I would have rather watched Lucy Lawless for two hours

Sadly my high expectations for a big screen Boardwalk Empire with outstanding cast support were dashed after half an hour. What I was left with was a violent meaningless endurance test that bore minimal relevance to the gangster genre.

The opening of the film suggested promise, a visceral assault asserting Tom Hardy's alpha status and Shia LaBeouf's as minion to his brothers masculinity. Then the film cuts to a slick guitar interlude with Shia drawling his narrative explaining context. However what proceeds is little character development and incredible amounts of unsettling violence.

In terms of the characters, Shia does little to explore his acting potential by reverting to his default bright eyed and bushy tailed bewilderment. He wants to take a more active role in the 'family' and takes matter into his own hands by selling all of their stash to Oldman's character. More on that later. We are lead to believe that LaBoef's Jack is determined to be more self sufficient and higher profile but the montages suggest that he really wants new suits. He learns nothing from his endeavours and takes little responsibility. His brief, under developed foray with the ever excellent Mia Wasikowska, did little to convince me that he is more dimensional. He concludes his arc by tearing off like a big eyebrowed bull in a china shop and seeking revenge for the murder of Cricket. I have to question why bother having two characters that serve the purpose of one. It would seem more logical that he would be enraged by Mia's death than Cricket, or at least focus relationships on one of them and leave the other out. Audience sympathies extended out for Cricket for more mere minutes.

Tom Hardy's Forrest over eggs the pudding as the stoic brute of a man. His diction was harder than when he played Bane and whilst many found his incoherent guffaws amusing, I was just annoyed that he was being drastically under used. His character was to play the role of elder brother, rumoured to be immortal, and not to be trifled with. His relationship with Jessica Chastain was as convincing as his coherence and the implication of him being a coiled cobra ready to strike was no enough for me to really care about his plight. He gives a shot speech about the need for principles but its hard to take this seriously when we have witnessed a scene of him severing testicles and sending them on to Guy Pearce's Rakes.

Guy Pearce was terrific. Haunting and threatening. He established his violence very early on, in my opinion, to a higher extent than what would be deemed necessary. We are consequently terrified as to what he will do next. There were unexplored ideas around his OCD behaviour that would have been nice to see but his role was executed very well.

Gary Oldman's Floyd Banner was ridiculously useless. His screen time amounted for 3 minutes and only served to further advance Jack's career and appear as a big time gangster. Yes Shia was emulating his dress sense and life style but why Oldman had to be this man I have no idea. Michael Caine was asked after Jaws The Revenge whether he had even seen the appalling film, he replied, 'no but did you see the house it bought'. I hope Oldman sleeps well now.

This film sits in the gangster genre but in fact resembles slasher movie with a better dress style. I was reminded throughout how good the Godfather actually is. There are several comparisons I would like to make to highlight just how good that film was opposed to Lawless. The absence of raw violence in Godfather and implications instead didn't demean the film but rather enhanced it. Many, if not all deaths, were symbolic and thematical. Mo Green shot through the eye for getting greedy, Sonny attacked as violently as possible in the manner of his personality, Luca Brasi needed two men to take him down. The Lawless deaths and violence were incredibly perfunctory. When Michael is beaten by McClusky we see an immediate change in his character, he is awoken from his civilian slumber and assumes the mantle of leader. Shia still remains in his bewildered state and is motivated to kill by revenge. With Michael, we are seeing something more sinister, more personal and more chilling. Sonny's masculinity versus Forrest's differs in that Sonny is seen as more sexually mature and easily excitable. His hulking frame dominates scenes he is in and his retribution over Connies attack establishes him as a good 'bad guy'. We all know he is hot tempered but we still love him. Forrest has a murmur and a knuckleduster. The Godfather is threatening and dark with implication, Lawless takes this literally. A casing point would be the horses head scene in Waltz's bed versus the testicles in the jar. Its a shame that director John Hillcoat didn't value subtlety more. It's said that the photography and attention to detail are very high, and there are some pleasant panoramics but in fact it remains a framework for a bad film. I suggest that Hillcoat utilises violence as his medium as almost a parodying trademark, such as JJ Abrams adoration for lens flares, Lucas's scenewipes and Scorsese's Rolling Stones interludes.

After seeing Lawless, I just felt invaded and desperately wanted to get home, put of Godfather and re-balance my favourite movie genre. I admit it loses unfair points by not being a big screen version of Boardwalk Empire or a visceral tribute to gangster movies. But I was still left unsatisfied by miscasting, over reliance on violence and not enough time devoted to character relationships which at best are implied.