Visitors Review

Daniel F-P (2012-05-26 15:44)

Great gangster movie

I did not know anything about this film until I saw it. I felt greatlyentertained while watching it and was happy to find David Thewlis inthe cast (haven't seen him since Naked). The movie takes this sort ofviolent trajectory and just spirals down into the inevitable finale.There is a sort of a romance going on between Colin Farrell and KeiraKnightley but thankfully it does not overshadow the gangster theme ofthe story. Ray Winstone is great as the villain and there are othergreat performances as well (for instance by Thewlis). All the acting isnot flawless but all in all it's a movie I would tell my friends to gosee. Only negative thing I have to say is about the ending. I don'tlike it when the hero is killed in the end by a good-for-nothing kid!One thing that brought me a lot of pleasure the plot aside was the factthat Farrell at one point cites the writer R. M. Rilke. I did not nowthat guy until I saw the film. Guys, you cannot but dig the quote"Everything terrible is something that needs our love".

Lou O (2012-05-26 08:17)

Can we talk about 'London Boulevard'? My Revised Review

In what hopefully proves to be a happy coincidence, now that 'Drive'has established a good benchmark for more left-field entries in thecrime thriller genre, and I suspect has positively affected thecritical environment for the reception of the same, 'London Boulevard'is soon getting US distribution. I anticipate the stateside reviews.Last year, towards the end of November, it opened in the UK and Irelandto baffled shrugs and critical dismissal. This, only one week after'The American' – now widely agreed to be an above par effort in theMelville tradition – had been released to a near identical reaction.I saw neither film during its cinematic run, but rented 'LondonBoulevard' as soon as it was out, and it was actually to write a reviewof it that I signed up to IMDb, an 8/10 review to which the headlineran, "Underrated, but now on DVD appreciation for this film sure togrow." I've seen the film twice more since then, and can say thatwhile, as to others, it wouldn't appear to have made much inroads, MYappreciation for the film has certainly grown further still. It's not aperfect film by any means, and part of the reason it benefits frommultiple viewings is that there is something of an information dump atthe end, one detail of which stands out as either insignificant or notwell enough integrated into what has come before. Fifteen (twenty at apush) of the film's ninety three minutes also plod to some extent onceit tips the thirty minute mark, which is not to say this stretch isboring or that nothing happens – not at all – this is simply theportion of the film with the least style and the most concern for plotadvancement.That plot, briefly, is a spin on 'Sunset Boulevard', only here aneurotic younger actress, besieged by paparazzi, hires a newly releasedprisoner for a caretaking job in her West London pile; love blossoms,while the hood's mad sister and erstwhile gang associates figureheavily in events.Much as the list, disseminated throughout various sources, of 'Drive'sconceptual forebears is a long one – Hill, Melville, Kenneth Anger,Brothers Grimm etc. – so is that of 'London Boulevard's referents. Itslook aspires to that of British Technicolor films of the sixties andseventies: "(I)n London there was just something about the light andthere's something about the way London went onto film in those days,whether it was Technicolor or Technicolor plus the flatness of thelight. It's mysterious and Elysian in a way that Antonioni got at in'Blow-Up'." The Yardbids play over the opening titles.It mixes art world and gangland subcultures in a manner reflective ofRoeg's 'Performance'. Ray Winstone plays another in a long line ofcockney gangsters. Thewlis's character harks back to 'Withnail'.There's also maybe a touch of Osbourne in the central relationship; ofPinter in the dialogue; while some of the script's other gestures areas much Shakespearean and even medieval as they are gangster filmclichés. For example, what might ordinarily be called 'turf' is insteadrepeatedly referred to as someone's 'manor'. This vibe is accentuatedby the sound of a lyre on the score and, not least, by the film's bigfinal number, "Green Fairy," which kicks in just around the time evilis confronted on the fens. The pretend-blind old man who lives in theunderpass, meanwhile, evokes BOTH 'ye olde times', AND that Antonionianotherworldliness.The Shakespearean is evident not just in the generous number of playerswho come to a sticky end – or the crazy sis – but, more fundamentally,there is a real sense of King Lear's Edmund's – "Wherefore should Istand in the plague of custom? (...Optional: Now, gods, stand up forbastards!)" – in Monahan's approach to characterization. As in 'TheDeparted's "I don't want to be a product of my environment. I want myenvironment to be a product of me." In 'London Boulevard', then, comesa protagonist, Mitchell, who, though he's within this determinist,tragic gangster template, nonetheless acts wilfully and withself-determination: Danny: "I don't need to tell ya, there's no freelunches." Mitchell: "There are other things I can do, and maybe I wantto F-ing do them." And, "See what you have to understand is that if Iwas a gangster, Rob, you'd be the first to F-ing die. I wouldn't workfor you. I'd kill you and take everything you've got … IF I were agangster. That's why you don't want me to be a gangster."This – alongside utterances more abstracted and ontological in nature,the likes of the Lennonesque (supposedly he's the uncle of onecharacter), "There are times when a gangster is something to be," andThewlis's rakish dissipate taking up a large pistol and intoning, "I amwhat I am" – is indicative of what, at first, because it doesn't muchsquare with genre expectations, can be perplexing to an audience, butalso of what is ultimately so interesting about the film.But that kind of density, being purely verbal, might go for nothing ifthe film as a whole failed to present it in a suitable style. But itexcels on that score too, with the final fifteen minutes the obviousstandout section, an atmospheric tour de force.Cinematographer Chris Menges achieves Monahan's desired neutrallycoloured, flat, tactile Technicolor look in the film's daytime scenes,while its night shots, which often contain the ambient twinkle of thecity's lights, out of the depth of field, benefit from a June shootwith the beautiful deep indigo of their sky. With Keira Knightly's headstaring from concession stands and looming hugely from billboards, oneof which itself twinkles memorably, the effect, sometimes, is that ofan aquarium. Appropriate for a crime movie seeking to plumb deeperchannels.

Tony Heck (2012-05-24 08:20)

A very slow moving movie that is less gangster action and more internal struggle with a love story. Not for me. I say C

"If I fell in love with you in the countryside, what would you do aboutit." Mitchel (Farrell) has just got out of jail and wants to staystraight. He gets a job as a bodyguard for a reclusive actressCharlotte (Knightley). When a friend of his introduces him to London'sDon things go badly for Mitch and he is now stuck between going back tohis old life or trying to keep the new one. Going in I saw ColinFarrell, writer of the "DEPARTED" and another mob type movie. I wasexcited. I started watching...the longer it went on the moredisappointed I got. This is a very neat idea but didn't know if itwanted to be a action movie or a love story. It seemed that the actionaspect was good but then slowed done when Knightly showed up. I realizethat that is the characters dilemma and is needed to show his choice,but the movie didn't feel smooth. This could just be me but I love mobmovies but this one didn't feel like one at all. Very artsy, so beprepared. Overall, not what I expected which is why I think I didn'tlike it that much. Too slow for me. I give it a C.

Angelus2 (2012-05-24 05:25)

Mediocre at its best

Mitchel is an ex-criminal who wants to leave behind his criminal waysand is offered a job as a handyman for a famous movie-star, but Mitchelfind that a underworld boss known as Gant wants Mitchel to work forhim.I was expecting a suave British gangster movie, one that would putBritish greats such as Get Carter, Lock Stock, Snatch and the recentRocknRolla to shame, but what we got instead was a film that was barelygangster, comedy, drama and romance orientated. Secondaly when youconsider the rich cast with the likes of Colin Farrel, Keira Knightly,Ray Winstone, Sanjay Bhasker and Anna Friel, its very disappointing.Colin is someone I'd watch and even go far as saying is perhaps one ofmy favourite actors, but even he fails to entice his accent at times isdodgy but that is forgivable, in all honesty none of the actors wereused to their full capacity and the script was terrible with the 'deadclichés' of gangsters seeking protection money.Stay away from London Boulavard.

cmoyton (2012-05-23 05:26)

Walk on by

Despite a great cast assembled things just don't quite gel in LondonBoulevard. A contemporary gangster flick also doubles as a homage toprevious older and better British criminal underworld movies. Most ofthe soundtrack is from the 1960's and feels out of place. A star fromthe world of entertainment holed up in a fancy London house befriendedby a gangster. Where have i seen that before? There are some great performances by the actors playing the roles ofthe secondary characters but Farrell has done much better and Knightlyis poor. Thefilm is nicely shot but the plot and editing is haphazard.Farrells visits to Knighly charting the development of theirrelationship are punctuated by scenes of graphic violence. Not that iam advocating such behaviour but these scenes acted as a jolt andstopped me from switching off. The main problem is not with the endingbut with the predictability of the plot. The only questions were whoand when, both of which i guessed correctly.

(2012-05-22 21:04)

different

some may view this as a typical british gangster movie and if that's a turn off don't bother watching it. don't watch it for the supposed romance between kiera knightley and colin farrel. don't watch it because most people seem to hate it. watch it for the difference in language. nothing is a shock in this movie but it's well paced and provides a transport from reality for a little over an hour. isn't that what movies are for?

antoniotierno (2012-05-22 09:22)

brutal but very original story

Colin Farrell is totally credible as a tough guy but the movie featuresother stunning performances like Keira Knightley and Ray Winstone, whomake the film pleasant and interesting. Monahan borrows something fromother famous flicks such as Martin Scorsese's The Departed andCarlito's way. The story plays out perfectly and the pleasures aremany, including Farrell's reflective smiles when things go wrong andKnightley's depiction of a beautiful woman (with fame and money butalways needy and selfish). Not to mention the London perfect locationsand the believable depiction of the mob's underworld. The finale leavesa bit a bad taste but the story is wonderful on the whole

JoeH526 (2012-05-22 06:04)

Could not get this movie

What exactly is the sweep of this? Everybody on earth is vile and evil?There were so few characters in this who had any sense ofright-and-wrong. There are bad people but in this there were fewothers. Maybe the actress and the homeless guy but I think he'd been inprison. Most of the other characters were awash in complete moralbankruptcy. What place on earth has nothing but bad people? A goodscript wrestles with what is real it is too easy to make everybodytotally bad. We don't really know why most of these were so badlyflawed. This movie reminded my of "The Bad Lieutenant" which also mademe feel sick to my stomach afterward.

(2012-05-19 19:46)

The most senseless waste of talent I've seen in quite some time.

I looked forward to seeing what William Monaghan could do on his own, away from the watchful eye of Martin Scorsese and a seriously overrated film like THE DEPARTED. He seems to have a good head on his shoulders, and a good ear for dialogue. But where THE DEPARTED lacked in gravity, LONDON BOULEVARD lacks in just about everything.Basically we have an ex-con (Colin Farrell, looking like he needs some Grecian Formula), his crazed drug-addled sister (an amazingly bizarre Anna Friel), his idiot criminal friend (Ben Chaplin, channelling his inner coke-fiend), a damaged and agoraphopic film starlet (Keira Knightley, happy to finally be out of those horrible PIRATES films), her stoner caretaker (the brilliant David Thewlis), and a prerequisite volatile, vulgar and racist crime boss (Ray Winstone, phoning it in here).The main problem with this film is that it starts out strong with a not-entirely novel concept of an ex-con trying to stay as far away as possible from re-entering that life but keeps being pulled by two opposing forces, but it spirals completely out of control once Ray Winstone enters the picture. His character is less of a fleshed-out character and more of a gimmick. He exists solely to force the protagonist of our film to certain extremes. Character arcs as well as storylines are left incomplete. There seems to be a great deal of footage that was left on the cutting room floor that might elongate the runtime of the film, but it might help to complete and clear up some gaping holes. I will never say that I don't love a great film that makes you think or wonder after the credits start rolling, but the story has to make sense first.Aside from the solid work that Farrell, Knightley (who continues to impress after films like the brilliant NEVER LET ME GO and A DANGEROUS METHOD), and Thewlis do, this film is so far beyond making any kind of narrative sense, it's ridiculous. No character is given an opportunity to get fleshed out; the dialogue is pretty rote for this type of film; the direction by Monaghan seems inspired at first, but then becomes less of a homage to the 70's British crime films that apparently inspired it and more of a ripoff.There's almost no level that the film works at other than the three performers I mentioned already, and the ending is beyond moronic. It's very rare I find myself shouting at a film in incredulous anger, but LONDON BOULEVARD did it.

(2012-05-19 16:25)

All the components, none of the thrill and Farrell looks good in a suit.

Great soundtrack! Fantastic actors. Dayum, Farrell looks good in a suit. But aside from that, meh. It's just not really cohesive. Farrell's character wants to go straight yet he's the most violent of all the players and I didn't feel it was because he needed to be. And others are correct about the accents. If you watch it, just to see Colin in a suit, of course, have the subtitles on. It was a disappointment but man, Farrell looks good in a suit. Two stars for the movie, three stars for the suit, four for the soundtrack. Averages a three rating.

arami_nik (2012-05-17 15:20)

"The Departed" goes to London

We Know William Monahan for his great screenplays (Mostly for MartinScorsese 's The Departed ) . Now ," London Boulevard " is hisDirectorial Debut and I have to say he has a done a great work ."London Boulevard" is the story of a man newly released from prison(Mitchel) who falls in love with a reclusive young movie star(Charlotte) and finds himself in a duel with a vicious gangster (Gant)and… The Story itself may seem a little Clichéd to you . But Monahan'sway for story telling makes this a very entertaining Crime Drama aboutBritish Gangsters . If you are a lover of genre , You'll enjoy everyminute of it . Collin Farel Does His best work since " In Bruges " . Heis the Lead Character : Mitchel who doesn't want to do his bloody jobanymore . Keira Knightly gives a charming performance and David Thewlisis OK . But The Best Performance comes from Ray Winstone (who was alsoin The Departed as Mr. French) he plays the crime boss Gant who LovesReading Beautiful Novels and talks to people about the last Poet He hasread . London Boulevard could be a better movie If it had a betterending or more Violence (Like The Departed) but , Very good characters, Cool Music and great Lines makes this one of the best movies I'veseen In 2011 . Keep an eye open for William Monahan's Next Movie . Iwant this 50-years old talented screenwriter direct more movies (andeven Better Movies ) Who Knows ? Maybe he'll receive another Oscar forBest Director in the future . I hope so . Verdict + William Monahan's "London Boulevard " may not be 100% New or Complete , But It's still agreat offer to Modern Crime Stories fans .

simona gianotti (2012-05-17 05:44)

Totally unstructured, unfounded and with no substance

This is a movie bordering on the unwatchable. I'm displeased to saythat, since Keira Knightley is one of my favourite actresses, and wasin a way disappointed to see her acting in such an embarrassing movie.It is really lacking in everything: the plot, if any exists, does notarouse any interest or involvement, consisting only of an unstructuredsequence of pseudo-events, the screenplay is pathetic and boring, thecharacters are just odd prototypes, interpreted by a cool cast onpaper, but which in the end leaves much to be desired. Colin Farrell asthe good, redeemed macho sounds too artificial, only physicallycapturing when shot dressed in a suit, Keira Knightley does her best tomake the story at least watchable till the end, probably just becausewe want to see how their chemistry will turn out. The picture wasclassified as a thriller, but there is no thrilling scene,I would justclassify it as a kind of farce of romance-drama-gangster, with a littleof all these genres, but a bad little, together with some disturbingviolence, lacking any convincing element. The only interesting point isa good depiction of a gloomy, dark London, which is of course notenough to make a movie worth seeing. So my advice is: Don't see it!

(2012-05-16 08:41)

Great Action and Unexpected Ending!

This review is from: London Boulevard (Amazon Instant Video) Colin Farrel is superb in one of the best movies I have seen this year and have never heard of!This movie has good action, acting and is totally unpredictable, which is rare in movies today. Also the soundtrack is fantastic, good classic and emo/brit pop. I would say this is a must see for any Pulp Fiction or overall action movie fan.

(2012-05-15 20:09)

The simlicity of it.......

Being able to relate as the star role of Farrel is all to eazy for me but the end result was a buzz kill. Looking for far more than expected will only let you down. Living life as a true Gangster takes passion. Where the bloody h*## can I find the soundtrack to this flic?

wacoastguy (2012-05-13 02:16)

Carlito's Way ---- No Way!

I read a review suggesting that this grating flick is on par with"Carlito's Way" and I just have to say no way! First of all, ColinFarrell is a far cry from Al Pacino, and that is being kind. I alwaysfeel as if I am watching a huge pair of eyebrows attached to a reallysmall person when I am watching Colin Farrell, so much so that I justabout cannot watch any movie he has ever been in. And as far as thecharacters in this movie, these people are just totally, infuriatinglyworthless. I really struggled to watch this movie from beginning to endbecause of the idiotic, adult-child characters, and of course there isthe extremely predictable storyline. Here is what this very unenjoyablemovie is about: A man gets out of prison and then he is tempted to getback into "the life." It was obvious from that point (which was aboutseven minutes into the movie) how it was going to turn out. Save yourmoney and rent a decent movie like "Carlito's Way" which the plot for"London Boulevard" was painfully, obviously absconded.

philliperry (2012-05-12 10:03)

Unbelievably Rubbish

This film is truly awful. Badly acted, Hollyoaks level direction, noteven Hollyoaks level editing, but worst of all the script. Lets startwith the 'star'. Colin Farrell's cockney accent sounds more SouthAfrican. Was the director to scared to tell him its sounded wrong? Thescript feels like its written by a white supremacist who's neveractually been to London, and thinks its still like it was in the 60's.So Farrell gets a job looking after a poor millionaire film star whodoesn't like being snapped by the paps. Well boo-hoo. How are yousupposed to give a toss about that? Ray Winstone says the 'C' word alot. Wow. How edgy. Anyway, you get the idea. This film makes a GuyRitchie film look like a masterclass in filmmaking. I guess thedirector has sucked all the right pricks.

mattbaxter72 (2012-05-12 00:04)

Welcome to the disappointment

In a lot of ways, this is a puzzling movie. Every single element of itis so right, so how does it end up being so completely uninvolving thatI ended up nearly falling asleep halfway through? The problem isn't thecasting; Colin Farrell makes a hell of a gangster, all smoulderingmachismo stomping through the streets of London. And with a supportingcast that includes Eddie Marsan (sleazy), David Thewlis (sleazier) andBen Chaplin (sleaziest, and very, very good), Farrell has someexcellent support. Ray Winstone has never been scarier, but of allpeople it's Anna Friel who takes the acting honours as Farrell'ssister, a woman who out-sleazes Marsan, Thewlis and Chaplin combined.The problem isn't the locations, or how true to life they are. I livedin London for a long time, and I've rarely seen the city depictedbetter, all back streets and alleyways with nasty bastards lurkingaround every grubby corner. Considering the film's writer and directorWilliam Monahan is from Boston, I was worried that this might be thetourist's eye view of London, but that really isn't the case. The filmpositively drips with atmosphere, and the expletive-heavy dialoguerings true.And yet it all sits there, lifeless on the screen, a collection ofimages and characters that seem only vaguely related to one another. Itdoesn't help that the main plot - will Farrell become a propergangster, or will he end up with Keira Knightley's way-too-good-for-himactress - is hardly new. But that doesn't have to be a deal breaker,and there are plenty of interesting minor characters to pass the time.The problem is really that the film feels rushed. Those minorcharacters aren't given nearly enough time - Marsan gets three scenes,none of them remotely important to the plot, and even Anna Frieldoesn't get a lot to do. She's still better off than Stephen Graham andSanjeev Bhaskar, great actors who are cast in completely pointlessroles that could have been played by anyone. And so much of this moviefeels tacked on, from the dozen or so subplots, to Winstone's pointlessmurder of the wrong man halfway through, to the stalker, obviouslybased on Mark David Chapman, who makes several ominous appearances andis then dismissed in a single line of dialogue.If some subplots and characters are pointless, though, the ending mademe feel that way about the whole damn film. Without giving too muchaway, it's a horrible, limp lettuce of an ending, with none of theresonance that the film-makers clearly thought it had achieved. That'sthe film in a nutshell - it wanted to be profound, but ended up as agiant 'so what?'

jamesbrucedarroch (2012-05-11 10:39)

Could have been so much better

Glimpses of what could have been a far better film appear at regularstages throughout what is essentially another 'Landan' crime flick.You could be forgiven for assuming the predictable plot is actually aclever ruse, with a huge twist or revelation certain to turn events ontheir head in the back end of the film. But alas, William Monahan'sdirectorial debut points you in one direction from the start, thenfollows a fairly straight line for it's 100 minutes run time.What elevates this movie from Danny Dyer fodder is the rather excitingcast of British and Irish big guns, with David Thewlis perhaps the mostinteresting character and screen presence. The likable Colin Farrel'sposh-boy cockerney accent is consistent enough not to distract, and youcertainly root for his reluctant protagonist Mitchell. Ray Winstone istypecast as the (needlessly racist) villain, and Anna Friel is perkyand trashy as Farrell's screen Sister.Ikea Knightley on the other hand, is wooden and unconvincing as the'Superstar' whom Farrell's Mitchell is hired to protect. A limitedscreen presence at the best of times, it's hard to tell if Knightley'semaciated Supermodel/Actress is supposed to look so frail or if that'sjust how Knightley turns up to work... Either way, she makes for aparticularly unattractive and unconvincing screen starlet, and when herCharlotte laments that Actresses are merely in films to make the maleheroes look good, she struggles to do even that.The under explored sub-plot regarding Mitchell and a young thugshamelessly bookends the film with a predictable climax 'borrowed'heavily from the far superior Carlito's Way, and left me for one,thinking about the far better film this so-so effort could have been.

haddesah (2012-05-11 11:47)

Great Actors.... but shocking foul language of the worst type!!

This film has some great actors... one of them Colin Farrell. Even thoI know it tried to portray the London underground as it really is...full of sleazy, foul-mouthed, cold-hearted, deeply immoral and mentallydisturbed hardened criminals... it still was too shocking to watch andlisten to. The language was so extreme in its lowest forms that weturned it off within 15-20 minutes. Every 2nd to 3rd word in everysentence was so explicit that it just completely turned us off tocontinue watching any more. And anyone who thinks this was a greatmovie must be used to this kind of bad language every day and using itthemselves too. And Keira Knightley just did not fit the character shewas playing, her very posh English accent trying hard to be coarse inher attempt at bad language was very odd indeed and laughable. Anybodywho has ever said in disgust to someone "Please STOP!!, thats TOO MUCHinformation for me!!" Then this is the advise I and my family wouldgive to anyone who finds gutter-language too much for them. Thereshould be a warning on these types of movies that the language isexplicit for those who DON'T want to hear this kind of dialogue{english form}, in their homes. Great actors.....wrong movie! Verydisappointing and a waste of our money for our evening entertainment!

arne-ziebell (2012-05-11 05:03)

Excing, moving and surprising. Great entertainment!

This is an amazing film with great acting by all, especially by ColinFerrell, and it has a very good script. The film has a fabulous slowlybuild-up suspense, at times it's moving and even funny, but these funnyscenes are all appropriate … and the ending makes a full circle to thebeginning - just perfect! I'm not a big fan of Colin Ferrell, but inthis movie – just as in "A Home at the End of the World" and"Cassandra's Dream" – he shows what a good and marvelous actor hereally is.I would be very happy to recommend this movie, and I'll give all tenstars!