Charlie

This had all the makings of a classic Brit flick crime classic . The Richardsons were an infamous gang from South London who had had a reputation for torturing people via pulling their teeth out with pliers and sticking electrodes to sensitive parts of the body . Violently fierce rivals to the Krays they never really stayed in the public consciousness . The Krays were violent flamboyant homosexuals and the Richardsons weren't . This film tries to change all that

Steven Berkoff played Charlie Richardson in a previous film MCVICAR though he had a name change . The Richardsons also appeared in the 1990 biopic THE KRAYS though strangely again they had a name change to the Pelhams . You might remember the scenes they featured in because Berkoff minced around so blatantly he was camper than a row of pink tents . You can't help wondering if Berkoff done this on purpose because he was upset that a couple of pretty boy pop stars the Kemps got star billing and so decided to totally ruin the film by his performance . Considering CHARLIE stars Luke Goss one half of that bloody dreadful manufactured i5 minutes of famers undertalented pop group Bros one wonders what sort of hysterical acting atrocity Berkoff will unleash upon the suffering audience ? Believe it or not Berkoff is the least worst thing about the film

Watching Luke Goss play a violent London gangster is like watching Paterson Joseph play Adolph Hitler in DER UNTERGANG . He has all the menace of a poodle with distemper . In his defence he's not helped by the director Malcolm Needs who's so incompetent the name Special Needs would be more suitable . This alternative universe vision of England seems to be populated by parodies of " cor blimey guv " cockneys or posh people who all speak like Claude Rains in THE INVISIBLE MAN . They're all invariable camp too . Imagine a bunch of Anglican carol singers beating the living daylights out of one another while whispering the F and C words and you just begin to get the flavour of this movie and its graphic scenes of gangland violence . When you've got Mad Frankie Fraser portrayed by someone who thinks he's playing Edmund in the original series of THE BLACK ADDER something has gone wrong somewhere

Words rarely fail me . Adjectives have not yet been invented to describe this Brit crime flick . It features Leslie Grantham in a small role and one wonders if he dressed up as Captain Hook and got a little bit naughty over the internet with a tabloid journalist was to deflect attention that he appeared in this film . Let this be a warning to the rest of the human species - you misbehave , you commit murder , maiming and mutilation , you commit crimes against humanity then Malcolm Special Needs will be making a biopic on you starring next years winner of THE X FACTOR . You have been warned

The film is about Charlie Richardson and briefly talks about the Kray Twins, the inspiration for James Fox's character in Performance. Organized crime in London.

The film doesn't really offer anything we haven't seen before though. Nothing new here. There are some fairly interesting moments here and there but the producer and director seem to want to focus more on the torture scenes. These scenes are the boldest.

The rest is tired stuff we've seen in 100 other films prior to this. Be better off watching Performance. At least there is more style to that- more imagination. This is actually pretty dry.

The strengths of this movie are Luke Goss as the Charlie, and the truth, or at least believability, of the history. The film shifts back and force between Charlie's life as he tells it, and as it is portrayed by the prosecution during his trial. In one version he is respectable thief, stealing primarily from the government, and all-around nice guy. In the other he is a viscous sadist, torturing anyone who displeases him. In both versions he is charming, clever, and competent.

The movie's main weakness is the way that the story skips through small events without ever giving you the big picture. None of the other characters are developed much, and you don't see the progress of his relationships with the other gang members nor how he builds his business. Although the film is only 95 minutes long, it feels longer because it crams so many short scenes in. But because the scenes are disconnected and repetitive, it misses much of the story.

If the film was fiction, I wouldn't have enjoyed it, but as a true story it is fascinating.

I first picked up Charlie Richardsons book ' My Manor' a few years ago, and, as the review by 'Punch' said, its a fantastic read. Its extremely witty, hard hitting and sensitive at the same time with an excellent perspective on how stupidly rigid society can be. It provided an excellent insight into his life - all in all propelling me and my girlfirend to drive miles to the first cinema that cropped up in the paper that had its sneak preview.

A wasted journey? Nearly. The film contained none of Charlie's wicked sense of humour, satire and dark wit. It was structured by different characters standing up in court to speak out against Charlie, with snapshots of his life/adventures in between. Good idea in theory but it just didnt work. Luke Goss [ a good actor in my opinion] looked like a Michael Fabricant fresh from a holiday scorcher in Gran Canaria with that daft haircut and perma-tan. His shirts were even worse. No favours done.

What really dampened its attempt at portraying a genuine South London snapshot of 60's gangland was the accents of the actors. Dick Van Dyke's chimney sweep would have been mortified to hear the 'cockney' accents, which sounded more like your average citizen from Sydney, Australia. They were just trying far too hard.

There were a few flashes of quality, for example the scene where train robber to be Charlie Wilson arrives at the scrap yard to pepper their office with shotgun pellets. Charlie and his brother Eddie are in hysterics [ and i mean laughing not crying] in the office, and hide Wilson from the police who arrive at the scrap yard after hearing the racket.

See it if you must, but i recommend the book. Save the petrol.

In the 60's, London was ruled by two gangs: The Krays...and The Richardsons....Lead by the notorious Charlie. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.........After watching the lastest London gangster film I looked at my watch & said to myself "What a waste of 90 mins". This film really is poor, poor in every way, acting, script, direction, everything, This is the first film by Malcolm Needs that I have seen (I know he's only made two) & I hope it's my last, I was squirming in my seat at every word, what is it with British gangster movies, we just can't do it, When you watch the Americans do it you believe it, you believe the nutters in those films would stab you in the neck with a pen just for the fun of it. This film is "A True Story", will I don't care how true it is, it's rubbish. Malcolm Needs to go back to Film School or Malcolm Needs a head transplant, I Needs a drink !!.