CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.8/10
9.3 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Un antiguo gángster reingresa en el submundo criminal después de que su hermano se suicida sospechosamente.Un antiguo gángster reingresa en el submundo criminal después de que su hermano se suicida sospechosamente.Un antiguo gángster reingresa en el submundo criminal después de que su hermano se suicida sospechosamente.
- Premios
- 1 nominación en total
Desmond Bayliss
- Cannibal
- (as Desmond Baylis)
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
This is a great movie laden with enigmatic style. A modern, gritty film noir with a powerful and restrained performance by Clive Owen. Compared to other contemporary gangster movies, this one does without cheap action and unmotivated aspects of humor. This is a film taking itself and its moviegoers seriously. The pace and rhythm of the movie and great cinematography accentuates the underlying and half hidden aspects of the script, Clive Owen's acting really proves here that less is more. This movie is indeed one of the two best crime movies to come out of Britain around the turn of the millennium, the other being, of course, "Sexy Beast". These films both combine great style, magnetic performances from the currently best British actors, compelling story lines and sense of warmth emanating from perfectly cast protagonists; Owen and Winstone, respectively.
First the locations. This is London as it has not been seen since The Long Good Friday, Brixton; Holland Park near where I live. The camera loves these locations at night, a London where only the bad guys come out. The beach at the beginning and the end of the film is Newport Sands in Pembrokeshire where I spent many childhood holidays. There is even a shot of Fishguard with the Royal Oak pub in the background.
A plot that is deceptively simple, but is it. Does the Clive Owen character really want revenge or is he out of all that now? He doesn't know and he certainly isn't going to tell the audience, we have to do the work and think, something many cinemagoers do not like doing these days. His ambivelence is shown when he goes to kill Malcolm McDowall (in his best role since Gangster No.1.).
The acting is superb and realistic especially Ken Stott as the rival gang leader who can't tell his left from right. The dialogue is often elliptical leaving us to fill in the gaps, a bit like real life. Owen fills the screen, even when not speaking, he is the smouldering heart of the film with only Charlotte Rampling his equal when both are in shot.
And thank goodness no tidy endings. I am sure this will go down well in the states who had to show us how good Croupier was. I think its on in about five cinemas in the UK.
A plot that is deceptively simple, but is it. Does the Clive Owen character really want revenge or is he out of all that now? He doesn't know and he certainly isn't going to tell the audience, we have to do the work and think, something many cinemagoers do not like doing these days. His ambivelence is shown when he goes to kill Malcolm McDowall (in his best role since Gangster No.1.).
The acting is superb and realistic especially Ken Stott as the rival gang leader who can't tell his left from right. The dialogue is often elliptical leaving us to fill in the gaps, a bit like real life. Owen fills the screen, even when not speaking, he is the smouldering heart of the film with only Charlotte Rampling his equal when both are in shot.
And thank goodness no tidy endings. I am sure this will go down well in the states who had to show us how good Croupier was. I think its on in about five cinemas in the UK.
Mood, texture and ambiguity in a British crime thriller? You better believe it. ISWID is no conventional revenge thriller. Mike Hodges, whose Get Carter is something of a gold standard for this kind of thing, subverts auidence expectations by producing a similar setup (a ganster related death, the vengeful brother returning to the city to find out what happened) and then proceeding to wrongfoot them by concentrating on the psychological fallout from crime rather than screen violence or genre cliches.
A moody Clive Owen plays Will Graham, a former London gangster who became so full of loathing for his life of murder and criminality that he has rejected it totally having moved away and left behind the trappings of organised crime. 3 years on he leads a reclusive, hermit like existence, surviving on odd jobs and living in the back of a van. When his younger brother Davy is raped by local hood Malcolm McDowell, he kills himself, an event that serves as the catalyst for Will's return to his former life as he attempts to find those responsible but perhaps more importantly why they did it.
This is a dark, thoughtful piece, less concerned with the usual revenge thriller trajectory than the psychological underpinnings of it's subject matter. It's unusual for this type of film to stop and reflect on events rather than just skip to the inevitable confrontation but Hodges pulls it off not least because his London backdrop is a sinister place where social and moral breakdown are continually in the background. The city has a contaminating effect from which Owen has tried to flee. Crime dehumanises everyone here, both victim and gangster. Much of the movie is about Owen's character attempting to resist a return to his former self but as he learns more about his brother's final hours the guard slips and over the course of the film he gradually transforms back to the killer he once was, culminating in a physical and material change toward the end of the film.
It's not a movie that gives you all the answers nor it does it give you everything you expect. You never find out what single event, if any, caused Owen to leave London so you're left to share in the confusion of those around him. It's also unclear what McDowell's relationship is to Rhys Meyers but this simply adds to the sense of unease. In every scene omission suggests hidden layers which force you maintain distance from the characters, making you a less emotion but more thoughtful observer. It could be anticlimatic for those expecting an orgy of bloody revenge, but Hodges would undermine the disguist registered by Owen's character for his violent past by indulging the voyeuristic demands of the audience to witness that violence. The film cuts away from it and introspectively explores its aftermath, not to mention its occasionally tragic inevitablility. Ambiguity is the watchword here because, Hodges suggests, you can't necessarily trust everything you see and hear. "Memories can deceive" Owen's voiceover tells us in the scene that bookends the film, and as everything that follows the introduction is effectively a flashback, we have to consider the possibility that certain scenes are misleading. The focus of the film intially seems to be the rape of Will's brother but this is the hook upon which Hodge's probes the lure and ultimately the consequence of crime. It won't be to everyone's taste but ISWID will have you scrutinising the detail long after you've left the cinema, something which can't be said for too many crime thillers these days.
An unsettling, thought provoking film. Recommended.
A moody Clive Owen plays Will Graham, a former London gangster who became so full of loathing for his life of murder and criminality that he has rejected it totally having moved away and left behind the trappings of organised crime. 3 years on he leads a reclusive, hermit like existence, surviving on odd jobs and living in the back of a van. When his younger brother Davy is raped by local hood Malcolm McDowell, he kills himself, an event that serves as the catalyst for Will's return to his former life as he attempts to find those responsible but perhaps more importantly why they did it.
This is a dark, thoughtful piece, less concerned with the usual revenge thriller trajectory than the psychological underpinnings of it's subject matter. It's unusual for this type of film to stop and reflect on events rather than just skip to the inevitable confrontation but Hodges pulls it off not least because his London backdrop is a sinister place where social and moral breakdown are continually in the background. The city has a contaminating effect from which Owen has tried to flee. Crime dehumanises everyone here, both victim and gangster. Much of the movie is about Owen's character attempting to resist a return to his former self but as he learns more about his brother's final hours the guard slips and over the course of the film he gradually transforms back to the killer he once was, culminating in a physical and material change toward the end of the film.
It's not a movie that gives you all the answers nor it does it give you everything you expect. You never find out what single event, if any, caused Owen to leave London so you're left to share in the confusion of those around him. It's also unclear what McDowell's relationship is to Rhys Meyers but this simply adds to the sense of unease. In every scene omission suggests hidden layers which force you maintain distance from the characters, making you a less emotion but more thoughtful observer. It could be anticlimatic for those expecting an orgy of bloody revenge, but Hodges would undermine the disguist registered by Owen's character for his violent past by indulging the voyeuristic demands of the audience to witness that violence. The film cuts away from it and introspectively explores its aftermath, not to mention its occasionally tragic inevitablility. Ambiguity is the watchword here because, Hodges suggests, you can't necessarily trust everything you see and hear. "Memories can deceive" Owen's voiceover tells us in the scene that bookends the film, and as everything that follows the introduction is effectively a flashback, we have to consider the possibility that certain scenes are misleading. The focus of the film intially seems to be the rape of Will's brother but this is the hook upon which Hodge's probes the lure and ultimately the consequence of crime. It won't be to everyone's taste but ISWID will have you scrutinising the detail long after you've left the cinema, something which can't be said for too many crime thillers these days.
An unsettling, thought provoking film. Recommended.
You'll sleep while it's on
As you might guess, I'm not Clive Owen's biggest fan, having suffered through his woodenly monotonous performances, but I forced myself to see this because Mike Hodges has made some good films in the past (as well as cack like MORONS FROM OUTER SPACE). Sadly, this manages to be even worse than MORONS, a numbingly tedious movie where the semi-comatose leads are at least three hours behind the audience in guessing the plot. The shock revelation was obvious from the start and Hodges never makes you interested in getting there. He's not helped by his cast. They're either overacting like McDowell or Meyers or totally incapable of showing signs of life, like Rampling and Owen. Even before it was invented Rampling has always looked like she's had too much botox, but inexperienced filmgoers might think she'd OD'd here she's so stiff. Her expression doesn't change from its deathmask once. Owen is more hopeless than usual, shuffling through like a zombie from a cheap George Romero ripoff. He still can't act and his vocal performance is still like a bored photocopier salesman demonstrating some clapped out machine with one eye on the clock for the pub's opening.
Contrary to other posters, it's not thoughtful or atmospheric. The plot is obvious, the characters infantile. There's no depth, no ideas, just a dragging running time to fill out. And it is achingly slow in the doing it. From a first-timer this picture would have been laughed out of the office at script stage it's so empty and predictable.
British audiences shunned the film (as they did CROUPIER) but Americans might just mistake his accent for a performance. But for the rest of us, it's another pitiful performance in the dullest British gangster film of the past twenty years. That's quite an achievement, but it's the film's only one.
If you really want to see a good new British revenge movie, check out Dead Man's Shoes instead - that really is the business. This is just a photocopy of a photocopy.
As you might guess, I'm not Clive Owen's biggest fan, having suffered through his woodenly monotonous performances, but I forced myself to see this because Mike Hodges has made some good films in the past (as well as cack like MORONS FROM OUTER SPACE). Sadly, this manages to be even worse than MORONS, a numbingly tedious movie where the semi-comatose leads are at least three hours behind the audience in guessing the plot. The shock revelation was obvious from the start and Hodges never makes you interested in getting there. He's not helped by his cast. They're either overacting like McDowell or Meyers or totally incapable of showing signs of life, like Rampling and Owen. Even before it was invented Rampling has always looked like she's had too much botox, but inexperienced filmgoers might think she'd OD'd here she's so stiff. Her expression doesn't change from its deathmask once. Owen is more hopeless than usual, shuffling through like a zombie from a cheap George Romero ripoff. He still can't act and his vocal performance is still like a bored photocopier salesman demonstrating some clapped out machine with one eye on the clock for the pub's opening.
Contrary to other posters, it's not thoughtful or atmospheric. The plot is obvious, the characters infantile. There's no depth, no ideas, just a dragging running time to fill out. And it is achingly slow in the doing it. From a first-timer this picture would have been laughed out of the office at script stage it's so empty and predictable.
British audiences shunned the film (as they did CROUPIER) but Americans might just mistake his accent for a performance. But for the rest of us, it's another pitiful performance in the dullest British gangster film of the past twenty years. That's quite an achievement, but it's the film's only one.
If you really want to see a good new British revenge movie, check out Dead Man's Shoes instead - that really is the business. This is just a photocopy of a photocopy.
This story starts with several sets of mostly low life characters in various settings and slowly shows how the characters relate. Davey(Jonathan Rhys Meyers) is the self absorbed party animal, low level drug dealer whose tragic events form the glue to tie the characters together. Will (Clive Owen) first appears as a hard working back to nature recluse, but we soon learn he is Davey's brother. We learn that this morose woodsman was some kind of crime boss. His return to deal with Davey's tragedy kicks off the pivotal events that make up the rest of the movie. What looks at first like several disjointed stories slowly starts tying together. This is not your glorified crime life like the Godfather, or the Sopranos. This story is not about action, it's about how criminals think and feel and act based on those thoughts and feelings. It is a dark world, full of bad choices and painful consequences. It is a somewhat complicated story like these kinds of things are in real life. There are old relationships: loves, friends, enemies that must be dealt with in a time when emotion is hard to control. If you want something fast, are looking for clear cut plots, and easily understood characters you will be disappointed. I personally like movies sometimes that are not afraid to break with clear cut formulas and don't feel compelled to explain everything in clear terms. I found the movie very intriguing. This is a movie about how characters, in this case, criminals, process tragic events. These dark characters living in this dark world had to deal with something that was especially dark to them. The story moves slowly because it is not about action, but the dark setting, the subtle effects on the characters as the story progresses and so on. In reality tragic events are often not clear cut, and the movie is real in its development of the story. I found myself feeling for the characters, albeit mostly sadness and a little pity with a little admiration, compassion, and understanding thrown in. If you enjoy film noir I think you might like this film.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe title is derived from the song by the late Warren Zevon.
- Citas
Will: Look at me. Look at what I've become. I sometimes don't talk to another living soul for fucking days, weeks. I'm always on the move. I trust no one, nothing. And it's got fuck-all to do with escape or withdrawal or fear. It's grief. For a life wasted. And now there's Davey. Another fucking wasted life. And I'm gonna find out why.
- ConexionesFeatured in O Lucky Malcolm! (2006)
- Bandas sonorasFilter
Composed by Simon Fisher-Turner (as Simon Fisher Turner) and Robin Rimbaud
Recorded by Simon Fisher-Turner (as SFT) and Scanner
Published by Mute Song Ltd and 3MV Music Publishing/Big Life Music Ltd
Courtesy of Sulphur Records
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is I'll Sleep When I'm Dead?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Fuera de control
- Locaciones de filmación
- Dark Street, Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire, Gales, Reino Unido(Will calling from phone box)
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 360,759
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 13,415
- 20 jun 2004
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 490,964
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 1h 43min(103 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta