Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Frances Chung Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Sienna-Rose Mclaughlin The movie really just wants to entertain people.

mahmoudimohsen In overall, I liked the movie. It certainly has some shortcomings in my opinion. I think the pace of movie is slow and the story is straight forward with a happy ending. The latter may not be considered as a disadvantage, however did not satisfied me fully. The act of most characters other than Anson Mount is good, specially Christopher Plummer was a good match to this type of story. This picture that a man trying to spend his time with his child with cancer is indeed a touching picture, but involving him in criminal affairs do not seem like a realistic story. However, think that director has done a good job in showing how their life changes. I personally liked this part.

edwagreen John Travolta looks much older in a very mature performance regarding payback to a thief who was able to get him out of prison earlier so that he could spend time with his dying 15 year old son.It is heartbreaking how Travolta grants his son's wish by getting his mother, a drug addict, to see him. That day they shared together was poignant as the boy guessed his mother's affliction.There is a gem of a performance by Christopher Plummer, as Travolta's father. Parting from his usual urbane performances, Plummer is common and quite used to using profanity in each of his sentences.How the 3 guys unite in working on the forgery and turning the tables on the guy who demanded payback was thrilling to say the least.

Wizard-8 I took a quick look at the most recent user comments for this movie before typing this up, and it sure seems this film has divided people - people either love or hate it. I think that those viewers who didn't like the movie may have felt they were promised something different (a traditional caper movie) than what the movie actually is (a character study.) I admit that I thought I was going to get something closer to a caper movie, but I didn't mind at all what I actually got. The movie is pretty well done for what it is. There is some good acting here, for one thing. While Travolta (who has a weird looking toupee and facial hair) is just adequate, Plummer gives spark to his scenes, and the youthful Tye Sheridan does very well at all, making his teenage character interesting and vulnerable instead of obnoxious. It's primarily the script that makes their characters and the others not boring. I actually got interested in these people, and I didn't have any idea as to how they would end up until the end of the movie. I will admit that the movie is somewhat slow a lot of the time, and could have used a bit more excitement here and there (the art theft scene is surprisingly short). But in the end, I thought the movie was okay. Just don't see it if you are in the mood for action/adventure or a traditional caper movie, that is.

albrechtcm What might have been an okay movie turned out to be ridiculous from the very start…and didn't stop there. John Travolta, having a terribly bad hair day, is in prison. We have no idea why. He wants out. His lawyer says his appeal has been denied, and advises him to stick out his remaining 10 months. Ten months isn't so long. We have no idea why he simply has to get out, but he does. He gets a mobster to bribe a judge to get him an early release. Of course the mobster expects to be repaid. Turns out, to our utter surprise, Mr. Travolta is a expert art forger, perhaps one of the very best. And by an incredible coincidence, the mobster wants him to make a copy of a Monet that is on display in a local museum so they can make a switch. He has a filthy-rich client who wants the Monet for his private collection. Of course, they could simply steal the painting. It would create an uproar, but who cares? However, they want Mr. Travolta to create a fake. Okay, maybe that buys them some time, but he could paint a reasonable facsimile that would pass casual inspection long enough for the theft to be history, but no, he has to find a canvas of the same size and same age, and clean it off and then create oils in exactly the way Monet would have done, and in the end, create a masterpiece that is indistinguishable from the original. Why bother? I briefly thought maybe, in a plot twist, he would sell the fake to the buyer who would never be the wiser, but no. In any event, as Mr. Travolta points out, there's no way he can do all this in two weeks. But, it's life and death. So although he has to do this impossible task in a couple of weeks, he appears to have plenty of time to fool around before he even gets started. Then, somewhere in there, we can assume the reason he wanted out early is because his son has terminal cancer. By then, we're past believing anything that's going on, and overall, the storyline is so plodding and lacking in interest that we've pretty much lost interest. At the very end, the rich buyer, rather than pay half a million dollars to the mobster, has him killed and gratefully hands the half million over to an "art appraiser" whose expertise is based upon presentation of a business card. With the half million in hand, everybody goes to Tahiti where most of them live ever after, save for the poor boy with cancer who we are given to understand is going fast. This could have been a pretty good story without the enormous plot holes and confused directing.