User reviews

Taking as its, admittedly uncredited, source Arthur Schnitzler's play "Reigen", screen-writer Peter Morgan and director Fernando Meirelles' 360 combines several stories in something of the disjointed manner of Inarritu's "Amores Perros" or "Babel". It's very skillfully made and yes, it holds our attention but that's all it does. On an emotional level it never really engages us and the 'stories', which are naturally related, aren't particularly interesting. The film is clever, well-written, often beautifully directed and the large, international cast are all fine but there's a distinct lack of substance; this isn't a memorable film. Still, there is at least one thing about this film that is great and it occurs whenever Anthony Hopkins is on screen. It isn't a big part and there isn't a great deal of character development in the writing but Hopkins is such a great actor that he makes the part great. You get the impression he's making it up as he goes along; in other words, you feel you are seeing a real person rather than the actor playing him. He's only on screen for much too short a time but he's magnificent. As can he guessed from the title, the film is called 360 because the stories go full circle; if only they had been better this film might have been as great as something like "Amores Perros" or "Pulp Fiction" which were constructed in much the same way. It's certainly not a bad film but it could have been so much better while the closing story seems both melodramatic and really rather tagged on for effect. On hindsight this would probably have made a good six-part television series rather than a two hour movie.

Movies linking different stories taking place all over the world are usually are praised for the interweaving plot coming together with some big revelation. Think about Babel, universally praised for mixing intercontinental tragedy. I liked it moderately, as it was a bit too gloomy, and I would not put it in my top-ten list.

On the other hand, 360 working on a similar take, was vilified almost unanimously. On a different merry-go-round we have the stories of an English businessman ready to stray with a prostitute in Vienna, while his wife is already straying in London with a Brazilian guy, whose fiancée is dumping him for said infidelity and traveling back home, etc… Since the prostitute is having her photos taken by a photographer for her online advert, the movie starts and finishes with a girl entering the study, thus coming round 360 degrees. A couple of stories are quite weak, such as the Brazilian girl meeting a sex offender en route to Brazil and the prostitute's sister running away with a stranger. However, compared to Babel what is missing here is mega tragedy and that is exactly what made Babel so pretentious, with its existentialist grandeur.

Therefore, I liked 360 better because its characters are more "normal" – except, perhaps, the Russian mobsters – and their lives are not experiencing huge calamities. They just change or adjust slightly. I guess that was not liked by the critics (and public). Nowadays, a level of extra-drama seems to be required in ever massive doses to relieve with excitement our numbed existences … at least for a couple of hours.

The idea of narrating different linked stories of characters is certainly not new and the material in this picture is quite abundant: a lot of complex characters, a lot of deep and tense backgrounds. The limit was that the director probably wanted to explore too many characters and too many situations, and the result is that no single story or character is sufficiently developed and seem to be more kept separate than interconnected. The idea that people's lives are connected comes out as banal and evident, as part of any person not living secluded at home, and the fact that in the picture the links go from Europe to the US to Brasil is simply because it deals with dynamic people who move across the world. Some story lines, such as Hopkins' search for his lost daughter could have been explored more deeply, on the contrary it remains faded like the other stories.

Nothing to say against shooting, the use of split scenes is effective and tries to underline the idea of interconnections, and the subtle use of camera tries to make the characters' personalities come out, but in the end do not make up for a general underdevelopment. Nothing to say against the talented, but a little wasted cast, who give depth to the characters, although in the end we cannot but miss some more insight and deepening of both characters and stories.

The sisters Anna (Gabriela Marcinkova) and Mirka (Lucia Siposová) travel from the Bratislava, in Slovakia, to Vienna and the ambitious Mirka takes nude photos with the photographer and pimp Rocco (Johannes Krisch) and changes her name to Blanca to work as call girl. On the next day, she goes to a restaurant to meet the married British businessman Michael Daly (Jude Law) but he meets with acquaintances and does not contact Blanca. Soon he is blackmailed by the guy that forces Michael to close a business with him.

In Paris, a Muslim follows a married woman and then he goes to his psychoanalyst and tells that he is infatuated. Later the woman, named Valentina (Dinara Drukarova) tells to her husband Sergei (Vladimir Vdovichenkov) that she wants to divorce him since she loves her boss.

In London, Rose (Rachel Weisz) ends her love affair with the Brazilian photographer Rui (Juliano Cazarré) but they have sex for the last time. Rui is left by his girlfriend Laura (Maria Flor) that has discovered his affair and she travels back home. Laura meets a man named John (Anthony Hopkins) in the flight and she learns that he is looking for his missing daughter. Rose goes home and her husband Michael arrives from his business trip and they go to see "The Fiddler on the Roof" in their daughter's school.

In Colorado, the sex offender Tyler (Ben Foster) will be released on probation after six years in prison. He meets Laura in the Denver airport and he resists her harassment.

Their lives are entwined and life goes on.

"360" is not a bad movie and would be great if it were an independent production; but considering the director, the cast and the budget, it is but pointless and deceptive despite the fake reviews promoting this film.

Maybe the best subplot is the story of the aspiring prostitute that ends with her dream coming true. The subplots of Michael and Rose; the Muslim guy and Valentina; and the Laura, John and Tyler could have been better developed. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "360"

This is an international cast directed by Fernando Meirelles (City of God) of a marginally-connected multiple-plots. They all deal with sex and lust in some way. Sisters Anna (Gabriela Marcinkova) and Mirka (Lucia Siposová) are in Vienna where Mirka is starting as a call girl named Blanca. British businessman Michael Daly (Jude Law) has made an appointment with Blanca but he runs into some vendors looking to doing business. He immediately abandons the appointment, but one of the sleazy vendors finds out his appointment and blackmails him for his business. Michael's wife Rose (Rachel Weisz) has an affair with photographer Rui (Juliano Cazarré). Rui's girlfriend Laura (Maria Flor) dumps him and she travels back home. Laura meets John (Anthony Hopkins) on the flight and she learns that he is looking for his missing daughter. On a stop-over, sex offender Tyler (Ben Foster) has just been released and is tempted by aggressive Laura in her hotel room.

There are a couple other story lines. Some are interesting. Most notably is Ben Foster and his powerful performance. Others are boring as hell. When Jude Law gets blackmailed, I thought that storyline had potential but it completely fizzled. That's how I feel about this movie. I thought it had potential, but other than a couple of sections, there was very little realized.

Fernando Meirelles is certainly one of the best and most courageous directors of his generation. The British writer Peter Morgan, in turn, conceived great and elaborate scripts, which delve deep into the dramas of his characters, whether they were TV presenters, young doctors or even the Queen of England. Put the two together and put a stellar cast at their disposal and we're sure to have a good movie on our hands, right? Not exactly. Meirelles and Morgan conceived the feature film "360" for this partnership, a film that resembles "Babel" in its ambition to show us how the consequences of anyone's actions have effects on the lives of many other people around the world: cause and it is made.

Not long ago, cinema found itself hopelessly enamored with multiple narratives with characters linked in order to amplify a feeling of connection, and even randomness. Adept at international projects, disillusioned with the means of promotion in Brazil, Meirelles made use of this expedient, on a veritable tour of Europe and the USA, to film his version of "La Ronde", a classic play by Arthur Schnitzler. They appear interconnected to express multifaceted relationships, choices, vices and virtues. In 360, Fernando Meirelles is omnipresent as a witness, yet never sounding too omniscient. So the film does not hit the viewer coldly calculated, like some of its counterparts.

On a trip around the world, we met a group of people from different places and from different social classes. A woman who enters the prostitution business, an executive far from his family, a lonely journalist, an ambitious photographer, a young woman with a broken heart, a man in search of his daughter, a criminal in search of redemption, a Muslim in conflict with his desires, a neglected wife and a husband at odds with his manhood. All these people are at crossroads and the decisions they make will influence everyone's lives.

In this type of narrative, the directors have little time to delve into the intimacy of those involved, something that is the strong point of Meirelles' direction and Morgan's text. And that's exactly where the long falls short. With rare exceptions, we never got to know those people intimately or understand the motivations behind their actions. This distance and the coldness with which the plots are treated prevent us from caring about the fate of the characters. As good as the actors are, and the cast of the tape is really stellar, it is difficult to build three-dimensional characters without the film delving into their interiors and it is almost impossible for the public to cultivate any sympathy for some. The novice prostitute played by Lucia Siposová already in the first five minutes on the scene shows us that sex is not the only thing she will do for money and it doesn't seem to us that she and her sister live in a situation that would justify such actions.

It's also complicated to root for the happiness of a couple we barely know and conflicts we don't understand, as in the plot starring Jude Law and Rachel Weisz. The love story between the Muslim dentist played by Jamel Debbouze and his married assistant, played by the Russian Dinara Drukarova, could be interesting, but it turns out to be very anticlimactic and without rhythm. And we simply don't have time to understand Rui's intentions, the photographer played by Juliano Cazarré, making it practically impossible to know if he is a passionate man or an opportunist, not least because we only see him for three minutes of film. However, among this veritable tangle of stories that simply don't mesh, one of them works extremely well.

The whole plot accompanying the characters of Anthony Hopkins, Maria Flor and Ben Foster is simply fascinating, involving very human feelings of loss, redemption and desire. Even though it is relatively short, it is a very well-developed plot and the three actors are simply fantastic. Maria Flor's interactions with Hopkins and Foster are pure gold, with each bringing out the best in the other. It should also be noted that Meirelles' camera takes on an intimate look, which captures very well each reaction of the three, making their complex problems more real through an elegant narrative economy, making up with content for the little time on the scene that the trio has. Meirelles still imposes an increasing tension on the story that it becomes impossible not to get involved with it, with the intensity of Ben Foster's performance acting as a kind of tension marker.

Of all the stories told, the most unusual is that of Tyler (Foster), the man just out of jail and determined to defeat the compulsion for sex. His fight signals how much we are victims of addictive behaviors and addictions, banal in the eyes of those who imagine them as the result of coldly rationalized deliberations. Several of the characters in "360" struggle with impulses, dubious solutions, amoral movements and manufactured happiness. Cinema is very different from reality (even when it wants to approach it). However, is there anything more human than the constant struggle to defeat internal monsters? Finally, we have the story of Sergei (Vdovichenkov), the most complete. He leaves Paris, where his marriage to the Spanish Valentina (Dinara Drukarova) has its days numbered, to travel by car to Vienna. In the Austrian capital he meets his boss, the mobster played by Mark Ivanir. After being treated like a dog, as he puts it, Sergei finds himself at a crossroads that could change his life. And make your choice.

"360" is sober to the measure, photographed discreetly and restrained even when passionate. The space that could harbor frills, facilities and mannerisms is occupied by sharp dialogues and by the very sensitive observation of aspects that make us humanly prosaic in essence. Meirelles' film is precisely the split screen thriller that perfectly illustrates this idea. São 360º, a film that wants to turn around itself at all costs, by joining the dots between characters: a Slovakian woman starting her life in luxury prostitution before the disapproving and innocent gaze of her younger sister; blackmailing a businessman to obtain a deal; an adultery; a missing daughter; a dentist in love with his assistant who in turn is married to a driver fed up with the abuse of his mobster boss. And so on. The problem is having something interesting to tell them beyond the metaphysics of bifurcations. The metaphor is repeated at the beginning and end of the story, coming full circle and showing that our lives are built by choices.

And it is in the comparison that 360 loses points. After all, after 1h44min of this production, we were left with a big "so what?" in the head. The great message of this production, left in the reproduction of the image that appears on the panel of the facade of a building in Vienna, is that life goes on? Why, every now and then, when we choose a path from one of the many crossroads we encounter in life, are we opening the doors to happiness or to a real disaster? Yes, this is all true. But other productions that preceded 360 have treated these same themes in a more interesting way, with interesting stories from start to finish.

Besides certain choices being fundamental, and many dangers lurking around these moments - without us noticing anything - "360" deals with something fundamental: how some unforeseen contacts can become fundamental in our life. Like a sentence, a note, a hug placed at the right time, they can be the elements we were missing for everything to fall into place. For life to make sense, and for it to be clear what step should be taken next. It's encounters like those between Hopkins' characters and Maria Flor, among others, that change everything. Sometimes for the better, because they make perfect sense. Other times for the worse, because it "spoils our lives". And the beauty of 360, and of life itself, is that we can never predict or avoid these contacts. They just happen.

But despite what the title might seem, not everything comes back to the same place. Characters fulfill their arcs, whether longer or shorter. If the excess of "coincidences" that makes this group become the circle of the title can cause a certain discomfort, each personal drama there is well understood. There are no subtexts in the stories. One way or another, every character ends up having their story told. "360" is like "Babel", but without being political. The stray bullet leaves the scene and takes its place the bitter feeling of seeing your partner again after spending a few hours with your lover. They are different pains. They are distinct repulsions that also lead to reflection. Instead of asking "what kind of world do we live in?" the question now is "what relationship am I living in?" It is a pity that this urgency is not repeated with the other stories. Even the metaphor of 360 degrees is misused, given that certain plots have almost no impact on others and are delivered in a painfully artificial way. It is even sad to see the excellent technical work of Meirelles and his team, especially photographer Adriano Goldman, wasted in a text with almost no passion or intimacy, something essential in a film whose motto is a fetishistic look at the desires and passions of human beings.

(2012) 360 (Besides English, the film also consists of German, Arabic, French, Portuguese, and Russian with English subtitles) DRAMA

Made in the same tradition as "Crash", "Babel", "Crossing Borders" and many other films involving many different characters and interlocking stories. Right at the beginning, a naïve young girl wants to expose herself for the purpose of becoming an escort, she's accompanied by her sister who sort of acts like a chaperone. The next story involves the Jude Law character as Michael Daly whose a businessman who travels a lot, but has problems staying faithful as a result of already being married because of the lack of presence at his home. His wife's name is Rose played by Rachel Weiss, she's also unfaithful too, even though she loves her family too. There's a certain level of subtlety throughout this whole experience because not all stories have to end badly as most drama movies have to be- saying that theirs no rule about movies are not supposed to offer a glimmer of hope despite the situation. I also liked the fact that as a regular viewer such as myself, showcasing situations I can identify with that my assumptions throughout this experience regarding other cultures and ethnics always have to end stereotypically negative, and I was quite relieved to see that I was incorrect about that since Russian, Arabic, Portuguese or any other non- white American stereotypes always end unsatisfying, and in this movie that's not always the case.

As the beginning of the story goes, life will eventually present us with two possible directions: the one we choose to follow is for no one but us to decide.

"360" is the latest movie by Fernando Meirelles, a man with some good achievements under his belt. And taking life in its pure existence is a great source of inspiration for his work, where it is hard not to relate to. This time Meirelles brings us a beautiful concocted plan where some aspects of daily life are put into context, mixing different Nationalities and aspirations, dreams and sometimes tragedies that come together full circle, as the title itself states. It is moving, but never funny. Intelligent and simple, granting almost two hours of reflective observation that may teach us one thing or another. All stories are able to stand alone for themselves, but they are smartly interconnected, showing life never differentiates wherever it is at. Beautifully done.

A friend of mine told me that, I would love this, because I liked "Crash" (Paul Higgis one). I don't really see that much in common between those movies. I think the other one is far superior, but does have the aim to go socially relevant. This on the other hand is not trying more than to tell stories of different people. That's also the only thing that it has in common with Crash (the type of movie it is).

The actors are great (especially Anthony Hopkins as always) and the stories are decent enough. There is always some sort of connection between the people/characters. Not a perfect movie, but a decent one, with great acting in it.

"A wise man once said if there's a fork in the road take it." This is a movie that deals with many different characters from different parts of the world from different social classes and how they deal with day to day problems from doing anything to earn money to getting stranded while traveling. The cast in this, which includes: Rachel Weisz, Jude Law, Anthony Hopkins and Ben Foster is great and honestly the cast is the best part of the movie. I used to think that a great cast automatically means that it will be a great movie, but after the last 4 or 5 movies I have seen based off the cast I am beginning to rethink my opinion. The acting is great in this and the story lines basically end up being tied together I guess but the movie is just so slow moving that it makes it really hard to stay interested in. The movie is pretty OK but for me this is another example of a great cast in a sub-par movie. Overall, very slow moving drama that is really only worth seeing because of the cast. I give it a C+.

360 (2011)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

Director Fernando Meirelles' latest takes place in seven cities as a wide range of people with different backgrounds are thrown into difficult decisions due in some way to sex. A Russian (Gabriela Marcinkova) woman decides to turn to prostitution; an older man (Anthony Hopkins) searches for his daughter who is missing; a sex offender (Ben Foster) is released from prison and fears he's going to commit another crime; a married man (Jude Law) thinks about having an affair while a married woman (Rachel Weisz) tries to end her affair. 360 actually delivers what the title promises as the story really does go full circle but the entire ride through it isn't nearly as entertaining as I was hoping. There's no question that there are some good stories scattered throughout but by the time the end credits came I felt that there really wasn't a point to any of them. The funny thing is that while each character here gets several bits of development, all of the stories pretty much end without anything ever being solved so the viewer is left to wonder what will happen or if they'll be connected in some sort of way. I think one of the problems with a film like this is that the great stories don't get enough time while the more boring ones feel unfinished or you wish that they'd get to another story. The best one here is the sex offender as we get a terrific and very intense story as the man feels he's about to relapse and commit another crime. Foster's performance is right on the money and downright chilling. The Jude Law sequence really doesn't add up to much and the twist his character takes from a rival really isn't all that interesting. The stuff dealing with the prostitute was actually quite interesting as was the piece with Hopkins and his relationship with a young woman (Maria Flor). Both Hopkins and Flor deliver strong performances that help their stories. 360 is directed with style and there's no doubt that it's a well made film but there's still too many frustrating or weak things that keep it from being a good movie.

Fernando Meirelles is one of the top Brazilian directors, if not the best. When I started watching the movie, I saw his style and was wondering that he would do that again. The initial scene with the prostitute looked very real and the movie promised. But even with strong performances from Anthony Hopkins, Ben Foster and Maria Flor, the movie never took off. The stereotypes made the movie uninteresting: Russian mobsters, an easy Brazilian girl, men looking for prostitutes when traveling. And there are no closing in the stories. The end of the movie is abrupt and without explanation. It could have been a good movie, with a more developed screenplay. 6 out of 10.

Fernando Meirelles, an Academy Award and Golden Globe nominee, was evidently able to employ such a great cast (Anthony Hopkins, Jude Law, Rachel Weisz, Ben Foster - above all) thank to his prior fame, and screenwriter Peter Morgan is no amateur either, but the outcome is somehow protracted and arid (however, strange references to my country were included, not often in English-speaking films). Not all the different stories are intertwined (although the characters within have common features like painful memories and unhappy present) and the events and dreams depicted are not catchy to follow - in spite of their reality. Main value of the film are versatile actors of different ethnicities and scenes filmed on the spot, in different locations. Most of stories end up with no clear ending - apart from the Russian-Slovakian storyline; thus, the very ending does not finalise the total 360, letting you feel ambivalent, when the credits appear. The film includes definitely some profundity, but it is not interesting in the sense of spending time.

English journalist David Frost recently died. He was of course best known for interviewing disgraced ex-president Richard Nixon and shaming Nixon into admitting that he had put the country through a lot of suffering.

What's this got to do with Fernando Meirelles's "360"? The Frost/Nixon interviews got depicted in a play by Peter Morgan, later made into a movie by Ron Howard. Morgan also wrote the screenplay for "360", which he adapted from "La Ronde". This movie's connection to the Frost/Nixon interviews is obviously looser than the connections that the characters in Vienna, Paris, London and Colorado have with each other, but I still see it. The movie itself isn't bad, although I thought that it drug on a little long. It's still worth seeing, although "City of God" remains Meirelles's best movie.

Let me not get this wrong but there's no hyperlink movie - movies with inter related characters and plots - which bored me till date, until watching 360. And have seen quite a lot of them to benchmark the genre, or the least to enjoy them. 360 falls flat with a lame storyline though it assembles some of the finest actors - needless to say all of them wasted - and for a thread about human connections and relations, it leaves a lot to be desired in the end.

The making style, the narration and the editing were good, but the screenplay had nothing new to offer, seen all of them and many of these characters and plots else where - Magnolia, crash, 96 minutes, traffic, Nine lives to name a few. I mean where's the novelty in showing interlocking stories of characters in pursuit of money, sex, love which have been told a million times! Thankfully we don't have an accident in the plot, easily the saving grace from getting all dejavu'd! To make it lamer the background scores were so erratic and ludicrous.

The movie with some names in the cast is hard to put down, how deceiving! and for a thread that was supposed to draw and evolve the complex nature of human relations sadly stoops, even before the drama gets built up to the core. A big let down.:( :(

We seen Crash, We seen Traffic we seen Babel and this is exactly how to do it wrong. Nothing adds to the story yet people are engaged in dialogue for 10 minutes about superfluous rubbish. Scenes that do not need to exist that are BEYOND BELIEF. Like does that happen in fiction let alone real life? Pointless trivial simplistic interactions with sex scribbled all over them. How deep is that? Yet I see people giving the artist wannabe 10/10 and 9/10. Crash had a story, Babel had a story, Traffic while using this technique actually had a powerful story going on. This disjointed jumble has NONE. It has no higher direction. It does not even come 360 or 180 or 90 but breaks off into a lot of fragmented stories yet has not the direction to assemble any of them into solid storylines. Absolute waste of money. And the only reason I watched it was because I saw Weisz and Anthony. Not sure how they roped them into this junk. I mean some of these actors were like first timers.

I ran across 360 by chance and really enjoyed it. Yet, when searching for more information in internet the generic title proved difficult to google. After some clicking things started to unfold: the same author directed City of God and the movie is a loose adaptation of one Arthur Schnitzler's play. Although i can't say much about the latter, the former impressed me even more since i've enjoyed that movie, as well.

The cast is brilliant with famous actors popping in and out of view and blending discreetly with otherwise great performance of less known colleagues. We effortlessly move with them across cities, countries and continents as it otherwise is the case in globally interconnected world at the start of the 21st century.

The more i think about 360 the more interesting details i discover in retrospect. Probably the strongest message is that there is a good seed even in the worst of us. The other is that we all eventually get what we want but some of us also get what they deserve.

What i particularly enjoyed is that a lot of things are either foreshadowed or left unsaid. This gives room for viewer's imagination to kick in, which, in turn, is rather uncommon in the era of realism and boredom in movies with artistic tendencies.

To sum it up, the only reason my vote is two stars shy of the best note is that i understand how this kind of movie might not be everyone's cup of tea.

I saw this movie at is premier gala event at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF). The movie has good character development but the downside is that the beginning of the film is slow due to the nature that the characters are built. This is a movie about connections between people. As further connections are presented to the viewer the movie moves along at a faster pace. The cast most certainly brings strength to the film as does the locations in which filming took place. Unfortunately this is one of those pieces that you know worked best on paper. If you are a fan of the cast or the type of development that occurred in the movie Crash, you will like this work. The movie does live up to its name; 360.

This film is about a married couple, and the people linked to them through their respective infidelity.

"360" is an artistic film that tells the live stories of may different individuals, loosely linked with Jude Law and Rachel Weisz. Despite the plethora of characters, the story is easy to follow. However, the story itself is not that interesting. Basically, it's A meets B, B meets C, C meets D, D meets E, then A sees F walking past and then F does the same thing B was doing earlier. It is a nice circle, but I am unsure if it is entertaining or interesting to watch. One thing I would like the film to expand on is Blanca's fate after she found the suitcase. That would have been interesting. Overall, "360" is an OK film to watch, but don't expect much from it.

Talking about pointless movies that are going absolutely nowhere. I'm still confused about it what this movie actually tried to do and achieve.

It's obviously trying to be one of those movies that uses multiple inter-connected story lines, however in this case most of the story lines aren't even connected to each other, making some of them absolutely redundant for this movie, which also can be said for a lot of its characters. There isn't a clear enough main plot line and there are just too many distractions in it with characters that by the end add absolutely nothing to the story and let this movie go nowhere. You just keep waiting for this movie to do something clever, which will connect all of the different story lines or makes them come together by the end of it. None of this ever happens though, which also causes this movie to leave a lot of loose ends by the end of it. Characters disappear and story lines just end, without wrapping things up properly.

This movie might still sound good on paper but the execution of it is far too lacking.Director Fernando Meirelles really did a poor job with its storytelling and at trying to get its point across. There is just no good reason to watch this movie, though it's still far from the worst thing you'll ever see.

What also annoyed me about this movie were the many different languages spoken in it. Basically every character is from a different country and speaks a different language, which really doesn't add anything to this movie at all. It's really becoming a gimmick for these type of movies to do and is probably also supposed to let the movie come across as a more intellectual one but it's hard and tiresome to constantly have to adapt yourself to a different language, spoken on the screen.

It was also weird to see how the movie has some big name actors in it and just as many complete unknowns. Each are given an equal amount of screen time but what's a waste about it is that the A-list actors are all playing the most redundant characters out of this entire movie. Jude Law, Rachel Weisz, Anthony Hopkins, Ben Foster, seriously, this movie could had so easily done without any of them and their characters they were playing as well. It's almost as if their parts got specifically written for them later on, after the initial screenplay already was long finished and the rest of the movie had been cast already.

No, it's really a movie you could very easily do without!

5/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/