Read Mixed User Reviews for Bad Times at the El Royale

6

romethesecondtiJul 26, 2019

There is reason to believe that “Bad Times” could have been a very good film. The contained, isolated setting (think “The Shining”) is worthy: a stylish mid-century motel, once a haven for gamblers and the Rat Pack, and the site, as it turnsThere is reason to believe that “Bad Times” could have been a very good film. The contained, isolated setting (think “The Shining”) is worthy: a stylish mid-century motel, once a haven for gamblers and the Rat Pack, and the site, as it turns out, of perverse activity. The motel is empty as the film opens, its gambling license gone, its only employee the meek Miles Miller (Lewis Pullman).

“Bad Times” has other virtues. Like Quentin Tarantino’s 1994 “Pulp Fiction,” it employs time as a creative device, moving between past and present in clever and revealing ways. “Bad Times” even has a theme, an idea that runs through it from beginning to end. That theme is choice, and it’s introduced early on, when Miles explains to the new arrivals that the El Royale sits on the border between California and Nevada, and that the guests can choose a room in either state—“hope and opportunity to the East, warmth and sunshine to the West”–descriptions that seem to reverse the state stereotypes and ironize the idea of informed choice. There's mayhem at the end. Not everyone dies, but there’s enough killing to vitiate the strengths and subtleties of “Bad Times”—that is, to damage what could have been a very good film.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

6

eva3si0nJan 10, 2020

Bad Times at the El Royale by the beginning raises high expectations. Looks at first glance the film as Identity only without the charm thriller and in the antourage of the 60s. The plot is as if served with cliffs, the characters do not haveBad Times at the El Royale by the beginning raises high expectations. Looks at first glance the film as Identity only without the charm thriller and in the antourage of the 60s. The plot is as if served with cliffs, the characters do not have time to reveal, the ending is predictable and unambiguous. An absolutely grey film that tries to turn something interesting is Chris Hemsworth 's acting… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

RuzakyJan 23, 2019

Starts really good,and somwhere in middle loses momentum and becoming boring and tedious. Also to much flashbacks.

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

BrianMcCriticOct 12, 2018

Most people are using the word Tarantino a lot and for good reason as Drew Goddard attempts to dabble in those waters with the results being mixed. All the performances are strong and I commend the films spirit and originality but I foundMost people are using the word Tarantino a lot and for good reason as Drew Goddard attempts to dabble in those waters with the results being mixed. All the performances are strong and I commend the films spirit and originality but I found myself underwhelmed as the dialogue is not nearly as sharp as a Tarantino film and the story lacks the punch to put you fully on board. Overall a middle to high 6 a B-.… Expand

4 of 8 users found this helpful44

All this user's reviews

6

SSH83Jan 2, 2019

Good times until the mystery man shows up. Little random "twists" in the backgrounds of the characters were enjoyable (aside from the dull-as only-minority. give your minority character more action than just a token/idol). But when theGood times until the mystery man shows up. Little random "twists" in the backgrounds of the characters were enjoyable (aside from the dull-as only-minority. give your minority character more action than just a token/idol). But when the movie tried to string all the random subplots into a cohesive movie, boy does it fall apart. The people responsible for the plot just don't have the chops to do it. So expect a cluster-f mess, predictable ending, and a deus ex machina to get from the mess to the ending.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

5

MrMovieBuffNov 2, 2018

'Bad Times at the El Royale' is fiendish and dark, not to mention a very sly movie that I'm sure many film-lovers will absolutely enjoy. But for me, there was a lack of spark, I admired the film's somewhat originality and its diverse range of'Bad Times at the El Royale' is fiendish and dark, not to mention a very sly movie that I'm sure many film-lovers will absolutely enjoy. But for me, there was a lack of spark, I admired the film's somewhat originality and its diverse range of characters. But overall, the film feels flat and rather underwhelming not to mention that I felt it takes too long to get to the point. The first characters we meet are Father Daniel Flynn (Jeff Bridges) a priest who checks into the hotel alongside another guest Darlene Sweet (Cynthia Ervo), a soul singer who is currently struggling in the industry to make the career she had hoped for. The hotel is currently placed right in the middle of California and Nevada with the structure split into two halves and contain two different themes. We meet Salesman Seymour Sullivan (Jon Hamm), who also checks into the hotel with its only employee Miles Miller (Lewis Pullman) and the last guest to arrive is Emily Summerspring (Dakota Johnson), they all book their rooms and we see the different stories each character experiences. The movie spends a lot of the time building on these different character arcs and showing us what they get up to. It's broken up into different chapters with each event affecting that of another character's. Every story is the same, but told from a different point of view, and everything seems to add up once we get a bigger picture of what's going on. I would mention that Chris Hemsworth is in this movie, but I cannot discuss what his role is without spoiling it too much, what I can say is; the movie does pick up slightly the moment his character comes to play. Writer and director Drew Goddard ('The Cabin in the Woods' and writer of 'The Martian') has structured a movie I'm sure he's waited to make for so long. He knows what characters he wants to see and he knows what story he wants to tell and how to tell it. I liked the puzzle piece style of storytelling that he was able to craft here, I guess what really placed this movie in the gutter for me was the lengthy run-time of 141 minutes as well as my overall indifference to any of the characters. It felt gimmicky from time to time, and I think that, had Goddard got straight to the point, I would have enjoyed myself a little bit more. I admire his ambition and craft, but was underwhelmed by the overly ambitious result.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

TVJerryOct 15, 2018

It's not clear what kind of movie this wants to be. It feels like a Tarantino wannabe on slow motion without the snappy banter or extreme violence. What's left is the back stories of a group of people who checked into this unusual hotel andIt's not clear what kind of movie this wants to be. It feels like a Tarantino wannabe on slow motion without the snappy banter or extreme violence. What's left is the back stories of a group of people who checked into this unusual hotel and how they converge for dark outcomes. The cast includes Jeff Bridges, Jon Hamm, Dakota Johnson and Chris Hemsworth (who makes the experience worthwhile by strutting around semi-shirtless for an extended period). Having patience as the disappointing plot unfolds doesn't pay off with a shocker. It's attractively shot and interesting, but ultimately a long disappointment (2:20). Two newish actors turn in the most interesting performances: The woman who plays the singer (Cynthia Erivo)and the man who plays the hotel clerk (Lewis Pullman). NOTE: He's the son of actor Bill Pullman.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

6

TuneisonOct 13, 2018

Bad Times at the El Royale is a cleverly written film that takes it's time to get to the meat of it's story but, that is just fine. In a culture that demands fast and mindless films BT@TER is refreshing. Granted it isn't the most expertlyBad Times at the El Royale is a cleverly written film that takes it's time to get to the meat of it's story but, that is just fine. In a culture that demands fast and mindless films BT@TER is refreshing. Granted it isn't the most expertly crafted film you can see in theaters but, it certainly gives enough of a **** and, is overall pretty good.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

5

Bertaut1Oct 22, 2018

Derivative, predictable, and dull

Following the genre-bending and extremely funny The Cabin in the Woods (2011), Bad Times at the El Royale is the second feature from writer/director Drew Goddard, and is a similarly stylised cine-literateDerivative, predictable, and dull

Following the genre-bending and extremely funny The Cabin in the Woods (2011), Bad Times at the El Royale is the second feature from writer/director Drew Goddard, and is a similarly stylised cine-literate genre mash-up. However, whereas in Cabin, the twist upon twist upon twist had a cumulative effect, with the story getting better the longer it went on, in Bad Times it's a case of ever diminishing returns. By the time we reach the end of the lengthy 141-minute runtime, with everything and everyone shoehorned into neatly explained niches, the film has been shorn of its vitality, leaving one with an overriding impression of "meh". If Cabin was a genuinely new spin on a clichéd old story, playing with and subverting genre at every turn, Bad Times is singularly unable to free itself from the most oppressively derivative of its generic constraints.

Set in 1969, the film takes place almost entirely in the titular El Royale Hotel (obviously inspired by the Cal Neva Lodge & Casino). Over the course of one night, seven people will encounter one another but not all seven will leave. There's Fr. Daniel Flynn (Jeff Bridges), a Catholic priest; Darlene Sweet (Cynthia Erivo), a singer travelling to a job she doesn't want; Emily (Dakota Johnson), an intensely private woman; Laramie Seymour Sullivan (Jon Hamm), a vacuum cleaner salesman; Rose (Cailee Spaeny), who appears to be Emily's kidnap victim; Billy Lee (Chris Hemsworth), a cult leader; and Miles Miller (Lewis Pullman), the motel's receptionist/bellhop. As the night wears on, it becomes apparent that not only are few of these people who they claim to be, but the motel itself is hiding its own dark secrets.

If that set-up reminds you a little of Identity (2003), you're not completely off course. Bad Times shares very similar DNA, at least up to the point where Identity goes totally nuts; both are set in an out-of-the-way motel where a group of strangers are trapped overnight, and all, or some of them aren't who they appear, with the audience slowly filled in on their backstories via flashbacks. However, whereas Identity failed because the last half-hour is patently ridiculous, Bad Times has the exact opposite problem - the conclusion is decidedly underwhelming, with the last twenty minutes or so lapsing into utter mundanity, and, most unforgivably for a mystery film, twists for twist's sake.

To start on a positive note though, it looks terrific - Seamus McGarvey's cinematography is faultless, whilst Martin Whist's production design is superb, with the ultra-tacky period detail dripping off the screen. Directorally, Goddard also has his moments with some eye-catching compositions, locked-off cameras, POV shots, and lengthy single-take Steadicam sequences, with the long single-shot opening scene, in particular, a masterclass in slow-burning tension. The problem is that the scene is so good, it spoils the audience, establishing a tone to which the rest of the film mostly fails to live up.

In direct contrast to the opening, the ending is both narratively and directorally formulaic, predicable, and trite, with the least compelling and well fleshed out character taking centre stage, mano-a-mano good guy/bad guy dialogue aplenty, and even a ludicrous shoot-out. The whole thing smacks of "been there, seen that a million times." Another problem is that the characters all feel like archetypes ripped from other films, with none giving the impression of having any degree of interiority. They are, in essence, walking plot-points.

A final problem which must be discussed is length. Padded, and massively self-indulgent, there is enough narrative content to barely fill 90 minutes. With this runtime and so little content, needless to say, the bottom falls out entirely during the middle section, as things become unrelentingly slow and contrived. Goddard seems to equate curiosity about who the characters are with suspense, meaning things take a decided turn for the mundane long before the underwhelming dénouement. And when he finally does get around to wrapping things up, the last few twists are nowhere near enough of a reward, with the mysteries more interesting than the explanations.

The film flirts with a few themes (redemption, forgiveness, karma, political corruption, the seductive nature of power), but none get off the starting grid, and ultimately, Bad Times isn't really about anything. Attempting to both subvert and celebrate generic conventions, Goddard seems to think he has a bonafide epic on his hands, a portent piece of celluloid mastery which imparts valuable lessons in the process. He doesn't. It's more self-indulgent folly than paean of universal truth.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

6

whoischarlotteOct 23, 2018

Not enough Jon Hamm. This film means well and could have been really great but scene were very hit and miss.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

amheretojudgeOct 17, 2018

the lies and deceits are more chilling than the confession itself..

Bad Times At The El Royale Goddard's crime drama is more Tarantino-isc than it is Polanski-ish. In its initial stages it may come off as "The Hateful Eight", but thethe lies and deceits are more chilling than the confession itself..

Bad Times At The El Royale

Goddard's crime drama is more Tarantino-isc than it is Polanski-ish. In its initial stages it may come off as "The Hateful Eight", but the euphoric energy quickly wears off as the amateurly edited sub-plots interfere poorly. The sweet moments where it sweeps away the charm is when the scene is about to transition. It somehow feels obliged to gut punch the viewers everytime before doing so, and in those moments, the makers create their long lasting impact. This revealing natured script is more shady and edgy than it is disclosing. The writing is gripping since it focuses only on astoundingly high pitched dramatic sequences that is written with fluid conversations. Now these well choreographed conversations is aware of the final vision and hence is a borderline risk throughout the course which is how Goddard keeps its thrill alive. The characteristics of each characters and the props or the set pieces, everything is utilized to its best on the narration, they hold you much more than the trick itself, since the silence that builds up to the scare is comparing more intense. The camera work is manually handled and is up close to the viewers that offers it the aspired personal touch especially when Hamm in the beginning discovers the entire structure of the hotel. Bridges is the real deal in this snidy hotel. Not only his character has the range to fuel this entire more than two hours of journey, but his riveting performance is jaw dropping and moving at times. The lies and deceits are more chilling than the confession itself. Erivo's performance unfortunately doesn't justify the strength that the character is given, she seems distracted and at times amateur too. Similarly, Johnson too falls short on delivering the anticipated uncertainty that her character is brimmed with. And as much as slick and easy Hemsworth is on putting on this character and literally taking off his clothes, he fails on giving the scares to his actors and the audience. Supporting Bridges thoroughly, is Hamm in his blatant and firm portrayal. Goddard's core strength that was this mixture of plethora of emotions and opinionated hot heads floating around, also evolves to be its weakness by the end. The adaptive grippiness that he had achieved by ping-ponging the ball from one room to the other, makes him obliged to follow the semantics throughout the course for the sake of the closure. And it backfires vigorously since the obviousness overpowers its potential to be a compelling storyteller. So now, when he wishes to be focused on one and only one track, the missing traffic on the other lane isn't feasible. The ruggedness of the gunpowder, the smell of the forsaken money and the taste of the innocent blood, this essence of the early 70's crime drama is what amps up the charge. Bad Times At The El Royale actually comes with a good time guarantee card, but if flipped and searched under the layers, you better book some other hotel.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

SaraClementsOct 15, 2018

Pulpy fun up to a point. The El Royale guests are all fleshed out incredibly well with interesting backstories and the jump to all their differing perspectives was something I really quite enjoyed - with wonderful performances to match,Pulpy fun up to a point. The El Royale guests are all fleshed out incredibly well with interesting backstories and the jump to all their differing perspectives was something I really quite enjoyed - with wonderful performances to match, especially from Cynthia Erivo. Hemsworth’s cultist villain lacks this exposition, but Billy Lee still makes for an interesting antagonist. The cinematography is slick and the music elevates the era in which it’s set. Unfortunately, the film is so drawn out. While you’ll still be interested in what’s happening, you’ll be pulling out your phone to check the time. And when the climax comes, it doesn’t hit you like it should - you’ll just know that it’s over soon. Some plot elements go unanswered, but the twists, turns, and the mystery surrounding the characters and the El Royale made it worthwhile. (Xavier Dolan’s British accent tho).… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

thieleOct 23, 2018

Bad Time at the El Royale is trying to be a Tarantino film. There, I said it, the one thing that was on my mind the entire length of the film. Imagine "The Hateful Eight" but instead of a cold cabin in the middle of a snowstorm and eightBad Time at the El Royale is trying to be a Tarantino film. There, I said it, the one thing that was on my mind the entire length of the film. Imagine "The Hateful Eight" but instead of a cold cabin in the middle of a snowstorm and eight strangers with something to hide, imagine a cold motel in the middle of a thunderstorm and 5 strangers with something to hide.... wow it really is just "The Hateful Eight" in another era. But don't let that stop you watching the film. While it tries to be a Tarantino film, it lacks dialogue that flows, it chooses the wrong time to change the mood, and it has pacing issues especially in the final two acts of the film. While the dialogue isn't great, at times I could see that the actors were trying their best to make the most out of it. There really isn't a main character, with the story jumping perspective throughout the film. This at times is done really well, with the first two acts being non-linear (another Tarantino trait) however, in the final act, in the last 30 minutes of the film, a character is given more backstory which seems to come out of nowhere and feels like it's been thrown into the story to make another plot point. I could rant about it all day, but I'll leave it because I'll be getting into spoilers. So overall the characters have some interesting backstory, and all have something to hide or be ashamed of. Cynthia Erivo is the stand out for me. Also Chris Hemsworth's antagonist reminded me of Joseph Seed (Far Cry 5) with a lot more crazy in him. I think he was an interesting character but, I wish was used and developed more. But not all is bad, the music, was used tremendously throughout most of the film. The only negative was that at times I felt the music didn't fit the scene but often the camera work would pull me back in. Because visually the film is amazing, the cinematography was on point, starting with symmetrical framing and ending with a noir film look and feel while the lighting starts neutral it again takes on a film noir look. Sadly, the visuals don't save the film it from its plot and structure. With many plot point going unsolved or just forgotten, and many instances where the pacing changes because they want to add another subplot to the already congested main story. Yet, I enjoyed watching it but because it kept going and going, I slowly lost interest. (sorry to bring it back to the plot, I really didn't enjoy the structure of the film.) I still think it's worth a watch. It has the body of a Tarantino film, making it enjoyable even if it's long. But it doesn't have the soul of a Tarantino film. TL; DR: The weak structure of the film and the not so great dialogue would pull me out, but I'd find myself going "wow that looks cool" So well done Drew Goddard.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

LarBrd33Oct 18, 2018

Pretty mediocre and loooooooong winded Tarantino wannabee. It meanders a bunch, has far too many shots of someone signing, and doesn't really have any point or purpose. Style over substance. Fun set piece and has the makings of a premise.Pretty mediocre and loooooooong winded Tarantino wannabee. It meanders a bunch, has far too many shots of someone signing, and doesn't really have any point or purpose. Style over substance. Fun set piece and has the makings of a premise. Solid performances by most. I give it 57.6 out of 100.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

5

BennytwotimesJun 1, 2019

I wanted to like the movie but it just doesn’t work. The first third of the movie is intriguing when you’re learning all of the characters and they’re all tear your motive’s. After that it starts to lose its luster and meander. The last thirdI wanted to like the movie but it just doesn’t work. The first third of the movie is intriguing when you’re learning all of the characters and they’re all tear your motive’s. After that it starts to lose its luster and meander. The last third it goes off the cliff to an unsatisfying end.… Expand