Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

The acting in this movie is really good.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Nothing ever comes clean with time after a hard past. Second chances are nothing more than covering up the man inside trying to break out. A coiled snake waiting for the circumstances to fall into place and then....powerlessness.After six years contained, Joe is released back into society. His mindset is to become a father again to his two girls, but outside circumstances, old ideas, and people muddy his path to the fantasies he had six years to create in jail.The movie zig zagged from scene to scene and I was not able to predict what would happen next. That is what made this movie great and reminded me of Pulp Fiction.

Although the dark tone of this movie may not be to everyone's liking, this film chooses intentionally and wisely to be downbeat and realistic without ever showing off it's own dark realism, therefore creating itself to be a film that will have very divided feedback and that's the main reason why I like it. This Netflix Original movie starts off with a scene that resembles the opening scene of The Godfather, possibly the most analyzed film scene of all time, containing similar cinematography, style and context and at the same time introducing the main character of the film for us viewers. Joe Denton is a kind man with a troubling past of small crimes and he is speaking to another man named Chaplin on the day that he is escaping prison, and this conversation between the main character, Joe Denton, and Chaplin held my interest because of how interesting the dialogue was. With good films like this one, scenes where you feel like you should be bored don't bore you at all and actually hold your interest, and what makes this opening scene so good is that it grasps our attention simply with good dialogue and camera work. Cinematography is a key ingredient for visual storytelling and the director of this film is aware of that, so he uses cinematography that catches the dark, realistic atmosphere of the film and in good taste without ever overusing it, always using it for important moments. Along with the cinematography is the humour which has been given very divided feedback from critics; to sum up the humour in this film, it is very straight-forward and cynical, and although it's not for everyone it's a damn fine treat for fans of black comedy. In fact I thought most of the critics would appreciate the wittiness of the cynical humour in this...the film isn't one of those "good popcorn feel-good" romantic comedies starring Goldie Hawn but the film is a "good popcorn feel-ashamed" black comedy starring Nikolaj Coaster-Waldau and isn't that better?It's a subtle black comedy and you can treat it as such, however you can also treat it as a serious crime drama. It's thought-provoking, interesting, visually great and containing the needed flow of a good film and if that sounds good to you give it a watch. After all, Netflix is providing us with films and we should be supporting their good work so they know what other kind of films to create. If you'd rather watch a sweet sentimental tale about a boy and his lost puppy however, go elsewhere.

Small Crimes is a sharp, short slice of noir. A low-key crime film that that is packed with great nuanced performances. Tightly directed with a gripping screenplay that smartly straddles the razors edge of noir and absurdity. Rich characters with a marvellously self-deluded and engaging protagonist. Small Crimes ticked all the boxes for me. I loved it.

The story starts off promising, with a realistic looking prison scene and the protagonist being released. He goes home to a not too goofy looking white trash family, and the set up for a good story (or narrative in today's lingo) is arranged. Problem is, the story quickly becomes confusing. The acting is good, scenery not too phony, but it's just tough to figure out what is going on.We are introduced to the protagonists parents, as well as some gnarly looking people from the past. However, the blanks are never filled in. The Mom is really down on the main guys behavior, but we are not sure why. Was he a sociopath who deserved her wrath? Or is he an OK guy with a loony mother? There are also some obnoxious "bad guy" looking and acting characters, but we never really know if they are valid when they beat up the main character, or if they are just evil. This is the sort of film that looks like they had the cash to hire some good actors and directors, then ran out of money before they could hire a writer. What they end up doing is the old "FOR THE CHILDREN" routine. He is desperately trying to find his daughters, whom he has not seen since before prison, and give them all of his money.We are suppose to believe that if a man can only have that one more meeting with his daughters, that he will be complete and fulfilled, even if he is never allowed to see them again. He explains this to his father, who believes he is not even deserving of this. What? a guy is so evil he is not even allowed to give some cash to his daughters? Yea, right. Even our society doesn't believe a guy is too evil to give money. It goes with the new Hollywood mantra "women and kids can do whatever they want, men don't matter".