|Average votes grouped by age and by sex:|
|Total includes those who didn't specify sex.|
The movie had no direction... it's sick the director was stoned!! It was an x-Sopranos cast reunion with really bad writing.
|1/10||pozcanon@ - 62 reviews|
13.4.2013 - age: 36-49
Is it only me who thinks that it is one of the worst movies ever?! I really don't get it! There is nothing good about this movie at all, and I mean it, nothing, it is boring like hell, it is one of those movies you kept feeling bad for the whole week because you spent 2 hours and you wished to find something in the end... but you just feel very disappointed.
|2/10||ashraf_zaky@ - 12 reviews|
13.4.2013 - age: 36-49
Just cuz Gandolfini is in this mob type movie and you're thinking of a "Soprano" type role, think again. The first 40 some odd minutes was totally boring. Pitt's role just doesn't seem fit for it. There were a few humour scenes but nothing that interesting.
|2/10||metalandy2000@ - 84 reviews|
13.2.2013 - age: 36-49
Stupid and strange character for Brad Pitt, very boring film.
|2/10||happysaad68@ - first review|
23.1.2013 - age: 36-49
The ending leaves you hanging. More of a conclusion is needed.
|7/10||johnkbarry@ - first review|
18.1.2013 - age: 50+
Frankly, the movie was just Ok.
|6/10||shazjoao@ - 1728 reviews|
Please watch it. Then you will see it for yourself. Listen to every word, follow every move, you will see how the movie tells you about people who think that they have [the] right to judge others. It's a great piece of art.
|9/10||swarnapala@ - first review|
11.1.2013 - age: 26-35
It is not a great movie but I thought it showed a slice of life in the mob world. Honour and respect for those who you trust, brutal in execution of those who you distrust and a code which if you cross the line you know what to expect. I thought Brad Pitt was excellent in his portrayal of a captain with some human qualities but ruled by the rules of the game... it is a slice of life movie... a window into what I think that world might be like.
|6/10||lynxear@ - 11 reviews|
5.1.2013 - age: 50+
I thought it was Great! Don't let these bad reviews fool you.
|9/10||bocul13@ - first review|
3.1.2013 - age: 36-49
Nothing too see here. Nothing happens, no entertainment found in this movie.
|1/10||hanleyjm@ - first review|
29.12.2012 - age: 36-49
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
1. Very predictable from start to beginning 2. No character development whatsoever. For example Gandolfini and Liotta characters had a role of 6-7 minutes cumulative max. The audience isn't even told off what became of Gandolfini. 3. Unnecessary focus/detail on the two thugs. 4. No twist in the tale (as I said very predictable) 5. The director seems obsessed with Sopranos cast. At least 3 characters from Sopranos in this movie without any significant need. The movie isn't even about mafia infighting. All in all the movie goes like this: three losers need to get whacked. They get whacked. Brad Pitt can't put a foot wrong. Everybody else is dumb. (And that I'm saying as a Pitt fan)
|2/10||favouritemartian@ - first review|
29.12.2012 - age: 26-35
The actors worked with the script they were handed and they did a fair job. The script is dark, it's a neighbourhood crime story full of flawed characters and swearing. It's not an exceptional script, the criminal's are not smart, the crime syndicate is crippled and the overall execution is missing something. A walk in the cold rain or the snow will do more for you than this movie ever could.
|4/10||ferling100@ - 47 reviews|
29.12.2012 - age: 26-35
Why is there such a large gap in opinion for this movie? I think that those who gave it a poor rating were expecting a Disney effect (lots of action, stunning fx, etc.) A good film should have a lot of character development and a good script, and of course good acting. I think that the heavy setting of the political landscape can be overlooked and may have been necessary to capture or intensify the suspense and makes it strangely more realistic in my opinion because like it or not our society is steeped in a political landscape and we are bombarded by advertising so much that maybe that's why this film seems to have exploited or custom of being overexposed. This film may seem closer to reality than most ( albeit a darker world), and goes against our expectation of a fantasy-escape genre that is popular these days (hobbit, lord of the rings, spider/bat-man.) This film may not be popular, but it is well done, fresh, and new, which might scare some of you more Disney-seeking types.
|8/10||jesselapointe@ - 5 reviews|
26.12.2012 - age: 26-35
[...] It was truly the biggest disappointment I have ever laid eyes on, no story at all, and terrible sub grade acting. What an absolute embarrassment to Brad Pitt and the guy from the Sopranos.. lol. Lol seriously I wanted to walk out so badly after 15 mins, but it just turned into "this movie has to get better" kinda thing, but not a chance. Stayed right to the bitter end, wow what a waste. Thanks for reading.
|1/10||laughlin_5@ - first review|
25.12.2012 - age: 36-49
I see a lot of movies but I have never before been moved to write a review. I was completely baffled by the appalling reviews of this movie. I cannot figure out what drove so many people not just to dislike it, but to loathe it, to walk out on it, to consider it amongst the worst films they’d ever seen. If you think you are going to see an action film (and the trailer will unfortunately deceive you on that score) then this movie is not what you are expecting. But if you are interested in a hard, insightful, painfully honest movie about American society, then you can’t get much better. This movie seems too real. Characters are all horribly flawed, hair is greasy, faces are sweaty, jobs are botched, fear is palpable, and worst (and most real) of all, there is never a good reason for anything. I have to assume that a lot of movie-goers cannot abide by such a stark picture of one part of society, even in the name of art. Contrary to what some other reviewers have said, yes, there is a plot with a beginning, a middle, and a perfect end. The characters are rich, each one a study in itself. The scenes and dialogues are each flawlessly crafted as studies in desperation, depravity, idiocy or folly. And somewhere far away, but still vaguely present in the film, is another America, the one we all know from CNN, much more flashy, pretty and sophisticated than the world of these lowlife characters - but otherwise, how different? I had to ask myself upon leaving the theatre, why - even without a particular appreciation of plot and character development and highly effective dialogue - why would people hate it so much? As another reviewer says, on another level, it was just "a simple neighbourhood crime story". Maybe not.
|9/10||deena.white@ - first review|
25.12.2012 - age: 50+
Not a movie for kids or girls great scenes, a bit too much talking thought but it's worth it.
|7/10||joe0069@ - first review|
24.12.2012 - age: 18-25
I'm not sure how to say, in a nice way, that this movie was not very good but... there, I said it... NOT WORTH WATCHING.
|4/10||aderry@ - first review|
24.12.2012 - age: 36-49
I really enjoyed this movie. I don't understand why people are leaving 20 mins in. It had exceptional characters, great acting and was a simple neighborhood crime story. It's not a big budget action waste of time with explosions every 2 mins. If you like movies with stories, then this is a good pick.
|9/10||dmacdonald@ - first review|
22.12.2012 - age: 36-49
Funny to read the lengthy diatribes that people will write about a film just to explain to the ignorant among us, to justify how wonderful it was in order to educate all of us unwashed initiates. A good film stands on its own merits. This was not a good film, and no amount of explaining will repair the damage. Calling it "art" and then saying we don't understand it is no justification for a bad film. I think all the walkouts and one line descriptions say enough. Save your money.
|5/10||djealas59@ - 21 reviews|
22.12.2012 - age: 50+
I decided to go and see this movie after having heard about its mixed ratings. I didn't go because Brad Pitt was part of the cast, but rather despite that fact. I know he plays in good movies generally but the presence of an actor in a film is not the ultimate barometer of quality on the big screen, at least for me. This said, I found this movie quite enjoyable. Of course, the constant excerpts from political discourse was a bit too didactic for me, and not too realistic as well, as, as can be observed from the ratings of this movie, not everybody is into long-winded commentary of a social or political nature, however well put in the mouth of slicked dressed and interestingly developed character. Ultimately, you will like this film if you are looking for an interesting commentary about today's society, well-developed but with a slow build-up, and you won't if you are looking for an action film, a la Tarantino, or a la Die Hard again, once more and forever. Also, I hope that the make a sequel to this movie, because the ending is quite promising in that sense, and it must be noted that this film was based on a book: Conan's Trade, by George V Higgins. Anyways, given the nature of most reviews around here, let's just hope that more people decide to forgo all the negative comments and make an opinion for themselves about this movie. It is worth it, most definitely.
|9/10||plouzzra@ - first review|
22.12.2012 - age: 18-25
What a terrible movie, people were leaving before the end... the one who were still there were sleeping. I could barely keep my eyes open... no action, acting is horrible, the dialogue is so slow... and getting no where. Can't believe this movie made it to the big screen... while other amazing movies can't... why? Because Brad Pitt plays in it? Studios who show movie like this deserve to go bankrupt, really!
|1/10||ac53083@ - 53 reviews|
20.12.2012 - age: 36-49
I went into this movie after having read the mixed reviews of both critics and regulars. This movie was very enjoyable for me. I was told it was a slow movie. Indeed it was, don't go expecting a high paced action movie but it wasn't nearly as slow as people made it out to seem. Also many of the reviews kept complaining about the over use of 'c-span' clips. Sure there are audio bytes from George Bush and Barack Obama for whenever there is a radio (for ex: in car rides) but it's not like they are showering you in them. The acting was excellent too. Great performances from Brad Pitt, Gandolfini and the rest of the cast, not one weak performance. The dialog was much better than I expected. Yes there were many moments that felt like they were trying to make it interesting/off-topic at the same time (think John Travolta and Samuel Jackson in the early scenes of Pulp Fiction) and I was very pleased with it. It obviously wasn't up to Pulp Fiction standards but it wasn't boring. I was very surprised when I saw someone walk out. The action scenes are few and far between, however they are very gruesome. A lot of blood combined with dark slow motion effects. If I had to compare the pace of the movie, it would be to the movie Drive with Ryan Gosling. An equally slow movie that I very much enjoyed as well. Keep in mind there is more dialog in Killing Them Softly. It's more of a cold-blooded Drive, minus the love story. Overall excellent movie. Just don't expect it to be a 'Transporter' type movie.
|9/10||abdu_saboor@ - 31 reviews|
19.12.2012 - age: 18-25
When you stay seated just to see how this movie will end... it's not bad, it means it's horrible. I never saw the end, I was with the people who left! Oh, and also, keep in mind, I am 37, and this is the first time in my life I left before the end. That's right... it's THAT BAD!
|1/10||cadieux.benoit@ - first review|
18.12.2012 - age: 36-49
Went to se,e left 20 mins into movie, was not an eye catcher.
|1/10||aanieshalondon@ - first review|
18.12.2012 - age: 26-35
Borinnng, no action, just dialogue.
|1/10||tareq48@ - first review|
18.12.2012 - age: 18-25
I don't get the reviews here; it was a great character movie, and a comment on the state of capitalism in the US, granted, it was a little too obvious that's what was going on, but hey, we've been dumbed-down, we need it.
|9/10||stanlee@ - 101 reviews|
17.12.2012 - age: 36-49
I really enjoyed it. Really bleak.
|7/10||g91304@ - 2 reviews|
16.12.2012 - age: 50+
Totally agree with some of the reviewers who described this film as mostly an artistic work. It's a quality picture. What's unusual though is pop actors are a part of this. I think it's both refreshing and promising as maybe Hollywood is coming back to its origins where it focused more on grown up audience.
|8/10||andrei_tmnv@ - 4 reviews|
16.12.2012 - age: 26-35
Was so slow, and boring. Acting sucked. People walked out.
|2/10||windsor_baby@ - 2 reviews|
15.12.2012 - age: 26-35
One of the worst movies I have ever seen. Brad Pitt should retire not Angelina. This movie was boring start to finish. I almost went and demanded my money back it was that awful. I've never left comments on any movie but feel compelled to warn people not to waste their hard earned dollars.
|3/10||ken_50@ - first review|
15.12.2012 - age: 50+
This film d'auteur, or arthouse film, wasn't meant to be entertaining. It was just meant to be. If you're not part of the film festival crowd, you will hate it. It was refreshing to see a lack of Hollywoodism in the film. But it could have been much better. There is a dialogue near the beginning of the movie demonstrating the educational level of the two characters, yet it falls flat. Unless the two were meant to be retarded or utterly stupid, the conversation makes no logical sense. The story starts falling apart at that point and people are ready to leave. And some do. But that is a pity. What was becoming one of the worst movies I'd ever seen starts being a wonderful arthouse film. There may be too much concentration on certain characters, but it is at the discretion of the director to guide us into this. What actually happens here is a threefold story of America falling apart and all the actors, wherever they may be from, are following the course. Metaphor becomes reality and by the end of the film we wish it wouldn't end. There is predictability as well. But it is the best scenario that finishes off the film. There are great performances here by Pitt, Gandolfini, and Liota. I believe James Gandolfini should be nominated for best supporting actor for his two scenes with Brad Pitt. Remarkable character building here and we see past the Tony Soprano image he has tried to fight off. The slowness of the movie works for the most part. It is needed for character building and also sets the mood. At worst, this is the pace we live our lives by. But what horrible fates reality can bring. The hero, Pitt, is human in many ways and is just enslaved as anyone else is. Gandolfini is a perfect representation of the victim. He is a man who is intelligent and could've been successful had he been able to use his faculties properly. I cannot give this film more than 8 because there are holes in it. At times, the director doesn't try hard enough and, at others, he is self-aggrandising and doesn't care. But that is what a film d'auteur is. It is worth the price of admission just to watch maybe the 15 minutes in total that Gandolfini is in the film. A bit more brushing up, better editing, and someone who can write better dialogue for the two villains, would bring this film close to masterpiece status. Don't listen to the bad reviews here. If you are a film connaisseur, you'll enjoy this film. It is preposterous that people can't recognise art.
|8/10||tedkouretas@ - 52 reviews|
14.12.2012 - One reply
What a refreshing take of the insight of a killer for hire. Godfather with a psychological training. I will tell my friends not to write this one off. Brad Pitt is excellent in this.
|7/10||joeljustleft@ - 270 reviews|
14.12.2012 - age: 26-35
Really interesting and offbeat. A hitman with a degree in Psychology... I enjoyed it and it is certainly a great Pitt performance.
|7/10||jilljustleft@ - 309 reviews|
14.12.2012 - age: 18-25
Terrible in every way, no value at any level. I am amazed it got made.
|2/10||walter2@ - 93 reviews|
14.12.2012 - age: 50+
Absolutely waste of money and time, damn.
|1/10||alnaif@ - first review|
14.12.2012 - age: 26-35
This movie is absolutely terrible! From beginning to end this movie was slow, boring, mindless, with subpar acting, directing and writing. When you go to a movie, you should be entertained... There was zero entertainment!! Easily one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Complete garbage!!
|1/10||rickrogers@ - first review|
14.12.2012 - age: 36-49
It is a very "SLOW" moving movie, with entirely too much meaningless dialogue. The movie is convoluted and dark. The entertainment value is a 2. The acting is entirely superficial.
|2/10||timjones@ - first review|
14.12.2012 - age: 36-49
Terrible!!! Had to leave before the end. THAT bad. Brad Pitt should seriously consider a career change.
|1/10||seanwilliams456@ - 13 reviews|
14.12.2012 - age: 50+
I have NEVER walked out on a movie and I did on this one. Offensive mindless profanity just for the sake of saying the words. No story line and poorly done. Someone commented that those that didn't like it weren't really listening, really!? Intelligence not needed for this one.
|1/10||blanbusserv@ - first review|
13.12.2012 - age: 36-49
Excellent acting, solid writing. I don't think the plot is as much the focus as the wonderfully executed interplay between the top actors here. You feel the "gridiness" of those lifestyles. Gripping at times.
|7/10||mtl.items@ - 2 reviews|
13.12.2012 - age: 36-49
Terrible. No plot. No action. Only robbery was at the box office.
|1/10||rachelkoekstat@ - first review|
12.12.2012 - age: 50+
Like many others, because of the very negative reviews on this website, I reluctantly went to see this movie and was pleasantly surprised by the acting and dialogue. It is not the train wreck that so many have suggested.
|7/10||jginnes@ - first review|
12.12.2012 - age: 50+
This is possibly the worst piece of self indulgent garbage that I have ever seen. Brad Pitt should stick to his perfume commercials if this is the sort of pointless crap that he's sunk to. The overlay of the political situation in the USA was heavy handed and silly. Come on guys, you phoned this one in and people like me saw the stars and thought it might be worth a look. Won't make that mistake again.
|2/10||timothycollins@ - first review|
11.12.2012 - age: 50+
What a waste of time and money! Perhaps the worst movie I've ever seen! Is disgustingly slow, bad taste, really, really, really bad, is pure garbage, I can't get it how come they can do such a crapy movie with such an stellar cast! Really bad!
|1/10||jcsalazaro@ - 2 reviews|
11.12.2012 - age: 26-35
I liked camerawork a lot, this movie has a strong mob feel to it. This movie has a simple story that may be but ask yourself what did you expect when you bought your ticket? It's a real life story, shows you how things really work.
|7/10||myworkaccount@ - 3 reviews|
11.12.2012 - age: 18-25
Take Reservoir Dogs, strip it of all the witty, fun, slightly surreal dialogue, then replace it with what sounds mostly like real people discussing their jobs and private lives, throw in a sprinkle of violence now and then, and hire Brad Pitt and James Gandolfini to give it some star oomph, and there you have it.
|3/10||newscott13@ - 400 reviews|
11.12.2012 - age: 36-49
For the life of me I can't understand the putrid reviews this film is getting. It's certainly no masterpiece, yet it isn't the abysmal train-wreck that some of these reviews suggest. It is a talky, nihilistic and brutal expose into the low-life criminal underbelly of America, an America in the midst of the financial crisis. It's clear from alot of these reviews that the film's wink wink shot a capitalism and it's every man for himself, go it alone attitude was over the head of most viewers. That's not surprising seeing as how the same [...] public ignored director Andrew Dominik's last Brad Pitt film, the criminally under-seen but brilliant Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. Both films require a certain amount of patience, though with Softly, the payoff is not as substantial. It's populated with ugly characters who say ugly things and the film really has nowhere in particular to go. The script is good, if you can handle the constant barrage of profanity and Pitt is excellent, delivering a tempered, subdued turn as the hit-man. His closing lines sum up the entire film perfectly and are worth the price of admission.
|6/10||jfichaud@ - 97 reviews|
11.12.2012 - age: 26-35
Can't believe Brad Pitt was in this "B" movie.
|4/10||percula2004@ - first review|
10.12.2012 - age: 50+
Acting fantastic. Strong story. There is a message in this movie.
|8/10||bellyboat@ - first review|
10.12.2012 - age: 50+
Here's how this movie works. It has lots of good long scenes with interesting dialogue, some interesting stylistic choices, and pretends to treat some weightier issues. However, it actually doesn't have any plot. That's not me being unable to sense the undercurrents, I mean structurally it lacks a plot. There are massive problems with the script's structure, which is why so many people hate it. Full of cliches treated in a more stylized way, the film wastes several good actors on meaningless activities unrelated to anything. If I were James Galdofini, I would fire my agent. Despite some really great performances, the film just isn't that good. It's a shame, the director's previous work is masterful. Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert ford is a masterpiece, and Chopper is similarly very good. But while Jesse James was languid and meditative, this movie is simply inert.
|2/10||teliok@ - 3 reviews|
10.12.2012 - age: 26-35
Note: User reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our readers. We are not responsible for their content.