Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
| Thriller | 2020-10-30
📥 Fatale 2020
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
88 Minutes | Horror, Thriller, Drama | 2020-07-23
📥 The Rental 2020
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
https://www.msbreviews.com
The Rental is Dave Franco’s debut as both director and screenwriter of a feature film. Making a successful horror movie was never an easy task, but I believe it’s even harder nowadays. This genre has evolved in so many ways by delving into distinct subgenres and helping new directors deliver brilliant horror stories. Of course, every year has dozens of awful horror films, and most of the “Worst Movies of the Year” lists possess more than one horror flick. However, I firmly defend horror is reaching audiences like never before, and I genuinely believe that it’s a matter of time until a Best Picture award goes to this genre.
So, is The Rental one of the better ones or not so much? Well, it’s as “okay” as it can be. I find it hard to heavily criticize a film that doesn’t really give me much to actually analyze. It’s a straightforward story with barely any complexity. Four characters with clear yet generic motivations. Their relationships and how they handle each romantic bond is surprisingly the most interesting aspect of the movie. Still, besides being somewhat predictable, it seems more captivating than what it truly is because one particular screenplay element fails to deliver a compelling narrative.
The main (and honestly, only) horror component of the story is no more than a hollow attempt at creating a franchise. Now, there’s nothing wrong with teasing an overarching story in the first film of a saga, but if this tease plays the entire horror role, then the only feeling Franco is getting from the audience is disappointment. Viewers might look forward to jumpscares and creepy sequences, but if the questions the movie makes are left unanswered, chances are people will dislike the ambiguity.
I’d be interested in a sequel because this first film creates a really intriguing mystery that I’d love to see developed and eventually solved. However, this comes at the cost of sacrificing the latter flick since it basically uses the whole runtime to introduce the overarching character/element. The Rental follows the usual “friends in a vacation house where things are not what they seem” formula, which doesn’t really set up Franco as a horror director to follow closely. He shows a bit of skill, the uneasy atmosphere is well-established, and he lets the actors play off their dialogues without too many cuts, something I deeply enjoy.
Technically, it’s quite good, to be honest. It’s a very dark movie, but I could see everything clearly, which is usually a problem in this type of horror film. The third act might be partially a letdown, but its execution holds the necessary tension and suspense. Dan Stevens and Sheila Vand deliver two great performances, showing remarkable chemistry. Alison Brie and Jeremy Allen White are also good, but the previous duo steals the spotlight. I wish it had more horror-like sequences, even though I appreciate the focus on the character’s relationships and dynamics.
All in all, The Rental is a clear attempt at creating a new horror franchise, and honestly, it partially works. If “success” means getting the viewers interested in a sequel, then mission accomplished. However, sacrificing the first movie of a possible saga to just introduce its main horror element doesn’t quite work as Dave Franco might have thought. In his directorial debut, Franco focuses on the characters and their relationships, which are undoubtedly the most captivating aspects of the film, also thanks to a fantastic cast. Despite some neat technical attributes, the formulaic screenplay and its predictable developments are far from being entertaining enough to hold my attention. The dozens of unanswered questions definitely leave an open door to produce a genuinely compelling sequel, but this first installment will always feel more like a prologue than an actual movie. If you’re just looking for a simple horror flick to spend your extra time, this one won’t surprise you, but it might be a good, inoffensive Saturday night pick.
Rating: C
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
88 Minutes | Drama, War | 1957-09-18
📥 Paths of Glory 1957
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Madness and Patsies Crash Together In Kubrick's Explosive Thunderbolt.
Stanley Kubrick's Paths of Glory is holding up rather well these days, in fact it's as pertinent and relevant as ever.
It's 1916 and the French and German armies are in opposing mud trenches, when the French are ordered to undertake a suicidal assault on a German held hill, many of the soldiers are quick to realise it's an impossible order to see through to its conclusion and retreat, something which brings charges of cowardice from the military hierarchy. Someone must take the fall...
Withdrawn from circulation in France at one time, unreleased in Spain as well, Paths of Glory is a shattering indictment on military hierarchy. On those General types who watch from afar through telescopic sights as men and boys are led like lambs to the slaughter, then off they go to their dinning rooms to gorge on wine and wholesome meat, the stench of rotting flesh as bad on their breaths as it is out there in no man's land. But it's OK for the war effort, while there might even be a promotion for some lucky soul in nice trousers...
A two-parter, the film was adapted from the novel written by Humphrey Cobb. The first half follows the craziness of the attack, the horrors of war brutally realised as Kubrick and cinematographer Georg Krause bring out the worry and simmering anger that jostle for the soldier's souls. The camera is cold and calculating, thus perfect for the material to hand, it leads the viewers - with skillful fluidity - through the bleakness of the trenches and the desolation of no man's land, the former a foreboding place, the latter an atrocity exhibition as bodies get flayed and shattered, while others retreat with limbs or sanity barely intact.
Second part shifts to a legally based procedural as the Generals conspire to make an example of those who retreated. Cowardice and a dereliction of duty apparently means the firing squad must save the integrity of the army. Patsies are lined up, but their Colonel (a superb Kirk Douglas) wants to defend them, there's much sweat, tears and anger, accusations hurled, and mistakes once again proving insurmountable. Which leads to the astonishing finale, heartbreaking whilst inducing fury, and crowned by an elegiac song that brings tears for characters and viewers alike.
A monochrome masterpiece full of technical skills, towering performances and writing to die for, Paths of Glory, candidate for one of the greatest anti-military films ever crafted. 10/10
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
160 Minutes | Action, Thriller, Crime | 2012-06-22
📥 Gangs of Wasseypur - Part 1 2012
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
144 Minutes | Action, Adventure, Science Fiction, Fantasy | 2016-05-18
📥 X-Men: Apocalypse 2016
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Not really a step forward in the X-Men franchise. Read my full review here.
http://www.hweird1reviews.com/allreviews/x-men-apocalypse-review
Though far from the worst _X-Men_ film, _Apocalypse_ was still a disappointment, because until this entry, every Bryan Singer _X-Men_ film had been excellent. _Apocalypse_ is a far cry from terrible, but it is underwhelming given Singer's history, as well as in and of itself.
Certain actors, who shall remain Jennifer Lawrence, were completely checked out in this instalment. The CGI was often so bad it was confronting, even in the climax of the film. Apocalypse's plan was plot-hole-y and underdeveloped, and not all of the new characters hit it out of the park.
There was still a lot to like here though. Some of the newer costumes were neat, and a lot of the side-plots had me very intrigued. Fassbender and McAvoy are excellent as always. It's certainly not a failure amongst the likes of, for example, _X-Men: The Last Stand_. Which was a good callout in _Apocalypse_. Another thing I enjoyed.
_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._
**Another ancient power was awoken and blah blah blah.**
I have seen almost all the superhero films of the recent time, but this is the franchise I never liked. I'm sorry to say that, but that's the truth. The 'X-Men' series never made me sense, particularly to say it from the Marvel comics is a disappointment. When it comes to 'Wolverine', my opinion is different, because I loved those films. Hugh Jackman as Logan is the only 'X-Men' I love, so like usual this is another waste of time from its series to me.
I even enjoyed the recently rebooted 'Fantastic Four', but not this one. There's nothing new in the story, it's the same plot stolen from the different films. Like an ancient force is awoken who tries to rule the world by destroying everything created so far by the humans. So the mutants join hands to bring him down and we know what happens at the end. Apart from the vfx, this is very boring film and 150 minutes runtime was another lengthy joke that you never laugh.
Not just me, many people, even 'X-Men' fans showed displeasure over this film. That means, Bryan Singer's stint with the franchise is pretty much over. So they will going to bring a new one and that's another disappointment, because I don't know how long they're going to drag this series. End it already. Anyway, like I said I never was or will be this universe fan, so I don't care much, rather I just give them a try when they get released and obviously I'm to end in regret watching. Instead, I'm looking forward to the final 'Wolverine' film with Hugh Jackman.
_5/10_
X-Men Apocalypse is typical of what you would expect from a Marvel X-Men movie. Light on story and depth and heavy on special effects and action. In short it is exactly what I, as a Science Fiction and Fantasy geek, would expect as well as hope for.
The X-Men faces a new threat in the form of the worlds first mutant. Naturally said mutant is really a Ãœbermutant vastly more powerful than any “normal” mutant. Equally naturally this Ãœbermutant is set on a path of world destruction and domination. I quite liked this villain. He is a good all evil and powerful bad guy and a worthy adversary. No nonsense about trying to make the villain likable or trying to explain why he turned evil or such like. This guy is evil, he is the bad guy, he needs to be taken down…full stop.
As I wrote the story is not the most elaborate one around but it is a good one within the confines of a Marvel super hero movie. It gets the job done without being overly stupid or silly. It is set in the “prequel” universe created by X-Men First Class. The movie adds a few new X-Men to the ranks of Professor Xaviers team. Some of them thanks to the manipulations of Apocalypse although they start out on the bad side at first.
The movie moves along at a decent enough pace and, as was mentioned, there are quite a few action sequences and special effects thrown at the viewer throughout the movie. Personally I found the special effects to be quite good. Even stunning at times. I am quite a bit of a special effects nerd so of course this pleased me a lot.
The movies ending certainly opens the door to future X-Men movies and I for sure would like to see the franchise continue. I very much enjoyed these almost two and a half hours in front of my TV set.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
After immensely enjoying the turn the X-Men franchise took after the disappointment of X-Men: The Last Stand, I was pretty excited to see this movie. I love comics, but I never got into the X-Men, so I can excuse some of the inaccuracies that seemed to upset hardcore fans. I just enjoyed the movies.
X-Men Apocalypse is the weakest film since duds like Last Stand and Wolverine Origins. It just didn't have a whole lot going on. One of the biggest critiques of Marvel (yes, I know X-Men films aren't produced by Marvel Studios, but I'm speaking of the publisher of the original medium) is that their villains are lackluster. The big baddie through the whole franchise has been Magneto, easily the most charismatic and entertaining Marvel villain on film. Though we've had brushes with Stryker and Trask and his sentinels, this is the first movie in which the X-Men had taken on a true super villain who wasn't Magneto-- Wolverine vs. The Silver Samurai aside.
But it's almost like director Bryan Singer painted himself into a corner with Apocalypse. The villain was too powerful and could have easily achieved his goals without the help of his "four horsemen." He could have ended the world, in mere minutes, all by himself. But, of course, that would make a boring movie, so Singer and Co. had to figure out what to do with the world's most powerful and dangerous mutant for two hours before the final climax was to begin.
There were scenes where the villains were literally sitting around the desert talking about how they were going to lay waste to a city on the horizon. There were scenes where the most powerful of the villains went out recruiting much less powerful villains to join him. Really, Singer just didn't know what to do with this character. How do you create conflict and drama when the bad guy is just too powerful? Well, you can't.
Of course, after two hours of watching the most powerful mutant ever talk about what he is going to do (instead of simply doing it) he finally unleashes his fury. Except that, the X- Men actually have the most powerful mutant in the world on their side in Jean Grey.
So, again, why is Jean not simply destroying Apocalypse in the first 10 minutes of the movie? Because, running time needs filler.
And that's basically what this movie is: Filler. They came up with a concept that would make the storytelling aspect problematic. And rather than tweaking the concept or fleshing out the story with subplots, they just assumed explosions and superhero fights would be enough to carry the film.
What a let down after Days of Future Past (the best X-Men movie ever, in my opinion). Bryan Singer has usually directed some of the best films of the franchise but this one is a real clunker. Too many characters with not enough development and a very lackluster villain. Oscar Isaac is a talented actor, but even he can't make Apocalypse interesting under all that silly blue make up. Characters like Angel and Psylocke, as Apocalypse's horsemen, are very thinly written and barely have a personality. Also, it is absolutely ridiculous that the villain Mystique is transformed into a role model and leader for the X-Men in this movie. Jennifer Lawrence looks bored throughout and barely appears as Mystique's true blue self even though she's supposed to be an out and proud mutant. A real disappointment.
***Ranks with the best in the X-Men franchise***
Released in 2016 and directed/co-written by Bryan Singer, "X-Men: Apocalypse" has the team go up against the first mutant, Apocalypse (Oscar Isaac), whose origins date back to ancient Egypt. After thousands of years in stasis, Apocalypse is immediately disillusioned by the state of the world and so recruits a team of worthy mutants, including a dispirited Magneto (Michael Fassbender), to purge humanity and craft a new world order over which he will reign. Professor X (James McAvoy), with the assistance of Raven (Jennifer Lawrence), leads a team of young X-Men to stop their greatest nemesis and save mankind from complete destruction. Josh Helman is on hand as Col. Stryker.
This sixth film in the franchise (not including the several spin off films) easily ranks as one of the best. It includes many of the best elements of the X-Men and everything I would want in a great X-Men flick:
Professor X's ongoing goal for an educational sanctuary for interesting mutants from all over the world; his love for Moira (Rose Byrne); Magneto's increasing mastery of his great powers and his struggle to go on the offensive against prejudiced humanity; a greater focus on Cyclops (Tye Sheridan) and his potent power, both of which were neglected in the original trilogy; an outstanding actress to play Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), who is far better than the bland Famke Janssen; Olivia Munn's ultra-hotness as Psylocke; a worthy subplot on Weapon X with the corresponding guest appearance of Wolverine (Hugh Jackman); an excellent collection of young mutants, like Storm (Alexandra Shipp), Beast (Nicholas Hoult), Quicksilver (Evan Peters), Nightcrawler (Kodi Smit-McPhee), Havok (Lucas Till), Angel (Ben Hardy), etc.; a worthy main villain in the mold of Dr. Doom and Thanatos; an epic, apocalyptic final act (sorry); I could go on and on.
This isn't to say the movie doesn't have faults, however; the cartoony overblown prologue in ancient Egypt is Exhibit A.
The film runs 144 minutes and was shot in Quebec, Canada (Greenfield Park, Montreal and Oka).
GRADE: A-
Plenty of action with good acting, however, Apocalypse (the villain) lacks originality. X-Men: Apocalypse is a mediocre film in the respected franchise that is "X-Men"
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
| Drama, Music | 2021-01-21
📥 Everybody's Talking About Jamie 2021
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
106 Minutes | Crime, Drama, Thriller | 2018-09-14
📥 Lizzie 2018
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
**_Could do with a bit more vitality, but the acting is superb_**
_I knew there was an old axe down cellar; that is all I knew._
- Stefani Koorey quoting Lizzie Borden; _The Preliminary Hearing in the Lizzie Borden Case_ (2005)
Written by Bryce Kass, and directed by Craig William Macneill, _Lizzie_ is based on the _cause célèbre_ of Lizzie Borden (not to be confused with director Lizzie Borden, or extreme porn star/director Lizzy Borden), who was accused and subsequently acquitted of the axe murders of her father and stepmother in Fall River, Massachusetts in 1892, a crime that is still officially unsolved. A "_smash-the-patriarchy_" (to use a quote from producer and star Chloë Sevigny) revisionist take on the material, the film presents Borden as a protofeminist lashing out against patriarchal oppression, homophobia, and sexual assault. Strikingly contemporary in its thematic concerns, this long-time passion project for Sevigny adopts the perspective of the #MeToo movement, proposing a version of events wherein Borden is forced to actively fight back against a lifetime of subjugation. Although the languid pace will alienate many viewers, whilst the liberties it takes with historical facts will irk others, there is much to praise here, including fantastic cinematography, terrific sound design, and flawless acting.
The film begins on the day of the murders, August 4, 1892, with Borden (a terrific Chloë Sevigny) and housemaid Bridget Sullivan (Kristen Stewart, with a surprisingly convincing Irish accent) working in the garden moments before the bodies are discovered. The narrative then jumps back six months, presenting the family dynamic leading up to the murders. 32-years-old, Borden lives with her domineering father, Andrew (a lecherous Jamey Sheridan); stepmother, Abby (Fiona Shaw), and elder sister, Emma (a criminally underused Kim Dickens). Although the Borden family are prominent members of the community, Andrew is well-known for frugality, refusing to install indoor plumbing or electric lights in the house, believing them "_extravagances_". When Sullivan arrives as a live-in housemaid, she and Borden quickly grow close, with Borden attempting to teach her to read and write. Meanwhile, the family is receiving written threats, which Borden believes are connected to her father's land acquisitions. Overhearing Andrew discussing his will with his brother-in-law, John Morse (a slimy Denis O'Hare), Borden is shocked to learn Andrew plans to leave everything to Abby. She later discovers that Andrew is regularly sexually assaulting Sullivan. Eventually, the friendship between Borden and Sullivan turns romantic. However, when Andrew learns of it, he forbids Borden from seeing Sullivan again, something Borden refuses to accept.
Well-known in the US because of the nursery rhyme, this is actually the first theatrical feature to depict Borden's story, although it has been adapted many times for other mediums; a 1948 Agnes de Mille ballet (_Fall River Legend_), a 1952 Michael Brown musical number (in _New Faces of 1952_), a 1961 Chad Mitchell Trio song ("Lizzie Borden"), a 1965 Jack Beeson opera (_Lizzie Borden_), a 1975 Paul Wendkos-directed TV movie (_The Legend of Lizzie Borden_), a 1980 Sharon Pollock play (_Blood Relations_), a 1984 Evan Hunter novel (_Lizzie_), a 1985 Angela Carter short story ("The Fall River Axe Murders"), a 1989 Walter Satterthwait novel (_Miss Lizzie_), a 1998 Christopher McGovern and Amy Powers musical (_Lizzie Borden_), and a 2014 Nick Gomez-directed TV movie (_Lizzie Borden Took an Ax_), which led to a limited series (_The Lizzie Borden Chronicles_).
The idea for the film originated with Sevigny herself, who brought it to Kass to write as a TV miniseries almost a decade ago. The script was sold to HBO in 2011, but by the time the network decided to move forward with the project, Lifetime's _Lizzie Borden Took an Ax_ was nearing completion. When it spawned _The Lizzie Borden Chronicles_, HBO decided against proceeding with Sevigny's version, so she and Kass purchased the rights back, with Kass adapting the script into a feature film. Pieter Van Hees was hired to direct, but had to drop out due to scheduling conflicts, and was replaced by Macneill. The idea that Borden and Sullivan were lovers is not original to Kass's script, as it was first posited in Hunter's novel. He theorised that Abby had caught the girls having sex, firing Sullivan, and prompting Borden to kill her. When Andrew returned home, Borden confessed, but when he reacted with horror, she also killed him. In later life, Borden was rumoured to be a lesbian, but there was no such speculation about Sullivan, who moved to Butte, Montana and got married. Speaking to the _Huffington Post_ at Sundance 2018, Sevigny revealed she was somewhat disappointed with the finished film, stating
> _almost everything that was on the page was filmed, and a lot of it didn't make it in the movie. More stuff with me and Fiona Shaw. There was more to the relationships that made them more complicated, and also then informed why Lizzie did it. Now it's a little more vague than what Bryce and I intended._
One of most interesting aspects of _Lizzie_ is its narrative structure. Beginning on August 4 just as the (unseen) bodies are discovered, it then flashes back six months to Sullivan's arrival in the Borden house. Building up to August 4 again, this time we are shown the bodies, but we don't see the murders. It then jumps forward to the trial, before once again flashing back to August 4, this time showing us the actual killing. This pseudo-_In Cold Blood_ structure is well-handled for the most part, and has a number of advantages. For one, it allows the film to briefly cover the trial, whilst still employing the murders as a powerful and very effective _dénouement_. It also allows the film to build tension around an event which the audience know is coming; by not showing the killings (twice), it has the effect that when the film does actually depict them, they are all the more impactful, placing a suitable cap on what is essentially a story of forbidden love.
From an aesthetic point of view, there's much to praise, with Noah Greenberg's cinematography particularly laudable. Often framing Borden in windows, doorways, and behind railings, whilst also using shallow focus to flatten backgrounds, the sense is that this is a woman living a confined life with little room to move, trapped in her immediate environment. When she and Sullivan first kiss, the camera pulls back to reveal that Andrew is watching them – even in this moment of release, they are still trapped in his domain. Borden is also often shot off-centre, or reflected in mirrors, particularly as she talks to someone who is on camera. This reinforces the sense that she is trapped, and also feeds into the metaphorical meaning of a later scene where she spreads the shards of a broken mirror outside the door of Sullivan's room to cut her father's feet as he emerges.
Dank and airless, the dimly lit Borden household, outside of which the film rarely ventures, is practically another character in and of itself. Complimenting Elizabeth J. Jones's production design, Greenberg's photography gives rise to a restrictive and claustrophobic _mise en scène_, which is often lit with only a single candle. However, it's not just how he lights scenes that impresses, it's also how he uses the camera; gliding over important details without hammering home why we should be paying attention (the first time we see the hatchet, for example). Also worth mentioning is how Macneill uses the full-frontal nudity towards the end of the film. Although it will no doubt be accused of gratuitousness by some, it's not only historically accurate, it's shocking, necessary, and makes a powerful statement. God forbid a woman should ever appear naked on screen in a scene _not_ of a sexual nature. Assisting Greenberg's photography and Jones's design is Ruy GarcÃa's superb sound design. Of particular note are the floorboards, which creak with the slightest touch, making any kind of clandestine interaction between Borden and Sullivan virtually impossible, and thus contributing to the sense of the household as a prison. Enhancing this even further, is the lack of warmth in the sound design, with footsteps and voices echoing and bouncing off the walls due to the lack of any soft surfaces.
As a narrative of female empowerment (albeit of the homicidal variety), most of the film's main themes relate to combating the patriarchal strictures of the Gilded Age, represented primarily by Andrew and John, both loathsome characters in their own way, and Abby, who reinforces patriarchal hypocrisy by unquestioningly submitting to it (she is well aware that Andrew is abusing Sullivan, for example). Talking to the _Huffington Post_, Sevigny explains,
> _we just really wanted to focus on how she went about finding [her freedom] and how important that was to her and what that meant to her. Whether it was through the relationship with Bridget or ultimately killing her parents for money – because money equalled freedom then. It still does. I wanted it to be this rousing, smash-the-patriarchy piece and then she gets everything she wants, monetarily – the capitalist dream._
Presenting Borden as a woman driven to her wit's end, with few practical options in a society that looks down on her because she is unwed and in her 30s, the film depicts a free-spirit living in a cage, yearning for agency, with the murders presented, at least in part, as her attempt to break free of such restrictions. Suffocated by unquestioned authoritarian patriarchal rule, Borden essentially becomes a protofeminist heroine, actively rebelling against the dominion of men and the women who enable them.
Sullivan, who acts as the audience's moral compass, faces different obstacles, primarily related to economics and social caste. Her place in the ideological and socio-economic hierarchy is manifested in the fact that the family call her Maggie (the generic name given to all Irish servants). However, Borden's insistence on calling her by her actual name (which is historically inaccurate, as Borden also called her Maggie) lays the groundwork for their later emotional connection. Presenting their relationship as an illicit romance which they had to hide because of the moral bigotry of the age, the film very much adopts a #MeToo sensibility, as Borden and Sullivan fight back against self-righteous judgement, unchecked abuse, and socially sanctioned oppression. In this sense, when Borden and Sullivan strip naked before the murders, they aren't just undressing to avoid getting incriminating blood on their clothes, they are repudiating the garments that have restricted them in a physical sense just as much as men have in an ideological sense.
There are, however, some sizeable problems in all of this. For one, the film lacks energy, and the slow pacing will leave some viewers bored to tears. Additionally, apart from Sevigny and Stewart, the rest of the cast is wasted, particularly Shaw, O'Hare, and Dickens (who only has a handful of scenes, and is virtually a background extra). None of their characters come across as possessing any kind of interiority, instead existing almost exclusively as archetypes; the wicked stepmother, the lecherous uncle, and the ice-cold older sister. Additionally, although he has a lot more to do, Sheridan's Andrew is completely over-the-top, only one or two beats away from a moustache-twirling mega-villain. Perhaps the most egregious problem is that the film seems as war with itself. On the one hand, it wants to be an elegant, period-appropriate tale of women attempting to take their destinies into their own hands in a Victorian society not predisposed to allow such, but on the other, it wants to present a modern story of murder and homosexual women (Patty Jenkins's _Monster_ (2003) in corsets, if you will). At times, such as the superb depiction of the murders themselves, you can feel the modern sensibilities rise to the surface, but for the most part, they're stifled by the hushed austerity of the more muted _milieu_.
_Lizzie_ tells the story of an initially powerless victim who lashes out and, quite literally, slays patriarchal authority. Just by giving Sevigny the first significant starring role of her career, the film earns a lot of brownie points, as she's been an unsung, but consistently brilliant supporting player since her debut in Larry Clark's _Kids_ (1995). Alongside her, Stewart equates herself very well, even having a decent go at an Irish accent, and the passion between the two, though period-appropriately muted, is completely believable. However, the film's attempts to shoehorn in 21st century moral values doesn't entirely work, primarily because Kass's script tips the scale in Borden's favour to a ridiculous degree – there's Andrew's over-the-top villainy (not just an authoritarian homophobe, but a rapist to boot), John's creepy intimations, Abby's refusal to stand up for her step-daughters, Borden's protofeminist rhetoric and humanitarianism, the alterations to historical fact to ensure the audience is never in any doubt as to where its sympathies are supposed to lie. Weighing the scales so decisively drains the film of any ambiguity and most of its vitality, presenting a binary story of righteous good slaying hypocritical evil, rather than a murder with many facets. A Gothic tale told from a #MeToo perspective, _Lizzie_ tries to be many things at once – a revisionist history, a feminist tract, a championing of homosexuality, a murder mystery, a period drama – but ends up kind of falling into a no man's land between genres. Still though, there are aspects of the film that are enjoyable, if you can look past the enervating pace.