. A subtle comment on social equality and today's western world? Perhaps... but not that subtle. His character didn't even completely seem necessary. Jack Mulligan, his son (played by Colin Farrell) was the more interesting and layered character, caught between his father's crimes, his hatred for his father, yet still pushing to maintain the legacy and safety his family has built. If you removed the older Mulligan, the film would have remained pretty much the same which is a true waste of Duvall's talents. Kaluuya, who broke out in last years' Get Out was the biggest waste. His Jatemme was another character that could have either been amalgamated or cut completely. While the character had almost nothing to give a solid actor like Kaluuya, I even found the way he was played was too over-the-top villainous, throwing paraplegics from wheelchairs and killing without reason or remorse.

There were several aspects of the cast I was excited about, yet ultimately disappointed with. I was excited about Bernthal and Coon, but they're barely in the film. Even Neeson has very limited screen time, his role mostly comprised of flashbacks. Debicki is another gifted actor whose character was not given enough time or development to give the actor a chance. I would dare say that with the exception of Davis (again) almost all of the characters were one-dimensional.

Without Davis' Veronica, there is almost no one or nothing to latch onto in the story, (This may in fact be one of the downfalls of such a large ensemble and such an ambitious story). Luckily with Davis at the helm, steering this otherwise sinking ship, you can at least enjoy another powerful performance by this seasoned and award-winning actor. Veronica also represents the main point of the film, which is McQueen's focus on creating strong female characters. The Widows are in fact quite strong, one way or another, many of. I think with more time and a better rounded script, they could have all shown that. Sadly, once again, it seemed like the easy answer was to show physical prowess instead of inner strength or intellect; showing how fast Cynthia Erivo's Belle can run, showing Michelle Rodriguez's trademark Latina attitude, or showing Viola Davis' impressive musculature. Davis was the only character who on more than one occasion showed true inner strength and intellect, as she was not only capable of being Harry's equal in terms of planning and leading a heist, but perhaps even out-doing him.

Yet that subtext falls flat in many of the other characters. McQueen and his co-writer Gillian Flynn constantly attempt to show strength in these women, but fall just short. They constantly try to convey other sub-textual elements like the class war, or the way men treat women, but again, fall short. They merely introduce concepts and perhaps give them one other small moment within the film, but I never found any theme truly woven throughout the story. The element that was the biggest disappointment to me wasn't McQueen's direction, it was Flynn's writing - I was enamored with Gone Girl (ironically also released in 2014) as I thought the development, the twists, and ironically again, the breadth of strong female characters was near perfect.

For Flynn to be so near-perfect in her previous screenwriting endeavor, to create such intrigue, to masterfully reveal twists, and to develop the depth of character she did makes this endeavor that much more disappointing. Granted, she was adapting her own novel at the time, but she certainly has the writing talent and the tools available to have made Widows something special, or exhilarating, but instead it falls flat in every respect. The so-called twists especially were completely wasted. Mid way through the film, there is a major revelation that could have taken the story in so many different directions, and yet, once again, it went in the safest route possible.

Everything about Widows whispered "missed opportunity" to me, and I call it a whisper because the experience of viewing it was akin to waiting quietly, patiently, but then ultimately realizing my expectations were never going to be fulfilled. While the film starts with some intrigue and excitement, it becomes more and more predictable. The conclusion has been seen several times before in one iteration or another, and especially after the conclusion, I realized there were several plot holes and that my suspension of disbelief for some of the cinematic convenience had been stretched too thin over too much time. You may think I'm simply being too overly critical (even for a guy who has a job title with 'critic' in it), but the fact is, there were reactions from my fellow audience members that were inexplicably inappropriate. There were several moments where I'm positive the scene was projected to be dramatic or sad, but some TIFF goers were laughing. That's a serious issue that goes past someone's terrible individual sense of humor, that's a failure of the director and the actors to convey the intended tone and emotion.

You can't argue that a film like Widows, with its pedigree of direction, writing and one of the most impressive casts recruited is a Festival Film. Having seen the packed house at TIFF, you also can't argue that it will have thousands of fans clamoring to see it in theaters. What I can argue is whether it is the film it could have been. Flynn could have written a much tauter thriller. McQueen could have balanced the characters and pace of the film better. The actors could have tried to create more depth rather than surface level tropes. The potential with this group of artists far exceeds what was actually presented, but more importantly, so much of the movie has been done before. This goes beyond simply remaking a television show, but telling the story in a cinematic manner that is neither original nor inspired. I merely felt with all the talent this film had going in, what came out of it made Widows my most disappointing film at TIFF this year.

The caliber of director and cast got this film a lot of attention, and the critical response was mostly positive. On the face of it, you can see why, because it takes a generally popular genre of twists and turns and 'one big jobs' and delivers it in a much less 'capery' way than is normal. The characters are people, they feel and fear, hurt and lose, and they carry a lot with them from previous events in life. So it is a genre film with weight, and it was engaging in the way it did that. However the parts that engage all produce the feeling that the film should be better as a whole than it actually is.

The performances and the quality of the casting is a big part of this. They all bring a lot to their roles, and they make the material feel better by virtue of what they do. This creates the problem that the material is actually not that strong; it is still a genre film and it plays like one when you get below the surface - which reminds us why this genre is popular while also exposing weakness in this film. The reason most of these type of things are played a bit over the top, or as a caper, is that the spectacle or fun of it means the viewer allows it silliness in the plot; here though the events of the film didn't get that forgiveness because it told me it was being more serious and real. Related to this a little is the feeling that the film tries to cram too much in regarding characters and threads - so most supporting elements feel rushed or crammed in.

It is still a good watch though, with McQueen's approach adding value in the same way as the heavyweight cast all do; however I'm not sure the quality links to the film as a whole, and I came away from it feeling that in any given moment the film was being better than it actually was. An interesting problem though.

Right from the opening sequence, a car chase which is post robbery and the women doing their daily stuff and then grieves. It sets the mood and tone of the movie, strong women making big life changing decisions. The message the movie makes regarding various of topics was needed and it didn't feel out of place. Steve McQueen did a great job at directing the movie, it's a solid crime/thriller but it isn't perfect but still a good movie, it could have been much better than it was but this is what we got.

The ensemble cast is superb, with famous actors and actresses makes this a must see movie just for the cast. There is so many well known and familiar actors, it's great. Viola Davis, Michelle Rodriguez, Colin Farrell and Brian Tyree Henry stood in the most, bringing most in terms of performance and to the screen.

Steve McQueen, the Academy Award winning filmmaker behind '12 Years a Slave,' directed the hell out of this movie. Since 'Widows' is a heist flick, some may view this directing choice for McQueen as a step down from the power and pervasiveness of his most recent film. But that's not the case. With the way McQueen moves the camera and frames his shots, he displays a wizardry of creativity and a mastery of his craft. He shows us that no genre of film is taking step down if it's handled correctly.

Within the opening moments of this elevated thriller, it's evident that we're witnessing something made by a true pro. Crucial plot points are unveiled via dialogue-free or dialogue-light scenes that allow the actors room to convey story in other ways. There's a couple lying together, clearly deeply in love. There's woman with a black eye swatting away the hand of a consoling husband. There's a man trying unconvincingly to assure his wife that he has their store's finances under control. These rich backstories and fully formed characters reveal themselves in abrupt scenes but somehow never feel rushed. These scenes tell us so much by saying so little.

After introducing these soon-to-be widows and their soon-to-be late husbands, we watch a flashback of the violence and destruction that led to their deaths. The husbands were criminals, and they stole a lot of money from a lot of bad people. Now Jamal Manning (Brian Tyree Henry), who happens to be one of those bad people and who happens to be a running for political office, wants his money back. He and his enforcer brother (Daniel Kaluuya, perfectly chilling in a way that's not at all over-the-top) make it clear that the widows have only a few days to pay two million dollars, or they will suffer the same fate as their husbands.

Veronica (Viola Davis), the widow of the criminal group's leader steps up as the leader of these blindsided woman and shares her husband's notebook, which contains the plans for a job that will land them five million dollars. Linda (Michelle Rodriguez) and Alice (Elizabeth Debicki) agree to join, but the fourth widow doesn't show up to the meeting for some unclear reason.

It's Davis' show, and the film would struggle without her flawless performance. She's the glue or the straw or the foundation or something. She's essential-that much is certain. But she's far from the only standout. Kaluuya is stellar, as always, and Debicki as well as rising star Cynthia Erivo jump off the screen. McQueen certainly knows how to make actors pop. Credit him as well as each performer.

In addition to the thrilling action and interpersonal drama, there is also a healthy dose of social commentary. It's delivered with just the right degree of subtlety. It's never too overt of condescending, but it's noticeable if you want to pay it attention.

This movie has a lot going for it. Call it an elevated heist. Call dramatic thriller. Call it whatever you want. By any classification, this is a brilliant film and one that deserves plenty of consideration come award season.

This movie has a story, but a lot of mistakes and missing things Only what i can say that the acting was so great and my rate for it.

If you are looking for a smart, intelligent, well-made, well-crafted, well-acted action-heist flick to see with the family over the Thanksgiving weekend, then look no further than WIDOWS.

Yes, it's that good.

Based on a 1983 British TV mini-series, Directed by Steve McQueen (12 YEARS A SLAVE) and with a Screenplay by McQueen and Gillian Flynn (GONE GIRL), WIDOWS tells the story of 4...yes...Widows who's husbands were mobsters that were killed while stealing money from other mobsters. When the rival mob comes to the Widows to get their money back, these women must band together to complete a job to get the money to save their lives.

Leading this disparate group of women is Oscar winner (for FENCES) Viola Davis. She brings a strength and vulnerability to her role and makes a surprisingly complex and charismatic center to this film. Joining her is the always tough and gritty Michelle Rodriguez and the eminently watchable Carrie Coon. The surprise performance of this group of widows is Elizabeth Debicki (the golden Ayesha in GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY 2). Her widow, Alice, is more than just the "good-looking" trophy wife and has a depth and gravitas that upon first glance is not something that seems to be there. These 4 are joined by Cynthia Erivo and their group could probably kick the crap out of the Ocean's 8 crew.

McQueen has assembled a diverse and interesting cast to support these 5 - each "smaller" role filled with someone who brings something to the table that makes their character interesting. Liam Neeson, Robert Duvall, Collin Farrell, the always watchable Garrett Dillahunt and Jackie Weaver fill the film with "screen presence", power and strong characterizations that service the story. Special notice should be made for Daniel Kaluuya (Oscar nominated for GET OUT). His menacing "bad guy" ranks right up there on the list of "dudes you don't want to mess with". He was fascinating to watch - especially when he was doing "nothing" - you could see the animal swimming within him in the most still of moments.

All of these actors are directed with the Orchestral efficiency of McQueen - a director who knows what he's doing. He keeps the focus of his cameras where he needs to, sometimes eschewing the most obvious action to focus our attention elsewhere. The downside to McQueen is that he sometimes gets enamored with his beautiful pictures and atmosphere, so the film gets bogged down at times - especially in the first half - but all of this is in service to the larger story - a story that demands our attention.

The screenplay by McQueen and Flynn is full of plot twists and turns, of course, keeping you guessing throughout and concludes in a most satisfactory manner.

All in all a very fine time at the Cineplex. In this week of a myriad of items competing for your movie-going dollars, I would strongly recommend that you pick WIDOWS out of the pile and settle in for a good time..

Letter Grade: A-

8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)

I bit of a disappointment, this is my least favorite movie by director Steve McQueen to date. There is a lot to like in this movie, from its amazing ensemble to the way it's directed (McQueen doesn't know how to shoot badly), but, unfortunately, the screenplay is very frustrating. I use the word frustrating because there is a lot of potential here, but its execution is just not very good, full of cliches and predictable twists. Still the themes of the story, the acting and some virtuoso shots make me rate this a positive 6.

Went to the movie without knowing anything about it and I was fully impressed when I walked out. McQueen has done a fine job in making a realistic heist movie set in Chicago which shows the dark side of American politics & police. There are some scenes in the film which would possibly off and for the right reasons. Colin Ferrell was the most impressive performer in the film and Hans Zimmer has composed another flawless soundtrack yet again.

The acting, filming etc was quite good but the story was boring. We've seen this sort of thing before and by halfway I couldn't care less about what was going to happen. The 'twist' was visible from miles away. Overall worth watching but don't go out of your way to watch it.

Going against the grain of all the positive reviews, I found this a very unsatisfying and silly drama. The plot is incoherent and so many story lines are left undeveloped and, essentially, irrelevant. Key plot lines make no sense at all from the macro plot to the micro details that don't stack up and serve only to undermine it. I suspect the very same film from a less regarded director would be slammed but we become hyptonised to assume there must be something important and worthy going on here.

With so many plot lines this would make a great Netflix series but as a film it is very poor.

Only the acting redeems it.