GamerTab That was an excellent one.

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

winopaul People just don't act like this. Perhaps in France where the writer/director is from, you stick with family members who are total losers, living in your little village with the one little well. Here in America, we have much more affiliation with friends and our co-workers than with any jerk relatives, even in 1970. Many families have spread across the country and hardly see each other any more.When I read the box office section, I misread the 46 thousand domestic gross as 46 million. So I do the highlight>copy>New Tab>Bookmarks>Box Office Mojo>paste>search>click, because Jeff Besos is too inconsiderate to put a link both ways even though he owns both websites. So then I see they spent 25 million and got 2 million back from sales in France. So I guess those European investors that wanted to make a killing in the American market lost almost everything. Sorry, c'est dommage.The sad thing is that if the editor or the money men deleted one scene, just one scene, this movie would be 100 times better. That scene was where the bad brother executes and entire family at that restaurant, for reasons unknown. Its awful hard to care about this sociopath jerk after that, and that scene was pretty early in the movie. With the time saved by taking that scene out, they could have put in a scene explaining how the crazy ticked-off ex husband escaped and was in pursuit of the cop brother. That would have made the ending more understandable, if no more sensible.A few news flashes for French directors. An ex-con that just got out might get mad at his ex-girlfriend when he is drunk and lonely late at night. He will not take a gun into Grand Central Station to execute the girl and her cop boyfriend. Next flash: street hoods in Brooklyn in the 1970s did not carry machine guns. Another flash: Some loser brother does not get out of prison and start killing people, robbing people, and running girls without getting his knees broken by the Italians, and Puerto Rican, and Koreans, and gosh knows how many other established criminal enterprises there were in that neighborhood.I think the director was insecure in his story and his actors, so he had to spray gratuitous drama wherever he could. This is so sad, since the actors and cinematography and music and editing were all so good. This movie showed me how little can be wrong to make a competent production into a flop.Just toning everything down would have made this a decent move. Make the bad brother a lovable rogue, not a complete sociopath. No executing his henchmen in the robbery or other absurdities. Cripes, robbers are not murderers, it is just such incoherent characterization. I kinda lost track of all the girls, forgetting who was an ex-wife or a sister, or a lover, or some random broad off the street. Less is more.And none of this love-you-hate-you-love-you-hate-you brother nonsense. Maybe make the cop brother get involved by busting brothels to make room for his brother's business, and of course, he would be in on the take. Its either that or make it a simple bad guy chased by the good cop with no family relationship, just good vs bad.Its dripping with drama, but its all cargo-cult drama. The director has never read or studied much less been in real situations in the 1970s. He has dreamed up this confabulated image based on all the other (bad) movies he has watched, so the behaviors and characters in the movie don't ring true. I think of the violence in Goodfellas, and there was the central murder of Billy Batts, and Joe Pesci shooting the kid, and him getting his just rewards in the end. But there was no willy-nilly killing sprees. Mobsters are about money, not violence. The violence happens but as a result of chasing the money. Killing a whole family? They have assets, take the restaurant like in Donnie Brasco, or any other type of hard-butt extortion. Its all about money and killing people does not get you your money back, and attracts way too much attention from law enforcement.The real pathos about this flick it that it could have been saved if they just cut out the absurd violence, and simplified the plot, and took out a few characters. They could have made back the budget in the editing room. A few re-shoots might have made it a profit-maker. What a sad sad waste.

toddg-473-289818 Blood Ties tells the story of two brothers, one cop and one convict, making their way through their dysfunctional lives in the early 1970's. Director Guillaume Canet gives the audience an unabashed view of what life looked like then, including the bad hair, tacky clothes, and even the awful paint colors on most interior walls. He observes, rather than explains, and lets the viewer absorb the uncomfortable interactions between the characters, rather than force those moments onto those watching. He even incorporates music of the period into the story, in a Scorsese like way.Clive Owen plays Chris, who is just released from prison and is having hard time adapting back into society, trying to keep on the straight and narrow and not violate the terms of his parole. This is not helped by the allure of getting sucked back into the world of violent crime, as many of the people he runs into in the real world are criminals and/or ex cons. Adding to his stresses are his cold ex-wife, played by Marion Cotillard, who demands years of back child support payments soon after Chris's release. Having seen Owen in mostly strict dramatic roles, this role, while also dramatic, gives Owen a chance to smile a bit, exploring a range of emotions and embracing his inner rebel, reminiscent of a Nicholas Cage.On the flip side of the family, Billy Crudup plays Chris's brother Frank, a cop trying to reconnect with his ex, played by Zoe Saldana. His life is difficult as well, with a somewhat meek personality not particularly suited for law enforcement, and trying to help Chris fit back into the real world. The cast is rounded out by James Caan, playing the brothers' ailing dad, and Mila Kunis, playing Chris's young love interest. The expectation of this movie should be set in that the audience is watching a drama, not an action or cops-and-robbers movie. Having said that, I found Crudup's performance understated, but that may have been the vibe that director Canet was looking for.

Leftbanker I mean this literally. I realized when I started to watch this that I had already seen it several months ago yet I couldn't remember a thing about it. The first question you have to ask when you see a period piece movie is do they really need to set the film in this era. I don't get it for this movie; there' no time like the present.There were way too many personal angles to be addressed in a two hour movie (it felt like a lot more). If you want to tell this kind of story you should do it on TV. This is only my opinion but trying to make a movie that's supposedly all about acting is a huge mistake if your story is weak. This is especially true when Clive Owen is part of the cast as he's pretty thin on talent.The only reason that I am writing this review is so that I won't try to watch this a third time.

eddie_baggins While there is much to be commended in the fact that director Guillaume Canet and his production team have here in Blood Ties created a very decent recreation of the 1970's (with an overuse of record players, we get it OK, there weren't IPod's/CD's back then!) there is also much to be made of the fact that Blood Ties is a lifeless, seen a thousand times before, dull and dreary tale that fails to announce to us just why it exists.On paper, things within Blood Ties would seem to add up to a pretty decent family/crime drama, even moments within seem to suggest Sidney Lumet was a huge inspiration. We have a name cast in the form of Clive Owen, Mila Kunis, Zoe Saldana and the ever disappointing Billy Crudup, then behind the scenes you have a film not only produced but co-written by crime genre specialist James Grey and director Guillaume Canet who has a decent track record in his native homeland of France with films such as the excellent Tell No One and the decent Little White Lies, but nothing within Blood Ties ads up to any anything decent, nothing we see here feels emotionally engaging and no one truly seems to care enough to change it.Blood Ties needed someone too step up their game exceptionally within the piece, yet all participants seemingly rested on their laurels with the material and expected fireworks to happen. Canet's direction clearly did not help this dull overbearing feeling however with his stale, beyond workmanlike gig behind the camera transferring to one of the most bereft of life movies you'd care to see. Where is the tension to be found between warring brothers? The heart pounding experience of a crime in progress or the sparks between lovers? There is none of that to be found here despite the potential for it.Bloods Ties best moments are all taken/borrowed from other much better films of the same genre, whether it be a climatic train station scene (Carlito's Way), a bank heist gone wrong (Heat) or brothers torn between loyalty to their family/friends or loyalty to their job (We Own the Night or State of Grace) and they go to show you just what can be done with this type of film if it's done right. Blood Ties doesn't do many things right and that makes this a film worthy of being crossed off your to watch list, even if the cast list looks like a sure fire success.1 record player out of 5 For more movie reviews and opinions check into - www.jordanandeddie.wordpress.com