DJMonline

...and I don't like football, I just don't get the passion for the game and the devotion to it so I watched this as it is from a true fans viewpoint. It hasn't changed my mind about what I think about football but I was still captivated by those interviewed and why they feel how they do about the game and their club. This is a quality documentary, the fans we follow give true insight that is rarely explored but includes players, owners, managers to give a variety of perspectives. The direction and handling of the narrative is skillful in this directors hand to a quality we see from leaders in the field like Kevin McDonald. Regardless of whether you like, love or don't care about the game of football I highly recommend viewing this; it's what a documentary should be, a document of a time, place and events that people can view decades from now and see how things were even if the subject has a limited appeal or audience.

I was intrigued to watch this film due to some of the cast members and though the synopsis sounded average and the title has the too often used construction these days (the "i") I went into watching this with a positive view. However I quickly saw dull stereotype characters with mediocre dialogue acted by people that should know how to do better. It became blatantly obvious from the first 5 minutes who the "bad person" was going to be (amongst other tired virtues) as it was a completely superfluous character with too much screen time along with the poor attempt at "misdirection dialogue" from the other characters. Poorattempt at the genre which made it very disappointing to sit through.

It wasn't great, wasn't good but wasn't that bad really. Put it this way, I wanted to watch it until the end but there just wasn't the sense of suspense that the original film delivered...yes I know that you shouldn't compare the two directly but it's difficult not too as it is a remake of the same story, times have changed and there were 3 hours to tell this version but it was still lacking, maybe it was too long? The performances are OK, not that the acting was bad as the cast were just trying to do the best what they were working with which wasn't strong enough; the characters had plenty of time to try and establish themselves but the script just didn't seem allow for that whereas in the original film (the book is always a separate issue) though there was less time you feel as though you understand who the characters are even without verbose explanations? Mikael Solomon is known to be a capable director but again, it just seems though his vision was lacking and plodded along "by the numbers", knowing it was for TV an therefore shot like it was for TV as opposed to bringing his cinematic talent that he has...would have been interesting to see how Tony or Ridley Scott would have handled it as opposed to producing? Anyway, only my 2 cents as an opinion, it's worth a watch but for me not a repeat viewing.