ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

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

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

ryko25 Baffling. Baffling how this film got made, baffling what the director thought he was trying to say, baffling how this script was ever considered adequate and baffling that Fassbender and Gleeson saw fit to have anything to do with this utter turkey. The main problem is that there isn't anything even approaching a sympathetic character - they are all loathsome and this it is impossible to enjoy a single moment of anything that occurs. A total waste of time and effort.

Horst in Translation (filmreviews@web.de) "Trespass Against Us" is a British 100-minute movie from last year (2016) and most likely the most known work by now for director Adam Smith and writer Alastair Siddons. The two big names here are Fassbender and Gleeson, but huge film fans will maybe recognize other faces like Kinnear. I am quite a Gleeson fun, but while he was good too, not even I can deny that everything and everybody in this film is inferior to Fassbender. With his performance here, he turned a mediocre story into something pretty good in my opinion. Luckily for him the character also offers really a lot, be it his violent, almost sadistic side, the character's struggle between hating and loving his dad or the connection he has with his wife and children, it is all very baity material. I expected some tragedy towards the end and while it is certainly not an entirely happy ending, it almost looks like one, so I was wrong. As for Gleeson, his character is interesting as well, he may seem like somebody easy to hate but we find out during the film that he may be a victim of his own upbringing and lets keep in mind that he apparently raised his kids on his own and managed to keep the family together somehow, even if his measures are undoubtedly something (you don't want) to get used to. As a whole, this is neither a horrible nor a great film, but Fassbender makes it very much worth watching. This is a kind of film that won't get recognized by the big awards bodies I am sure, but that is quite a shame as MF gave one of the finest performances I have seen in a long time. The more I see from him, the more of a fan I become. Go watch this movie here that luckily does not have a great title to get people interested, even if the reference to the quote from Gleeson's character's is a fitting one. I give "Trespass Against Us" a thumbs-up.

Alan Fassbender is a good actor as is Brendan Gleeson and the story is a good one.It is hard to understand what they say & i am Scottish!! It's all gypo ( gypsie) talk and anyone from anywhere else other than the UK is going to have a hard time with this - subtitles needed :)The story is a well trodden one - where the main character wants to change his life but is enmeshed in the culture he was brought up in and it's taking him down.Some good car chases - even through fields!! Someone said it has no redeeming qualities but ultimately it's not Hollywood and there are no happy endings. A good gritty story with tension and a fair bit of action - food character study - Fassbender does a good job here.

Pramitheus I seriously don't know what the hell I just watched. I do remember putting it up in my watch-list because of the trailer and obviously because it stars Michael Fassbender. Still, as I write reviews, I am going to review it because it's not all poop. Now before I go on about this movie, let me make this clear. If there was some deep meaning in it, I didn't get it and I am so sorry. I am saying that because look at the title of the movie. It's so prosaic.SCREENPLAY - OK, I am really not sure whether there was a screenplay for this movie. I really don't think, because nothing made sense. At least to me, it didn't make any sense whatsoever. They are a family of vagabonds, OK. They rob and come back, OK. They rob again and Fassbender gets caught, OK. There is just some random stuff going on. The only thing that made some sense is that Fassbender's character is kinda scared of his father, played by Gleeson and that's it. As there are no character developments or character-arcs, when something happens, I just couldn't care. Even the kids aren't lovable. The dialogue is strange. I am sure it is some form of dialect from the U.K., and maybe it is authentic but at the end of the day it has to make some bloody sense. I mean, for example take this, "Dogs can only play with cats so long before it's the dog that gets scratched". If you've any form explanation for that, please leave it in the comments.DIRECTION - When you've got a script like that, I think there isn't anything you can direct. Is it possible to direct with such a vague script? I very much doubt that. Let's talk about the one interesting thing about the movie, and that is the robberies. That had a little bit of context and that is the Cutlers needed money to survive. Adam Smith went to the extent of sucking the context out of that too. I am literally pinching the gap between my forehead and nose. There was nothing. I didn't even have a spurt of emotion while watching this movie, and it has Fassbender in it. Even the father-son dynamic isn't strong enough. To sum it up, the direction was bland.CINEMATOGRAPHY - The singular thing that kept me watching this snooze-fest was the cinematography and why wouldn't it be good? Eduard Grau has been the D.O.P. for The Gift(2015) and The Awakening(2011). The use of colour was more expressive than the actors. The car chase scenes were something. I think the Fast and Furious franchise needs camera-work like this to bring some realism into their action.ACTING - I am so sorry but Michael Fassbender wasn't good in this movie. During the silent moments he was expressive with his eyes but whenever he spoke, he sounded so inexpressive. Probably because of the accent or the dialogues but that was some waste of talent. Brendan Gleeson managed to make a character. He came across blunt and dull-headed just fine. Sean Harris as that mad dude, was amazing. Amazing. Seriously, it looks like "what the hell is going on" but that is extremely difficult to pull off and that too consistently throughout the movie.FINAL VERDICT - It is at the end of the day a pass. Nothing really here worth watching. I know, Michael is here but you will only be disappointed. At the end of the day, I do respect film-making. It's a tough process but it has to make sense, right? If it doesn't make sense to the average movie-goer, then what's the point? Now, if anybody has watched this and has found some inner, deep meaning then please do explain. I say that because whenever I don't make any sense out of a movie, I assume that I am not at that level yet to understand the movie. If you are going to explain the plot, then please don't. There isn't any. If there is some inner meaning? Please share.