(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)
(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)
SW SCORE: 32
3.2 out of 5 🐙
It’s cool to see Guy Ritchie back to his gangster movie roots. Sherlock Holmes was decent but I really haven’t loved a movie of his since Snatch. Maybe that means I haven’t seen enough of them. The Gentlemen, appropriately considering the title, feels like a genteel version of Snatch which was a bit more genteel than Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. In general, things lose their edge over time. Things like directors, musicians, artists in general. Apparently, I like the phrase “in general”. Also, I get that Hugh Grant was playing against type but I don’t know why he chose that particular accent. The whole time I was listening to him I was thinking: “I’m fine with him playing a scumbag but that accent is really awful.” The whole movie was fun but it just felt like a less brilliant shadow of his early joints. One thing I was glad to feel: I’m bored of seeing Henry Golding in everything. That’s great! He’s reached the rare overcast typical white male actor level. That really shows he has made it! Also, Colin Farrell was great. He’s a fine actor who has taken a lot of shitty roles. It’s good to see him at full power. And after the abominable final two seaons+ of Sons of Anarchy, it’s nice to see Charlie Hunnam work quality.
(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.
(2) Octopuses (0-5 🐙, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)
(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feeling…not that SW score is scientific…but this one is even less so
(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant)