MovieChat Forums > Live by Night (2017) Discussion > Saw it. non-spoilery review

Saw it. non-spoilery review


So I caught a screening of this in Los Angeles a few weeks ago. This may go through some changes by the time it releases so take whatever i say here with a grain of salt.

Overall, pretty impressive film by Affleck. The story focuses on his character Joe who reluctantly (at first) becomes caught up the violent underworld mob scene in Boston and later in Florida. The film is wonderfully designed in its period details and costumes but not distractingly so; it feels lived-in and natural. The cinematography by Robert Richardson is also very nicely done especially when the action switches locations from gritty Boston to steamy Florida. The action scenes were well-choreographed and shot. Affleck's acting is very solid; the only thing odd was that Affleck's Batman physique was a bit distracting---his hulking frame dwarfs many of the other characters and I don't know if this served the movie well in illustrating the character dynamics from scene to scene. It wasn't always easy to see Affleck's character as under threat (as he was in a number of scenes) because he looked...well, like Batman.

Of the supporting cast, Chris Messina was the most impressive; I almost didn't recognize him at first as his look and physicality were so altered in this movie. Chris Cooper also does solid work here as his character goes through some fascinating turns in the story. If there's a weak spot, it's Zoe Saldana as Graciela. She looked heart-stoppingly beautiful (as usual) but her characterization felt very lacking and I didn't feel very invested in her character's relationship with Joe. Of the women in the movie Sienna Miller fared best. She played her tough-as-nails character with a lot of hard-bitten authority and she showed herself to be as strong (if not stronger) than most of the male characters in the movie. Unfortunately, her role is very brief. Elle Fanning conveyed a strong sense of tragedy in her character even though she was only tangential to the main action in the movie.

Overall, it's another accomplished and polished work by Ben Affleck. I think it will be well-received when it's released.

reply

Not sure if this is true, but it's detailed enough that I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

I know it may be hard to be precise, but how long was the movie, more or less?

reply

Does Scott Eastwood appear in the movie (Joe's brother, Danny)? I know they shot some scenes with him, but his scenes in the book are very brief and don't mean much unless you've read the first book, so I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up being cut.

reply

This sounds excellent... 👍

Argo f— yourself.

reply

What was the films run time? Openly wanting a three hour extravaganza.

Argo f— yourself.

reply

Sounds good. I know they did reshoots/additional photography around the end of June. So your screening was after that right? Also, do you remember how long the movie was?

reply

I honestly don't recall much of Eastwood in this. His role may have been drastically cut and what was left was barely noticeable. Not sure of the running time (a good sign as I wasn't thinking of how long the movie was!) but it seemed to come in around 2.25 hours.

I've seen two other Dennis Lehane adaptations (Gone Baby Gone and Mystic River) and this one had a VERY different feel than the other two. Maybe because much of the action takes place away from Boston but the hot, steamy Florida settings (I think those scenes were shot in Los Angeles and Atlanta) really made it atmospheric. Trying not to give any spoilers but let's just say that the settings are well-used and they do play a relevant part in how the story plays out. And one of the best parts of the film was the pre-credits sequence that tells us what happened to Affleck's character before the main events of the film. It was pretty elegant in conveying background information before the movie actually started.

Sorry to be vague but it is the kind of movie that would be ruined if you know too much going in.

reply

Well, Eastwood's character in the book appreared very briefly too, so I'm glad for him to just be here.

When you say 2.25 hours you mean 135 minutes or 145 minutes

reply

Sounds good. I know they did reshoots/additional photography around the end of June. So your screening was after that right?
Yes, it was late July that we saw the screening. Some of my friends do background work and they recall the notices for this film in June. It was surprising that the screening was so soon after that but they warned us before the film that many things were not yet finished like the score and effects.

reply

That's interesting what you said about the female leads. I expected the opposite between Miller and Saldana. The first I heard of the casting I thought to myself "Zoe is perfect". Then I saw the trailer and honestly, Sienna Miller wasn't how I envisioned Emma.

What's missing in movies is same as in society: a good sense of work ethic and living up to ideals.

reply

Thanks for the info.

reply

What will it be rated on rotten tomatoes?

reply