Lawless

The prohibition era has become one of the most common subjects for filmmakers in the last few decades. With identifiable clothes, guns and cars, alongside the charismatic anti-heroes, a director should be able to wow the audience into awe-inspired submission. With the latest prohibition film, Lawless, we have everything we have come to expect from a film of this type but nothing particularly original and this is why it is ultimately a forgettable disappointment.

The illegal sale of alcohol by the Bondurant brothers is based on a true story of three siblings who profited from the illegal sale of moonshine in Franklin, Virginia, to the surrounding towns and villages. The brothers, played by Shia Leboeuf, Tom Hardy and Jason Clarke are unwilling to be pushed around by the special detective, Guy Pearce, who wants a cut of all their profits. Upon their refusal, life starts to become difficult for them as they face opposition from rival gangs and corrupt policemen.

The film’s problems begin with its characterisation, especially of the females. Jessica Chastain plays a city girl who moves to Franklin to ‘escape city life.’ This character seems like a device used by screenwriters to make sure Tom Hardy’s character has a girlfriend. She shows very little depth, no decision-making and her character is simply swept along with the plot. The only assertive thing she does is jump into bed with Tom Hardy without being asked. Jessica Chastain was recently added to the TIME list of the 100 most influential people in the world but she certainly didn’t influence me into thinking this character was anything other than a boring love interest.

Whether it was due to poor writing or Shia Leboeuf’s dull, uninspired performance, the character of Jack Bondurant was not interesting enough to hold the attention of the audience for the duration of the film. Lawless is mostly centred on him, because he plays the role of the young whippersnapper trying desperately to compete with those above him. Basically, the same character he played in Indiana Jones 4 and Wall Street 2 and, like in those films, his performance is too bland to create the magnetism necessary for a leading character. This wouldn’t have been too big a problem if Tom Hardy hadn’t had his screen time sacrificed, as he was the best aspect of the film. His meteoric rise to A-list stardom has been thoroughly deserved and this performance is outstanding. Hardy is one of the few actors around who is capable of conveying a character’s personality from simple mannerisms like walking and breathing. Before Forrest speaks, we know the sort of individual he is from his deep, steady breathing and his lumbering strides. These are the sorts of small details that can make the character more realistic.

Lawless was undeniably entertaining and the director, John Hillcoat, knew how to create tension in the right moments and make the audience invest in the characters. Great care was given to the sets and the era was accurately represented. What makes the film forgettable, though, is that there is nothing original here and nothing that separates it from films like Public Enemies or The Untouchables. The plot is such standard fare that it becomes a predictable bore. The ending is too ‘Hollywood’ with its unoriginal ideas of poetic justice and slow motion trigger pulling and this is a problem that plagues the entire film. It comes across as insincere in the way the film is paced with every character having their own set of goals, girlfriends and enemies.
Lawless could have been the definitive prohibition film but the filmmakers played it far too safe; ironic considering the criminality and risk-taking that the era is supposed to represent.