"Widows" Movie Review

By: James Southworth
Rating: 4/5 Stars

It has been a year of unpredictability as to what will be going into the awards season this year. Part of this reason is because a lot of movies that have come out this year aren't necessarily under the conventions of what an Oscar contender is generally associated with. This isn't completely the case for director Steve McQueen's "Widows." McQueen is a very successful and talented director, having made such hits as "12 Years a Slave" and "Shame". He's generally known for making pretty intense movies that make one uncomfortable. However, with "Widows", McQueen has decided to go a more mainstream blockbuster route with a heist film. It has a star-studded cast and big action scenes. But in-between the stuff that will make it loved by general audience there's also quite a bit of thought provoking content thrown in. The jaw-dropping performances and the constant plot twists only serve to make this film all the more interesting, one that you can sink your teeth easily into.

At the core of this film is actually a pretty simple premise: four women must band together to get what they have lost after their criminal husbands are all killed on the run from the police. McQueen takes this premise and makes it incredibly interesting to watch. This film is surprisingly complex and twisty with how he presents it. There are a lot of character arcs that McQueen has to balance, many plot arcs that have to be addressed, and many plot twists that need to be discussed. This is a lot to do in a movie that's only a little over two hours. But I have to commend him: he does this very well. The movie stays unpredictable, but not to the point where it's ridiculous or over the top. There are a lot of twists that you won't see coming, but unlike some heist movies, these twists don't reach into the point of unintentional parody. In fact, the twists often do a good job at serving the main thematic arcs of the film. Speaking of the themes, McQueen tackles quite a few complex ideas here. At its core, though, this movie is about oppressed, trapped people who are trying to do the best with what they have been given. Every character here is under immense pressure, which makes this film quite literally a life-or-death situation. This movie isn't what you'd necessarily call a "fun" heist movie. Instead, it's one that leaves you on the edge of your seat, wondering exactly what's going to happen next. The reason you care so much is that all the characters are very compelling on both sides of the spectrum. You understand each character's motivations to a tee and exactly what they want. I thought it was really awesome on McQueen's part to make every character's motivation go back to the main theme that they're trying to get out of a cycle they've been trapped in for years. With both the protagonists and antagonists, you can understand and even somewhat sympathize with what they're trying to go through (for the most part- there are a couple of weaker characters we'll get to later). Character's motivations don't change, but the way they go about pursuing their goals can be surprising in many, many instances.

What really pushes this film forward more than anything is all the stellar performances that are given throughout. Unsurprisingly, Viola Davis is superb as the lead widow Veronica. So often, you can understand her emotions just by her expressions. She doesn't have to say anything and you know exactly what she is thinking. She commands the screen every time she's there, being a volatile and powerful presence who just can't be ignored. Davis is perhaps my favorite actress as of right now, and this film is further proof as to why she is so good at her craft. She owns the character of Veronica, becoming the role. When she is on screen, you can't turn away, and why would you want to? Even though Liam Neeson as Veronica's husband Harry isn't in the film that much, it's still incredible that I went away thinking he was one of the best parts of it. He has a minimal amount of lines. I think it was a smart idea to put him and Davis together, as the two of them are actually pretty even matches for one another. They create an intriguing chemistry between their characters, and the payoff to their relationship is surprising but effective. I also really enjoyed Elizabeth Debicki as Alice. Her character had some of the most interesting developments of any in the movie. I appreciated that McQueen gave Debicki a role that is not necessarily just her typecast. She got to take a lot of risks in this film, and because of that, I feel she should be in talks for an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress. Colin Farrell totally owns the role of the multi-faceted politician Jack Mulligan. This character was the one that kept me guessing the most; I wasn't really sure what side he stood on. It was interesting to see what happened with him, and that was mainly due to how dynamic Farrell's turn was. But easily the best performance in the film was Daniel Kaluuya as Jatemee. Kaluuya proves once again that he is a newer actor everyone should have their eye on. In this film he gets to play an absolutely sadistic villain, and man does Kaluuya own this role. The way he portrays this character is bone-chilling and frightening; you can just feel the unrelenting brutality the character has. The scene with him in a bowling ally (not going to spoil anymore than that) is one of the best acted scenes I've watched all year. Other great performances include Robert Duvall and Brian Tyree Henry.

There are just a couple of issues I have with the film. I mentioned earlier how I thought that McQueen did a pretty good balancing act with all of his plot threads. I still agree with this statement; however, some of the plot threads are just not that compelling. This is especially true of Belle's (played by Cynthia Erivo) plot line. This not really because Erivo's performance is bad; it's more just because her story and her character feel a little inconsequential to the story. I feel like if she wasn't in the movie at all, nothing would have changed. This is also unfortunately the case for Carrie Coon's character Amanda. I felt like Coon was vastly underutilized in this movie, as she is a talented actress who is way too often overlooked. While I understood why her plot arc was needed, it still felt like the movie passed over the revelation of her character's performance much too quickly. I also didn't like the fact that the movie gave Jon Bernthal literally only one scene, when he is also a very dynamic actor. It's just weird to me that McQueen wouldn't use two talented performers like Bernthal and Coon to his advantage. There was one performance for me that just didn't work: Michelle Rodriguez  as Linda. It seems to me that Rodriguez is always playing the same type of role. That is the case in this film, too. I felt like she didn't seem that invested in what she was doing, and when she was on screen with Davis and Debicki, you could tell that she paled in comparison. It wasn't like I hated her performance, but it was just so significantly weaker when compared to all the dynamic stuff going on around her.

Overall, "Widows" is a really great, even excellent movie. It's certainly one of the best movies of its genre. That is due to direction by someone who is clearly confident in what they are doing, as well as some of the best performances I've seen all year. Even if there are some plot points that feel inconsequential or underused, I still felt that didn't hinder this film by any significant. This is definitely a film that's recommended if you enjoy movies that make you think, while still having a blockbuster edge to them!