Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation | Release Date: November 16, 2018
6.9
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 278 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
182
Mixed:
68
Negative:
28
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
5
Brent_MarchantNov 23, 2018
The film's strong cast aside, "Widows" is a cinematic jumble of too many plots trying to fit into one film, coupled with numerous holes in its story and an overall implausibility that's impossible to take seriously. While the action sequencesThe film's strong cast aside, "Widows" is a cinematic jumble of too many plots trying to fit into one film, coupled with numerous holes in its story and an overall implausibility that's impossible to take seriously. While the action sequences are admittedly well orchestrated, they can't make up for a plethora of other shortcomings that derail this offering from being what it aspires to be. In the end, this is yet another example of a vastly overrated release from a vastly overrated director. Expand
5 of 5 users found this helpful50
All this user's reviews
6
clarkaddisonNov 22, 2018
drama film. They don`t always blend perfectly. There are a lot of moving pieces in this film. Twists are revealed in a balloon deflating sort of way. So that there are no twists at the end because of this. Some people phone in their partsdrama film. They don`t always blend perfectly. There are a lot of moving pieces in this film. Twists are revealed in a balloon deflating sort of way. So that there are no twists at the end because of this. Some people phone in their parts while others shine. Mix match of two movies tried to combine into one big thing. Expand
5 of 5 users found this helpful50
All this user's reviews
5
arrivistMar 2, 2019
Looks great, well directed. But apart from the heist scene and a few other moments, it's a bit tedious. With some pretentious camera angles thrown in.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
netflicNov 19, 2018
It is a heist film coming from a well known director Steve McQueen who has movies such as "12 Years a Slave" and "Hunger" to his name.
With great actor ensemble (Viola Davis, Liam Neeson, Colin Farrell, Robert Duvall just to name a few, and
It is a heist film coming from a well known director Steve McQueen who has movies such as "12 Years a Slave" and "Hunger" to his name.
With great actor ensemble (Viola Davis, Liam Neeson, Colin Farrell, Robert Duvall just to name a few, and many others) I had high expectations.

While actors were great, acting was mediocre. Script was not believable at all and had plenty of ends that led nowhere. Plus it was cliche after cliche after cliche.
"Politicians and criminals are all the same, be it in Chicago or elsewhere".
"Men are cheaters, especially white ones". "Women are great and strong".
Add to the mix exploitation of racism and bad cops, so fashionable in Hollywood today.

Emotionally I could not connect to any character in the movie.

I expected much, much more, especially with such a great cast and a talented director.
Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
5
hugoferreiraNov 27, 2018
Am I the only one that thinks that critics nowadays only care about what looks like instead of what actually is? Oh wait, a group of women leaded by a black character making an heist, WOW!! 10 out of 10 so innovative. Nowadays looks likeAm I the only one that thinks that critics nowadays only care about what looks like instead of what actually is? Oh wait, a group of women leaded by a black character making an heist, WOW!! 10 out of 10 so innovative. Nowadays looks like critics are more worried about being politically correct and to not offend anybody instead of giving a proper raw critic (same happened with Black Panther, Moonlight...). Don't get me wrong this movie has potential but it lacks content, has a lot of plot holes and it's a poor attempt of Steve Mcqueen at doing a drama inside a thriller with a society critic in between, and you're left with none. And look the movie it's actually ok, but being acclaimed as if it were something more than it is, it's just hypocrisy. On the other hand amazing performance by Viola Davis. Expand
5 of 7 users found this helpful52
All this user's reviews
4
swimjayNov 25, 2018
A soulless exercise that unreels like a well-oiled machine, with a mind-numbing bag of plot twists, and acting that is always competent, but never illuminating or hinting at anything real, except occasionally, and inconsequentially, in ColinA soulless exercise that unreels like a well-oiled machine, with a mind-numbing bag of plot twists, and acting that is always competent, but never illuminating or hinting at anything real, except occasionally, and inconsequentially, in Colin Ferrel's Jack Mulligan. The cartoonish enforcer played by Daniel Kaluuya we've seen before, but he is genuinely scarey.
Men monstrous and self-absorbed? Check. Women when empowered capable of amazing things? check. The bad guys all lose big time (except perhaps for Colin, who in his best speech could be asking for a way out of the film)? Check. Happy endings for all the women? Check. A feel-good moment of redemption at the very end? Check.
Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
5
GinaKNov 23, 2018
A disappointing film, although I am not sure whether the problem is the directing, writing, or editing – or everything. It is certainly not the cast, which is very good and very believable under the circumstances. But things don’t quite makeA disappointing film, although I am not sure whether the problem is the directing, writing, or editing – or everything. It is certainly not the cast, which is very good and very believable under the circumstances. But things don’t quite make sense (it starts right at the beginning with Colin Farrell). There are gaps and jumps – and mild frustration that becomes disappointment. This excellent cast deserves better. Example: Although this is a heist film, there is almost no tension. When the final reveal happens, it seems like a cheap trick (I can’t be more specific in case you haven’t seen the film yet although I am not keeping anything really clever a secret). Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
AcaciaNov 29, 2018
I did not enjoy this movie. First of all, it is soooo long! It takes forever to get anywhere and the violence in it was just too much for me. I do not mind violence if it is directed at the bad guys. Heck, I will jump in and help bringI did not enjoy this movie. First of all, it is soooo long! It takes forever to get anywhere and the violence in it was just too much for me. I do not mind violence if it is directed at the bad guys. Heck, I will jump in and help bring them down! But, this was just too much. I thought this movie got bogged down in the political machinations and took too much away from the women in the story. There were big holes in the plot that even a few twists a d turns couldn’t save. It just was not good for me. Even a great cast cannot save it. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
OkinAZNov 22, 2018
Widows story line seemed somewhat disjointed in a few scenes leaving one wondering "what was that all about?" Further, many scenes added no or little value to the movie and could have been edited out, producing a much better overall movie.Widows story line seemed somewhat disjointed in a few scenes leaving one wondering "what was that all about?" Further, many scenes added no or little value to the movie and could have been edited out, producing a much better overall movie. Many solid performances by very good actors/actresses. I thought Viola Davis and Elizabeth Debicki stood out and enjoyed the premise of the movie. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
tropicAcesNov 16, 2018
The cast is great (Kaluuya really shines) and half of the script has the same popping dialogue as Flynn’s “Gone Girl”. Unfortunately, McQueen gets a little pretentious and/or silly with his half of the screenplay, as well as his direction,The cast is great (Kaluuya really shines) and half of the script has the same popping dialogue as Flynn’s “Gone Girl”. Unfortunately, McQueen gets a little pretentious and/or silly with his half of the screenplay, as well as his direction, creating a film that drags before it picks up. Expand
3 of 7 users found this helpful34
All this user's reviews
6
hnestlyontheslyOct 12, 2019
Widows is a reminder that new stories and excellent storytelling are waiting in the periphery of the male gaze, that the expansion of interesting storytelling comes from widening the types of characters that can tell their stories. It’s hardWidows is a reminder that new stories and excellent storytelling are waiting in the periphery of the male gaze, that the expansion of interesting storytelling comes from widening the types of characters that can tell their stories. It’s hard to imagine anything less from the likes of Steve McQueen (of 12 Years a Slave) and screenwriter Gillian Flynn (of Sharp Objects and Gone Girl, one of my favorite crime thrillers of all time, funny and pulpy and completely mind-bending), but this movie found its place in the gaps between other heist films. It tells its story through the exquisite beauty of adaptation and underestimation, the negation of action hero archetypes, and (as Slate reviewer Dana Stevens notes) thoughtful commentary about tribal politics and gun laws.

Some of the most striking shots are simple ideas like the long, single take shot of the young politician played by Colin Farrell and his aide blowing off steam after a small event, a camera afixed to the hood of the car captures the stark contrast between the neighborhood where he’s campaigning and the one where his campaign quarters are, all the while his monologue about the transactional, futile nature of local politics accentuates the visuals. Farrell’s perennial visits to his political rival’s HQ in a cramped church building punctuate story with beautiful conversational set pieces, like the choral odes of a Greek tragedy.

The actual heist is a bit of an anticlimax, as seems the case with all of the great films of the year (the Sisters Brothers and You Were Never Really Here both employ anticlimax effectively). It’s nice to see the way in which nearly all of the legwork is accomplished by the loan, tall, waifish white woman who makes more money than anyone else going on lavish dinner dates with men she meets online. There’s quite a bit of self-awareness in this script that the racial politics of this film use for comic effect.

David Kaluuya is an excellent villain: the scene in the gym is stunning in its construction and trajectory; his scene work while staking the women; listening to pointed but subtly presented news clips and learning Spanish on tape; the bowling alley. The Twists this movie has in store are pretty impressive. There’s something here for everyone, especially dog-lovers. That white dog better be nominated for an Oscar.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
3ebfan511Aug 12, 2019
Don't waste your time if you are expecting either a good heist movie, or a unique film with anything new to offer. This film is neither and was quite cliche and boring for much of the 2nd half. I am shocked by some of the critic reviews,Don't waste your time if you are expecting either a good heist movie, or a unique film with anything new to offer. This film is neither and was quite cliche and boring for much of the 2nd half. I am shocked by some of the critic reviews, probably because the director has a previous Oscar win. But his previous films he has said each had a personal meaning, and it seems clear, this one had no meaning. There is no concise point, and no reason for the film to even exist. I learned nothing new, was not moved, was not excited much, did not laugh, as the script is very droll, very boring, and much of the characters actions are cliche, the type of thing you can see in any mediocre action or TV show anytime. The only interesting parts were the first 5 minutes, the last 15 minutes, and a few rare snippets of side characters such as Colin Farrell's. If the whole film was about Collin Farrell's character, it might have made for an interesting drama. Instead it is pretty much a cliched heist attempt at a movie, but told through a female perspective, which then adds nothing new to the genre, is less exciting, and with the poor dialogue and directing..it is not worth wasting time watching unless you enjoy mediocre and cliche average action and TV shows. From Steve McQueen and the level of actors and here, and the "positive" reviews, I expected much, much, more, and was disappointed by the end, and quite frankly bored for much of the last hour. Unfortunately, I would have to officially call this a bomb... Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
philatNov 24, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Why do critics rave about Widows while many ordinary viewers don’t? Critics love innovation, complexity, unusual camera shots and plot twists which Widows provides in quantity. More casual viewers want to have a sense of what going on as they watch the movie. Yet the plot of Widows is simple: a gang led by Harry Rawlins ( Liam Neeson) in the opening scene get killed in an attempted heist, highlighted by exploding automobiles careening towards the police. Rawlins wife (Viola Davis) discovers that money taken in the heist is to repay crime boss Jamal Manning (Brian Tryee Henry) who visits her and demands that the 2 million be repaid within the month; which leads the widows, led by Davis, to decide to carry out a heist based on plans left behind by Rawlins. Normal result is heist is carried out, crime boss repaid or killed, and life, maybe, returns to normal. Not here. Twists, double-crosses, and devious machinations are introduced with the notable cast garlanding their conversations with multiple F-words and their variations. Since the scene is Chicago, politics is involved from very rich and cranky Robert Duvall playing an aging pol still calling shots, his son Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell) running for alderman against black crime boss Manning. For ordinary viewers, this is one movie where one might want to read in advance the outlines of the plot before viewing the film. Overall, there’s fine acting, unusual camera shots, and occasional action to satisfy most—though there are long stretches of the movie which seem to be grinding gears rather than moving ahead. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
eagleeyevikingFeb 19, 2019
"Widows" seems confused whether it wants to be a heist film or social commentary. It ends up fluffing on both fronts, delivering a final product that while engaging, is all over the place thematically.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
brettroseyNov 24, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is a good movie if you're willing to call it as it is -- a fun, superficial, outlandishly silly heist thriller. The plot feels so contrived, you almost have to have a suspension of disbelief in order to get through the film and take it entirely seriously. I also think they could have cast better for the role of Jamal Manning. The whole thing was just poorly thought out, at the end of the day. What's the the random plotline with Rawlings and Manning? And the charismatic reverend gets a huge introduction and then is never seen again. Then the robbery gets botched, yet somehow there's a car available to them to chase down Jatemme Manning. And they drop her off at the hospital under a fake alias, both dressed in black, with Manning Sr's wife as a witness of how they were dressed and the height and frame of Alice....yet neither of those two women get in trouble. Just preposterous, really. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
AscosporeApr 15, 2019
Objectively, it is a somewhat dull and overrated heist film, but subjectively, it's an all-female heist film; designed to get the critics virtue signalling and frothing and rolling in the 10/10 scores.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Bertaut1Nov 25, 2018
Looks amazing, but tries to cover too many issues, and the plot is laughable

Arguably the most ambitious heist movie since Heat (1995), just as did Michael Mann's epic, Widows has aspirations far beyond the limits of its genre. Written by
Looks amazing, but tries to cover too many issues, and the plot is laughable

Arguably the most ambitious heist movie since Heat (1995), just as did Michael Mann's epic, Widows has aspirations far beyond the limits of its genre. Written by Steve McQueen and Gillian Flynn, and directed by McQueen, the film is based on the 1983 ITV series, written by Lynda La Plante. Operating firmly within a genre framework, it tries to filter the basic heist template through a feminist pseudo-#MeToo prism, taking in political corruption, police homicide, Black Lives Matter, institutional racism, American gun culture, hegemonic masculinity, and the importance of wealth. The problem, however, is that it tries to pack far too much into too short a space of time. Whilst I can certainly appreciate and celebrate how progressive the narrative is, placing a black woman at the centre of a genre traditionally dominated by white men, the film still needs to work as a genre piece. And this is where Widows fails most egregiously.

Widows tells the story of a team of women - Veronica (Viola Davis), Linda (Michelle Rodriguez, Alice (Elizabeth Debicki), and Belle (Cynthia Erivo) - who attempt to pull off a heist originally planned by their now deceased husbands, and set against the backdrop of an election for the alderman of Chicago's 18th Ward, contested by Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell) and Jamal Manning (Brian Tyree Henry).

McQueen and Flynn use the material as a vehicle for a racially-tinted critique of both powerful men and the corrupt systems that enable them. By creating a canvas depicting life at various social strata in Chicago - from the inherited white privilege of Jack to the poor black neighbourhoods of Jamal to the "everything is a transaction" philosophy of high-powered real-estate - the film attempts to address a plethora of racial, political, and gender issues. And herein lies the problem. Rather than trying to deal with one or two core issues, it instead tries to deal with upwards of about seven, and ends up saying little of relevance about any.

Which is not to say, of course, that none of the themes are foregrounded. Gender, for example, is built into the plot, especially in relation to notions of subverting the patriarchal status quo. As they prepare the heist, Veronica tells the team that their greatest strength is the element of surprise, because "no one thinks we have the balls to pull this off". Later, she reminds them they have "to look and move like a team of men". Whilst on the heist itself, they have to disguise their voices so no one realises they're women.

Another theme is macroeconomics. An excellent shot in this respect is when Jack and his assistant Siobhan (Molly Kunz) travel from a poor black neighbourhood to an affluent white suburb. Filmed in a single-take, Sean Bobbitt's camera remains fixed on the car's bonnet, with only a portion of the windshield and one of the side-mirrors visible. Meanwhile, we see the city change in real-time in the background, taking only a couple of minutes to go from skid row to millionaire's row, forcing the audience to acknowledge how thin the line is, geographically speaking, between rich and poor.

For me though, the whole thing was underwhelming and predictable, with a twist that's as ridiculous as they come, and a narrative that relies far too much on coincidence and movie-logic. The widows need to disguise their voices on the job? Good thing that Belle's daughter has a gizmo that does exactly that! A highly successful modern-day thief who writes everything down longhand? A team of people (irrespective of gender and race) who teach themselves how to pull off a major heist in a matter of weeks? For all its real-world social and political concerns, I never once bought into the premise that these four women could actually pull this off, and that undermines everything else.

Just because a film addresses certain themes doesn't mean it earns a free pass ("look, Hollywood cares about poor people; we better not criticise the ridiculous plot"), and from a narrative standpoint, Widows is pretty ludicrous. With the plot often feeling contorted to support the themes, rather than the themes arising from the plot, McQueen's didactic concerns overridden his storytelling. More a vehicle for protestation than anything else, because the central heist narrative can't stand on its own, the very real issues that the film addresses are flattened and neutered. The socio-political commentary, for the most part, is never really integrated into the narrative - so you end up with a film that feels like its preaching at you rather than talking to you. If it had embraced its genre a bit more, and eased back on the homiletics, it would have worked much better.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
Mauro_LanariOct 5, 2019
(Mauro Lanari)
McQueen is adept at pleasing the festival juries with his presumptuous authorial formalisms and his themes of socio-political pseudo-denunciation. With "Widows" it's the turn of the #metoo. Those who fall for it are fool.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
DawdlingPoetNov 28, 2021
This is an ok drama, that makes you see things from the perspectives of the recently widowed partners of criminals. Its got some good action based scenes, although it's not a film I'd say is especially memorable. For what it is, it's prettyThis is an ok drama, that makes you see things from the perspectives of the recently widowed partners of criminals. Its got some good action based scenes, although it's not a film I'd say is especially memorable. For what it is, it's pretty good but I wouldn't expressly recommend it as such, no. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews