Life of Crime - A Movie Review

We could get in big trouble doing this.

Life of Crime is a 2013 film. Two criminals original intentions are to rob a house but when the wife of a corrupt real-estate developer returns home, that sets a new exciting plan.

A comedy is always good to watch now and then. Based on the trailer, Life of Crime looked like a funny crime film. Except, like all crime-based films, Life of Crime bears the usual routes instead of stealing new ground.

Jennifer Aniston is the best part of the film. If she wasn’t cast, I don’t know if I would have watched it. You can think what you want of Aniston (I certainly have), she is a good actress. Some of her characters circulate similar characteristics to other roles but I have noticed Aniston adding more subtle characteristics, especially for her character, Mickey.

The film includes the usual stereotypical villain roles. John Hawkes, Mark Boone Junior, and Tim Robbins play the goons. At least not all the kidnappers are bad. I like the friendship Aniston and John Hawkes (Louis) build. Unlike the other kidnappers, Louis is respectful of Mickey. They get to know each other while Mickey is held for ransom, sharing deep stories.

Tim Robbins and Isla Fisher star in the film as Mickey’s uncaring husband, Frank, and his mistress, Melanie. Fisher deserves more credit for her role and how she started dictating the situation. Will Forte is also a part of Marshall, the neighbor who Mickey thought she had feelings for. The film has a good ensemble cast, but they’re not used to their advantage.

The issue with Life of Crime is that it sticks to the usual plot dynamics of most crime-kidnapper premises. The film missed a huge opportunity! Now is the time to explore new grounds! That’s what movies are here to do. Life of Crime is a flat story that suffers from a lackluster script, copying dynamics from Home Alone.

Writers didn’t elevate the material beyond the conventional crime comedy formula. The pacing is off and doesn’t flow naturally. The pacing is inconsistent with scenes dragging in the middle. The actions of the criminals are repetitive and nothing transpires with Mickey’s husband following ransom duties.

A character’s decision in the climax comes way too late! It should have happened in the middle of the film, giving it a more juicy storyline. That’s what the title implies, right? If I were this film's writer, I would have started the story in the climax from when said character gather their plan together. Why end the film on the most exciting note when it’s just getting started?

The film lacks a distinct visual style. While Daniel Schechter successfully captures the essence of the 1970s period through costume designs and sets, the film isn’t visually vibrant. It would have complemented the film’s quirky tone. Additionally, Schechter's direction lacked a comical approach to the film’s innovative story techniques. It’s a predictable story.

The pacing is inconsistent, with some scenes dragging on while others feel rushed, preventing the narrative from achieving a cohesive flow. The story itself is predictable, lacking a well-worn trope we’ve seen on numerous occasions.

Life of Crime falls victim to its genre. The unoriginal plot prevented the film from a more exciting plotline. It’s stuck between a comedy and a drama, struggling with the screenplay the most.

While the pacing issues, lack of originality, and tonal struggles hold the film back, Life of Crime is worth checking out for Aniston’s performance. It’s a pity that it doesn’t bring anything new to the crime film drawing board.