Lost in London (I) (2017) User Reviews

A fine technical achievement let down by a so-so story

[eddie_baggins · 5/10 · 29 November 2020]

Premiering via a live broadcast as it happened/was filmed way back in 2017, Woody Harrelson's ambitious directional debut Lost in London is now available to rent through YouTube here in Australia and deciding whether or not its worth your time will depend purely on what you are watching it for, for as a narrative film this is a film lacking in much goodness but as a unique experience and technical feat its highly commendable.

Based in parts around Harrelson's own experiences in the early 2000's, Lost sees the well-liked actor facing pressure in his personal life after a series of wrong decisions leads him to be appearing in tabloid publications across the nation and battling to ensure he doesn't lose all he holds dear in his life.

Filmed astoundingly in one take by Harrelson's D.O.P Nigel Willoughby and at the time screened live as it was being shot, with Harrelson looking to merge the cinematic and theatrical in a combined package, Lost constantly impresses as you witness the craft and care that must have gone into getting the film to a reality but you can't help but feel the very bare bones story and only mildly funny material at hand needed some more refinement to make Lost a truly well-rounded feature.

Always likable, Harrelson is his typically game self and has a lot of fun bantering with the likes of Owen Wilson and singing Cheers theme songs to confused security guards on his way around London this fateful night but the core storyline and delivery of some supposedly comedic moments like a U2 loving cop or an Arabian prince whose a big fan of Woody's never really gel together and you get a feeling that if the film had been delivered in a typical production sense jokes would've landed smoother and more time could've been given to areas that would've smoothed the boring components of the film out.

As it stands, Lost is an impressive feat in so many ways and its great to see the likes of Harrelson jump behind the camera and try for something special straight off the bat but Lost is only ever moderately entertaining as its generic and so-so story goes through the motions.

Final Say -

A must-watch for Woody fans and a nice novelty feature in conception and delivery, Lost in London is let down by mid-tier material and a mostly unengaging plot.

2 1/2 Bono phone calls out of 5

Lost in London

[henry8-3 · 5/10 · 24 February 2021]

Harrelson directs and stars in this experimental film where the whole thing was shot live in one night and screened into cinemas. The story, such as it is, features Harrelson playing 'himself' falling out with his wife and get into various mishaps as he tries to get back to her.

As a film, it's pretty slight, although Harrelson is very good as the witty, lost, selfish and naive film star lost in the big city. There are some fun scenes and some dull bits - Harrelson's row with Owen Wilson where they rip each other's films apart is wonderful. All this though takes a back seat to appreciating the quite incredible skills in pulling this together, as far as I can tell, without a mistake, whilst keeping pace and solid performances going.

Good directorial debut from Woody Harrelson

[deloudelouvain · 7/10 · 20 July 2018]

After reading some reviews I can see there are alot of mixed feelings about Lost In London, or you like or you don't like it at all. I'm glad to say I did like it. I liked it how the story was brought, with one camera shooting, with following Woody throughout the whole movie and to watch how his bizarre journey passes by. I get that not everybody has the same sense of humor so I do get that some people didn't thought it was funny, but I thought there were enough funny dialogues and moments to keep me entertained. I also do like Woody Harrelson as an actor so that made it probably easier for me to enjoy. For his directorial debut I think he did a good job. Lost in London was to me the perfect mix of drama and comedy, with the actors playing themselves. That was a good idea and made it a bit more special than the average movie.

unexpectedly great

[danielle-walker-1 · 20 January 2017]

Even after watching the Q and A for the film I still can't figure out why someone would have their directorial debut be the most challenging project I can imagine undertaking. Even without the single shot, live elements, the film is written and performed hilariously. I had more laugh out loud moments in the theater with this film than I can remember in recent history. After the film, the cast and crew presented a Q and A that really makes you feel like you are part of the process, which I guess we were. Willie Nelson was a surreal fantasy for both Woody and the audience. Owen Wilson was a great as usual and the self deprecating humor Woody Nelson threw in about his career as well as Wilsons, was lovingly harsh and very funny. There were some inconsistencies with the cultural and film references being post 2002 when the film supposedly takes place, but they didn't really place it in that time period until the end of the film so it wasn't distracting or obvious and didn't detract. It was fantastic as an experience and was a genuinely delightful film.

An experiemental film shot live and streamed was an achievement. An okay drama, but less of a quality film in it's own right

[vampire_hounddog · 6/10 · 21 October 2020]

Woody Harrelson comes off the stage in another mediocre London West End theatre production. Over the course of the evening his marriage to his wife (Eleanor Satsuura) breaks down due to an indisctrion which makes its way to the front page of a tabloid, but after an apparent fight with friend Owen Wilson he leaves a nightclub and gets into an altercation with a taxi driver that lands him in jail.

A piece of experiemental cinema whereby the film was shot in real time and streamed to a live cinema audience in the USA and then the UK on the 19th January 2017. The idea is incredibly bold and well executed with some aspects of the film working very well, others less so. Modern technology and smaller GoPro type cameras have allowed for this type of film to be executed, but it is also well choreographed. For this alone, Harrelson should be praised.

Tried to like it... Definitely not a great film

[peruhealing · 6/10 · 30 May 2018]

I didn't know this was a "one shot" live movie. For what it is, it's well executed and deserving of praise, however, it falls short if you expect it to stand its own ground. Maybe if we were rating single take live films, this could be an 8,9 or 10.

The dialogue is painfully intense, there is hardly any space to breathe. Camera is shaky, sometimes blurry... Some of the jokes are witty but they are few and far in between. Also you cannot really laugh as you are trying to understand what the heck is going on and what everyone is talking about. The British accents don't help. Overall interesting try but dont be fooled by the positive reviews, this will eventually become a 5 start movie on IMDB

A crazy project flawlessly executed.

[mrwhite000 · 10/10 · 20 January 2017]

If you have any basic knowledge of film making, acting, lighting, sound engineering and broadcasting, after watching this film you might agree it was an incredible achievement given the limited budget and schedule and all the obstacles and circumstances in which it was put together. When judging all the elements in the film, but particularly acting, it is fair to consider the EXTREME emotional and physical endurance all the actors and crew needed in order to materialize this (crazy) project, specially Woody who also served as director and, as he later explained during the QA session at the end of the movie, couldn't stop thinking about all the details while the camera was rolling. Remember, this movie was broadcast LIVE in one camera shot with no opportunity for screwing up, with the constant threat of technical glitches in sound (150 microphones) and video streaming, bad timing of actors and scenes, falls (the cameraman was running up and down staircases and other obstacles) and even bad weather, given that in London it can rain at any time and great part of the movie was shot outdoors. If you factor all these elements in, then Woody's performance was Academy Award ( or Tony? or both? ) winner. So for this reason, I am giving this movie a solid 10. What Woody and the rest of the crew have achieved is short of impossible. The plot and dialogues were good and entertaining, not a deep and thoughtful story, just a fun and silly comedy based on Woody's mostly-true recount of an awkward night in London. If you didn't have the opportunity to watch it live and would like to watch it now, please do so with an open mind and remember, this was an experimental project with incredible odds of not going well at all, and yet somehow it did!.

Meh...You Know What I Mean? Not Even With A Capital M, Just meh....

[PurpleCrayon2014 · 6/10 · 27 May 2018]

If this were viewed Live, my reaction might be a little different. This is a single camera project that is nothing new to anything genre, and although the imagery flowed there were a few awkward moments with the characters. I kept expecting James Corden to pop up to do a Carpool Karaoke scene-actually, this film could have been condensed into a James Corden Carpool Karaoke video.

My first review on here.

[john-b-hale · 2/10 · 27 May 2018]

I'm not even going to put any spoilers in here because there is none. I can only imagine these are fake reviews or something. It's not funny at all. Its depressing. I want my two hours back.

Films must innovate

[bastiankoh · 9/10 · 9 August 2018]

Woody made a fantastic accomplishment with this movie. Even though we scrape the story from the surface, we are able to submerge into the protagonist life and experience some of his emotions. They way it was filmed makes you feel present in the screen, and as an expectator, a succession of events contained in this kind of chronological order can make you lose your attention. However, I believe is part of the narrative itself.

Fantastic and innovate work!

Exhausting to watch

[emil-wisekal · 7/10 · 29 May 2018]

The comedy was in short supply in this movie. I wanted it to get funnier throughout the dramatic sequences. I kept watching and waiting for it to become funny again. In fact the movie was more of a tragedy that revealed a redemption in the very end.

It was exhaustive because I convinced my wife to watch it and she would have never let me forget it if I made her sit through another bad movie.

She said she liked it. Shew!

Disappointing

[loxford-53999 · 4/10 · 23 December 2019]

The cast were fine but I saw nothing comedic in this movie whatsoever. Other reviewers thought it hilarious. I'm afraid I just found Harrelson's character sad, that's how he remained throughout the movie. Sad and somewhat pathetic. I love Woody Harrelson. He delivered himself as he does so well, an ironic character, well meaning but selfishly damaging those around him. Funny? Hardly.

Right-On-The-Nose but unlikely to be published.

[cageyk-46578 · 7/10 · 22 March 2019]

As much as I am a big fan of Woody Harrelson I could never watch this flick as I just can't handle any movie with Owen Wilson in it. I'm just unable to get past his bulbous-tipped, misshapen nose and if he happens to be in a movie I've unwittingly started to watch, I end up constantly staring at it, to the exclusion of everything else and am forced to either leave the theater or turn off the TV. I have the same problem with Gérard Depardieu and as well, with any films in which the late Karl Malden appears. There is for me however, an irreconcilable difference between the former schnozz and the latter two and that is while Malden and Dépardieu possess large, knobby noses they are Not bulbous-tipped and misshapen. This is obviously not a review of Lost in London but I could never rate any Woody Harrelson film lower than 7 out of 10 anyway. Yes, not a review but it's definitely right-on-the-nose,

Original!

[RodrigAndrisan · 6/10 · 2 August 2018]

Not exactly a masterpiece but it has its moments! It's more Drama than Comedy, there are some funny scenes, but it's hard to laugh. The most appealing is Willie Nelson, who only appears for a minute. The cinematography by Nigel Willoughby is very smooth and smart. The story is pretty realistic and Woody Harrelson tried his best. His two daughters in the film are the sweetest. Martin McCann and Peter Ferdinando are also very good.

woody

[foxtografo · 6/10 · 10 June 2019]

I love Harrelson work, I like a lot his acting and I find him very charismatic and funny too. This movie didn't disappoint me in that way, but it's more an experiment as a one shot "live" (I didn't watch it live, though...) movie than what you would expect of a movie, with a pace, cuts, different camera angles, etc. This feels almost as an action movie, as it's always in motion, up and down with no break. It actually has a story line though, it's not a documentary type of movie. Problem for me is I'm not very keen of hand held camera movies. By times (a lot in the beginning) the camera was too shaky and annoyed me quite a lot. I understand and appreciate the difficulty of the way this movie's been done, but in the end, watching it now a couple years after the live screening, it's not much more than the achievement of how it's been done. It was entertaining, I've got a lot of the actor I came to see, but the story was only ok, and the cinematography isn't to my like. Still it's an entertaining movie, and if you appreciate the behind the movies aspect it will be even more impressive than what it is as a story.

Stop Shaking the camera!!!

[hcharton-944-475761 · 5/10 · 27 June 2021]

Just because you have one camera, why does it need to shake and spin around all the time? This is distracting and dizzying. Really some of the worst camera work I have ever seen. It just moves around constantly for no reason at all. Woody is great. Idea is funny, although another rehash of how hard it is to be a narcissistic movie star is a rather played out plot line.

Astounding! First rate comedy!

[BaiNst · 9/10 · 19 January 2017]

If you can imagine BIRDMAN done as a CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM "bearing and rending of Ego"...you've got a good understanding of what to expect from LOST IN London. Absolutely amazing, and it's really hard to believe they pulled it off in a single take...LIVE. If I hadn't stayed for the Q'n'A afterwards, I'd still have my doubts...it was that impressive of a feat.

It would be difficult to ruin the plot, as it's mostly an excuse to follow Woody through one entertaining night of fumbling...I really hope this will be available as a recorded purchase, so that I can revisit it, and have a closer look at the artistry of it. The acting is superb, the camera work is as good as anyone could do (and better than most!), and the cinematography was spot on.

The biggest possible flaw a project like this may suffer from (as with any project, even) is a flinching, uninsightful, uninspired, and semi- conscious delving into the ego of the writer/director/actor. Harrelson avoids these pitfalls, and handles it like a master. From his acting over the course of his career, there's always been a hint of brilliance beneath...but it's always tough to tell in a truly great actor where the acting ends and real person begins. He handles this roll (admittedly one with which he should be very familiar and had lots of practice) with an honesty and depth of character that shows he's been through it and come out the other side wiser for it...unless it's all an act.

Hard to tell, but a damn fine yarn, and funny as hell. I'm honored to have borne witness, and really hope to see it again, soon.

6.5 entertaining!

[ee01239 · 7/10 · 10 June 2018]

Although I didn't found it hilarious it did had some funny moments. There are some catchy and philosifical lines that on they're own already make movie worth it. The plot could be a bit more refined and concise but it was stronger than most nowdays movies that are normally built like a glass shatered pieces glued thogether.

1 hour and 44 minutes I'll never get back

[jlynn-52202 · 2/10 · 22 August 2018]

I did not find it funny, I found it difficult to keep up with. It was just plain stupid. Woody has done better films than this. I am so glad I didn't have to pay for the loss of 1 hour and 44 minutes of my life.

What an eventful night out!

[mikkocase · 8/10 · 20 January 2017]

What a great technical achievement this film was. One camera. One shot. Great sound (mostly). Fantastic theatrical performances throughout. Considering it was way past my bed time, I never once took my eyes off the screen, just watching in disbelief that this was all actually happening NOW in and about the London streets outside this cinema, in the very early hours of a cold Friday morning. There were some laugh out loud parts. Some rather black moments. And some cringe- worthy. But all good entertainment. Unless the cast hadn't pointed out a few problems in the Q&A afterwards I wouldn't have noticed them. As a live event it was spectacular. We'll just have to wait and see how it stands up as a film in its own right.

Incredibly boring

[muamba_eats_toast · 3/10 · 28 August 2019]

I love woody and admire the ambition but this was just so incredibly dull and boring didn't make me laugh once despite being a supposed comedy.

All credit to the cameraman.

[Screenrights · 4/10 · 20 June 2018]

A lost opportunity to make a great family film / commercial success. The dialogue is crass, demeaning and vulgar. PG in the UK; uncategorized in the US. Perhaps I'll strap a GoPro to my head, go for a walk et voila !

It's a great film, but.....

[byron-116 · 8/10 · 30 May 2018]

I selected to watch Lost in London because of my two favorite actors (Woody Harrelson and Owen Wilson) and also because IMDb labeled it as a comedy. It's a great film, but why misrepresent it as a comedy? It's a slow moving drama that absorbs the viewer due the great performances of Woody Harrelson and Owen Wilson and the very good supporting cast. Lost in London is a rare great film.

Worth a watch

[Gordon-11 · 21 November 2019]

This film tells the story of a Hollywood star who has an eventful night in London.

It is quite a funny film, with a lot of name checking of Woody Harrelson's film titles. A single camera shot is impressive, and I can only imagine how long the actors rehearsed the whole film before they shot it. It is also quite amazing to have quite a bit of support from the London police as well. I think it is quite worth a watch.

Total rubbish

[kim-80170 · 1/10 · 21 September 2019]

I would rather have root canal treatment than subject myself to this entire movie.