Live By Night | Christmas Day limited release, wide release on 01/13/17 | Ben Affleck/Warner Bros. New trailer on page 8

[DMan7]

2 minutes ago, JennaJ said:

 

 

 

Starts off with 4 rottens to 1 fresh on RT.

 

Ouch

[CoolioD1]

25 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

Beatty's ego must be off the charts, haha. 

burt reynolds isn't some modest saint either. when he looks like the easier to work with choice.... lmao.

[EmpireCity]

5 minutes ago, JennaJ said:

 

 

 

Starts off with 4 rottens to 1 fresh on RT.

 

Yep, disappointing.  All the signs were there for this to be good and sounds like it isn't anything more than mediocre.  

 

The winter season keeps getting worse.  

Edited December 21, 2016 by EmpireCity

[James]

The Accountant is also rotten and that had insane legs. I doubt reviews matter much for this movie, other than it's Oscar chances going away.

[filmlover]

So basically, this really is Gangster Squad all over again.

[TimmyRiggins]

The reviews are more mixed than anything, no one seems to hate it, it's more like it's good, but it could have been great. Maybe Ben just complicated things too much by being the lead as well, it worked out well in The Town, but Live By Night is much denser material. 

[TalismanRing]

8 minutes ago, TimmyRiggins said:

The reviews are more mixed than anything, no one seems to hate it, it's more like it's good, but it could have been great. Maybe Ben just complicated things too much by being the lead as well, it worked out well in The Town, but Live By Night is much denser material. 

 

Rather these reviews feel it missed it's mark to be good, otherwise the reviews wouldn't be rotten. 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2016 by TalismanRing

[bapi]

Shocking reviews but that long embargo was always suspicious.

[bapi]

If it's bad it'll hurt my expectations for The Batman A LOT, to be honest.

[TimmyRiggins]

Read them however you want to read them, it feels like there's a longer (Affleck did cut it down substantially from stuff I've seen online), more accomplished version of it somewhere, no review says it's bad. 2 hours 9 min does sound short. It's becoming a pattern with WB lately. 

 

Watch people like bapi start saying The Batman will be a failure, completely forgetting about the three excellent films he did before. 

Edited December 21, 2016 by TimmyRiggins

[bapi]

2 minutes ago, TimmyRiggins said:

Read them however you want to read them, it feels like there's a longer (Affleck did cut it down substantially from stuff I've seen online), more accomplished version of it somewhere, no review says it's bad. 2 hours 9 min does sound short. It's becoming a pattern with WB lately. 

Long versions we may never see don't change anything.

[bapi]

Ultimately, “Live By Night” doesn’t suggest Affleck’s lost his groove so much as that his groove has its limits. Saddled with derivative material, he can’t seem to find a fresh approach. It’s telling that the next project that finds him on both sides of the camera is “The Batman,” a studio-produced blockbuster hardly expected to take big risks. Affleck may not be a total sellout, but he’s the kind of steady-handed entertainer equally capable of making smart movies and forgettable ones depending on the task at hand. It remains to be seen if “Live By Night” is the anomaly or a regrettable new chapter in an otherwise satisfying career of intelligent escapism.

[filmlover]

5 minutes ago, TimmyRiggins said:

Read them however you want to read them, it feels like there's a longer (Affleck did cut it down substantially from stuff I've seen online), more accomplished version of it somewhere, no review says it's bad. 2 hours 9 min does sound short. It's becoming a pattern with WB lately. 

What's next, "he made it for the fans only?"

[JennaJ]

Well maybe we'll get an extended ultimate cut on the blu-ray.

[bapi]

2 minutes ago, JennaJ said:

Well maybe we'll get an extended ultimate cut on the blu-ray.

Well then maybe they had to make a VOD movie instead.

[JennaJ]

2 minutes ago, bapi said:

Well then maybe they had to make a VOD movie instead.

 

You realize I was being cynical, right?

[TimmyRiggins]

It's weird that it was supposed to come out in October 2017 (and yes him being in Justice League, etc, had a part in that) only to be released almost a year before that, I guess test screenings went well, so WB decide to push forward. Maybe they rushed it a bit in the end? maybe WB wanted it shorter (they love Ben though, so who knows)? 

 

I'd say we'll definitely an extended cut on BD, The Town had one (which is superior to the TC), Argo too (less footage, but welcome one).

[bapi]

1 minute ago, JennaJ said:

 

You realize I was being cynical, right?

Not until now. LOL.

[bapi]

2 minutes ago, TimmyRiggins said:

It's weird that it was supposed to come out in October 2017 (and yes him being in Justice League, etc, had a part in that) only to be released almost a year before that, I guess test screenings went well, so WB decide to push forward. Maybe they rushed it a bit in the end? maybe WB wanted it shorter (they love Ben though, so who knows)? 

 

I'd say we'll definitely an extended cut on BD, The Town had one (which is superior to the TC), Argo too (less footage, but welcome one).

Well, he wrote and directed Live By Night so it was his job to make TC work. Also releasing LBN two years after they started filming would make it obvious it's crap.

Edited December 21, 2016 by bapi

[DMan7]

I think WB are giving these film makers waaay too much free reign to do what they want resulting in them requiring to cut down the movie in the editing room because the film makers wanted to do a long movie.