Tacticalin An absolute waste of money

GarnettTeenage The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Phillida Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

HotToastyRag Remember the movie Ruthless People? It was really funny, right? Who, in their infinite brilliance, decided to remake this movie and make it a frightening drama? The preview of this movie is incredibly misleading; it makes it seem like a regular comedic remake. A rich woman is kidnapped, and her husband is thrilled by her absence, rather than eager to pay the ransom money. Again I ask, who decided to make this a drama? Jennifer Aniston plays the wife, and gives a solid dramatic performance, as she usually does when given the chance. She reminds the audience that she is in real danger, and that her kidnappers could hurt her, or worse.I didn't happen to like it, because I kept waiting for the jokes to start. If you go into it knowing it's a tension-filled, upsetting kidnapping movie—and you actually like that type of movie—you might, well, like it a little.Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to sex scenes and extremely upsetting situations, I wouldn't let my kids watch it. Also, there may or may not be a rape scene.

Lola A The movie does not have any important message besides that about trust maybe. Orwell Robbie betrays his partner Louis Gara when he thinks Louis would not agree to kill Mickey Dawson. Makes you think that you can't trust anyone. A lesson about karma can also be seen. Melanie cheating on Frank Dawson just as he did on his wife. But I mean what else would you expect from a woman like Melanie that gets involved with a married man. Overall however, the movie is too slow and definitely not a typical Jennifer Aniston movie. There is not a lot of action and it gets boring at times. The ending is the best part. Its hilarious and turns the cards around. It makes you like Mickey, Louis and Orwell. They become a cool 'couple folks'. Frank is portrayed as the typical bed man in this movie. He drinks a lot causing marriage problems and instead of improving himself he chooses to go after a younger woman that makes it seem as she accepts him for whom he is but in reality she does not care a bit about him. He is a fraud and self-loving men. Why is he that way the movie does not show. Jen's acting is top as always. However, who did the editing on the scenes when Louis brings Mickey home, a high school student? It's terrible. Overall I would not recommend this movie. I did not enjoy it.

Alicja Johnson Meh. That's the word I want to use when I think of an overall impression of Life of Crime. Released in 2013 at the Toronto International Film Festival, Life of Crime is an independent crime-comedy film directed by Daniel Schechter. Although it's classified as such, I did not find myself experiencing any kind of laughter. The writing, also done by Schechter and Elmore Leonard, is lackluster with little comedy. So….meh. Ex-convict Ordell Robbie (Yasiin Bey) persuades Louis Gara (John Hawkes) to partner with him and the Nazi-supporter Richard (Mark Boone Jr) to pull off the kidnapping of Mickey Dawson (Jennifer Anniston). The kidnappers plan to demand a one million dollar ransom from Mickey's husband, Frank Dawson (Tim Robbins), who has been keeping some excessive assets in a bank account kept secret from his wife. However, Ordell hasn't done enough research and fails to realize that the Dawson marriage is in shambles. Mickey appears to be lingering on the thought of having an affair with one of Frank's friends, Marshall Taylor (Will Forte); she is getting fed up with her abusive husband. Meanwhile, Frank is already fed up with Mickey, and on the cusp of filing for divorce. When Ordell and Louis come to abduct Mickey, they are surprised to find Marshall arriving at the house to pay her a visit – so they knock him out and leave him in the closet. However, the pair come to find out that Marshall is just a molehill…the mountain comes when Frank refuses to pay the ransom. I had several problems with this film; but let's begin with the writing of the characters. First of all, there were exactly two people with any sort of moral compass: Louis and Mickey. The other characters were morally disgusting, and not in the amusing way that Heath Ledger's Joker was. Although he was kidnapping a woman, Louis did show remorse and also protected Mickey from the cruel intentions of his cohorts. Mickey is ever the sweet and innocent victim in both her marriage and her kidnapping. Life of Crime is one of those flicks that shows the story through the views of the heroine and the villain(s) equally. The benefit of this type of film is that the villain has the chance to make the audience sympathetic for him or her. Life of Crime does not take advantage of this. The audience is given no information about the past of the kidnappers, and thus their actions are just black and white – there is no morally gray area. We aren't even told what the partners need the money for! The only characters we get any back story on are Mickey and Frank; but even that back story is wanting. There is some good character development in Mickey, but overall the characters in this film lack depth.Despite the problems with the actual characters, the acting in this film is just satisfactory; only one actor stands out in this film as more than that. Boone does a great portrayal of Richard (I always feel awkward when complimenting an actor on playing a horrifying character well!). Richard is clearly meant to be the truly terrible member of the kidnapping team, with all his Nazi paraphernalia and his aggressive attitude. There are even a few moments where Boone appears to be more of a literal beast than a man. Boone turns Richard into massive and terrifying villain – the kind you want to see burn. This movie could have been so much more. The plot is an interesting and original idea, but the opportunity goes to waste under the writing and direction. Also, there are a few plot holes that the audience gets stuck on. Overall, the film is unengaging and a total miss.

Tss5078 The plan was simple, kidnap a rich suburban woman, while her husband and son are out of town. The husband is corrupt, so he will be more than willing to pay a ransom, in order to keep them quiet, and to get his wife back, right? This group of bumbling, life-long criminals thought they had it all figured out, except for one small problem, Frank Dawson (Tim Robbins) isn't really interested in getting his wife back. This strange film, based on the novel, Switch by Elmore Leonard, takes place in the late 70's, and had critics raving, but after seeing it for myself, I'm left with one question, why? After the kidnapping takes place, the film moves at a snails pace, with criminals arguing, and phone calls back and fourth, nothing happens for the majority of the film. Jennifer Aniston stars and gives probably the worst performance I've ever seen her give. She is this spoiled, whiny, rich bitch, who just doesn't know when to keep her mouth shut. It really got to the point where every time she spoke I cringed. On the other hand, Tim Robbins, who plays her husband, was hilarious, but not in the film nearly enough. One of my favorite young actors, Charlie Tahan, also has a role in the film, as their son. In the brief amount of screen time he has, we see a very troubled and confused kid, an angle that could have helped the story, but he too was hardly used. The majority of the film features Jennifer Aniston interacting with her kidnappers and trying to form a bond with the bumbling idiots. I'm not sure if this was supposed to be a comedy or just a comedy of errors wrapped up in a dramatic theme, but either way it doesn't work. Most of the cast is absolutely horrible, the majority of the film is unbelievably slow, and the parts that aren't, just don't make a whole lot of sense. Life of Crime had quite a few side stories that could have been utilized to fill up the space and break up the monotony, but it was all left on the cutting room floor, leaving us with a film that could be used as a method of torture at Guantanamo Bay.