Lawless
Director: John Hillcoat
Writer: Nick Cave
Based on: Matt Bondurant‘s novel The Wettest Country in the World
Cast: Shia LaBeouf, Tom Hardy, Jason Clarke, Jessica Chastain, Guy Pearce, Mia Wasikowska, Dane DeHaan, Gary Oldman
Part of: /slash Filmfestival (it was the surprise movie)
Plot:
In the depression era, the Bondurant brothers, Jack (Shia LaBeouf), Forrest (Tom Hardy) and Howard (Jason Clarke), are successful bootleggers who have an understanding with the local police and a very good reputation. But then a new deputy – Charlie Rakes (Guy Pearce) – enters the scene. When Rakes doesn’t get what he wants, the pressure rises for the Bondurants. At the same time Jack, the youngest and softest, desperately wants to prove his worth and starts business with the mobster Floyd Banner (Gary Oldman).
Lawless was really great. Basically my only point of contention is that Gary Oldman was in it for a few minutes only (you can never have enough Gary Oldman).
Admittedly, the movie’s story was not the newest in the world, nor was it surprising how it ended. But you can tell me any old story if you tell it well and this movie tells it extremely well.
There’s the cast that is just fantastic. I mean, even Shia LaBeouf was actually good. But Tom Hardy and Jessica Chastain (and their storyline) completely stole the show for me. Tom Hardy even managed to bring some humor to the whole thing. Not easy given the subject matter and the general tone of the movie. (Also, the way he basically growls most of his answers was not only funny, but also weirdly and extremely sexy. Not that he needed much help with being sexy in the first place.) But also Mia Wasikowska was great. And Guy Pearce fittingly was hideousness personified.
Whoever their location scout was, they did an amazing job. Especially the woods were just the right mix of haunted and creepy and moody and beautiful and kinda unreal. All captured by the really great cinematography.
And mix all of that with a great soundtrack – which they did – and you’ve really got a great piece of filmmaking. Can really only recommend it.
Summarising: Excellent.
kalafudra's Stuff 
#Things you’re learning at uni: don’t take metaphors literally.
A professor who has an inclusive concept to deal with underprivilege. ^^ No, seriously.
There are many kids who are not as intelligent as you. And kids who come from average – which means bad – schools where they don’t learn anything about p.e. metaphors. I think it’s rather nice that the professor tries to ease his/her students into “difficult” concepts. Comes from being a sociologist who realizes the unfairness of it all. :P
Many freshmen left the my faculty (law) in tears because they
a) didn’t understand.
b) asked and got ridiculed
c) failed (90-98% flunks are considered the normal way of things)
… Those who graduated were not necessarely the most intelligent. But without above-average intelligence they had to be damn persistant. Too stubborn to care or too stupid to realize that they “didn’t belong here” (judged from an elitist point of view like the university’s). I was always awed how actually stupid men (lawyer’s sons) passed thanks to a nice cocksure habitus.
What I mean to say is: Maybe it is a very slow way of progress to explain simple things in a simple way. To ensure everyone understands. To make sure everyone can learn and move on to the next step. It is certainly not very elitist. It is certainly boring for a highly gifted person.
But it is very nice. And maybe that is the very spirit of this faculty.
It may also be a very big chance to meet with liberal, progressive, understanding and nice people. (I believe that a non-elitist approach attracts and produces nicer people.)
… There are many people who think university should be elitist.
I am quite undecided on this matter. Is it science, if everyone can understand it? Do we need everyone in university, has everyone the right to be educated there even if she/he takes an awful lot of time to understand? Should a university teacher spend his/her time explaining the things a school teacher should have explained to them when they were 15? Should universities have the right to tell a young person “We don’t want you, we’d rather educate someone who shows more promise”?
I really don’t know. I only know that I am intelligent (luck) but I think even as a person of average intelligence I still would have dreamed of being a lawyer.