Charlie Casanova

I like to keep an open mind when going to the cinema. I generally avoid all reviews and press relating to movies on show, depending on word of mouth and personal recommendation instead. I arrived at the cinema expecting nothing, and it dutifully delivered. It was easily the worst film I've ever had the misfortune of seeing.

The only positive I could draw from this movie is that it is mercifully short, although seemingly endless when you have to sit through it. Most people didn't bother (there were probably 20 people at the beginning of my showing and around 12 by the end). The dialogue was unintentionally hilarious at times, but mostly cringe-worthy. The acting is of an impossibly low standard. The story line is confused and forgettable. Even the movie itself looks extremely amateur. I'd imagine they were intentionally going for a dark and gritty look, but the technical expertise obviously wasn't there to pull it off.

Avoid this film at all costs.

N.B.: Aside from the disingenuous 10 star reviews of the film on this very site, the IMDb score is also massively misleading. It has the same ratio of 10* reviews as The Shawshank Redemption, IMDb's number one film of all time. If only real votes were counted, I'd say it would be in the 2 star range.

I've been a bit vocal in my urging for people to go and watch this film, purely as I feel that someone with the balls to make a movie for under a grand deserves to have their film noticed. Still, though, after finally getting to see it, I think that it could have been much more. Instead, could someone please explain to me how something so recent can feel like it has aged so terribly?

It felt dated like a late 80's TV play that may once have had something, but the years have worn away at its impact. A real shame, as with a little more care and attention, there could have been so much more power. Whilst I have nothing but admiration for McMahon's punk rock take on the "let's do the show right here" ethos, I just wish that the final result had been as powerful as his post-festival-screening campaign to divide the viewers and rile the critics.

The script had some wonderful moments, admittedly, but for my tastes came over a little stagy in places. However, despite this, Emmett Scanlan's delivery and performance were very deserving of all the accolades that have since come his way. Terry McMahon definitely has a way with actors, and gets the best out of his cast. Unfortunately his direction appears to be more towards what the cast do, and less to what we actually see in the frame. In the hands of another director, there may have been a different outcome - dialogue-heavy scripts are not always stagy, and can often provide an electric energy when combined with intense visuals (just look at the early films of Andrzej Zulawski for great examples of this). Perhaps it was due to budgetary constraints after all, but then again wasn't that one of 'Charlie Casanova's big selling points? Did adopting the punk ethic unwittingly sap it of all its punk energy?.

Maybe if the funding had come Terry's way before shooting, then this film might have delivered tenfold, with a little more time and a little more care. I've no doubt whatsoever that Terry McMahon is a great writer, and has a gift for directing actors. I'm sure that one day he will also be able to add great filmmaker to that list, and will one day make a film that delivers on all its promises. It's just a shame that this wasn't it. It could have been, and I really wish it had been...

Up to the point of me getting along to the Irish Film and Television Academy premiere of Charlie Casanova, the hype had been immense, much to the credit of Writer, Director and Producer, Terry McMahon, who kept pushing forward with his challenging, and yes, abrasive exploration of morality. Not just talking the talk of controversy for the sake if it, he has created a piece of independent, Irish cinema that we have not seen before, and will, I certainly believe, elevate to cult status for future generations to dissect, critique and quote from. And it seems, Terry's incredible gift as a writer, as well as his tenacity, is paying off. To the right of him, there is the camp of fans that love the film with such enthusiasm, that collectively, they have become a major marketing tool in spreading the word. And to the left of him, the ones who hate the film; don't get it, walk out on it, fear it, or simply can't understand what the hell this character is on about. Whatever their feelings, they are still managing to generate just as much hype!

Terry describes his film as being a fractured narrative about a fractured man with a fractured mind. His description is very appropriate, and it got me wondering as to how many of his audience would go home with fractured thoughts of their own! As a film-goer, my quest, for ninety minutes or so, is to empathize, to live vicariously through another life, to walk in their shoes as I re-imagine through the writings of another. Why then, as I settled in to watch this movie, could I not shake an annoying discomfort? I did not like Charlie from the get go, but he's a sociopath, so that's a no-brainer! And kudos to Emmet J Scanlon for his skill of transformation; from a well-heeled, over-educated, arrogant, yet strangely charismatic man, to a dangerous, viscerally ugly psychopath, and with such unrelenting realism that I truly believed the madness that was unfolding behind his eyes.

Leaving Charlie aside however, I could feel no empathy for any of the other characters. I did not like his wife, her responses to Charlie irritated me. Same for his friends, couples themselves in different forms of crisis. Why were they all so trusting of Charlie, so easily led by him? It irked me, a lot! So what the hell was I still sitting there for, in a cold, half-filled cinema, as the director said himself, for an hour and half of my life that I'll never get back? What kept me hooked? Yes, I got it, the subtext and metaphor that Terry has spoken of many times, his reflection on society, and how, as a nation, we have allowed previous governments, without accountability, to kick the shite out of us, the immorality, and amorality of the continued criminalization of the poor, the very fabric of 'family' constantly under attack, and how we, as a society, continue to allow it, with no consequences and very few raised voices. So, in the thematic knowing of the piece, why was I feeling a tad troubled, yet compelled enough to stay on for the final gut-wrenching scene? (Even if it does end with the hauntingly beautiful and pure lament of Damien Dempsey!)

The answer? FEAR…the recognition of the trait that ironically, was the reason I so disliked the characters in Charlie's life. So here's my tuppence worth of fractured thought, brought to the fore by the menace to society that is Charlie Casanova. Terry made reference to the fact that the characters in the film needed to be in their thirties, because to be older, they would have experienced the Ireland of the eighties, and therefore, they would have known too much. Through the decades of the boom, a large proportion of the current middle classes (now the hidden poor, in many cases) have come from the working classes of that decade, as indeed, did Charlie's people, so for me, the nail on the head has been truly hammered, and perhaps is where my own discomfort came from. In knowing too much from our past experiences, we can hardly bear to see it happening again. Even though it is happening. And if we cannot bear it, then we cannot face it, and so we bury the unease and carry on, minding our own and protecting what we have left with a societal and political lethargy that keeps that hammer raining down on us. And of our future, and that of our children, we blindly trust the universe, and get up each morning to salvage what hope we have left. Yes, we are fractured, as is our nation, but even in fear, it is the man and woman who get back up every day, get the kids to school and get on with their crappy paid and taxed-to-the-hilt jobs, who will keep that hope alive; but in the doing of the active citizen, the fear of change, and of fear itself, will also continue to thrive…

Footnote: I was recently at a writer's event, where Terry, in his unique delivery, and I paraphrase here, stated that some people would like his film and some wouldn't, and if they didn't, F***k them! I have to admit, the comment riled me up. If I didn't like it, then it would be right back at him.

I DID like the film, very much, so f**k you anyway, Terry!

http://carolinefarrell.wordpress.com/2011/11/

Charlie Casanova is an angry film that challenges an apathetic audience. Written in response to events more shockingly relevant than ever before, the subject matter deals with a class system and the ramifications of such a system and its inevitable misuse of power.

Using close shots to give an uncomfortably claustrophobic feel, the film follows a group of friends over the course of a weekend. Lack of a budget was no hindrance to this film; clever use of white noise in the sound design helps build tension and low lighting adds to the taut, uneasy mood. With raw and at times iconic performances and a muscular yet beautifully crafted script, this is a film that connects and resonates.

Using Brechtian technique to alienate the audience, McMahon gives us a new anti-hero in Charlie Barnum, played with force and true vitriol by Emmett Scanlan. We watch as Barnum lies and manipulates, is revered and reviled in turn by each of his companions. We see him destroyed and reborn in Donald, played with understated malevolence by Tony Murphy. Unshackled from the usual ties of empathy for a central character, given this unfettered clarity of objectivity, we are free to despise this eponymous creation; to know his form and ultimately to rise up against him and his type. "He doesn't know you but he already hates you." A fitting yet chilling tag-line to an important, unprecedented piece of filmmaking.

Hands down the best and most interesting Irish film I've ever seen,I never thought that something so completely original could be created from the emerald isle. Right from the start i was floored,i thought it was going to wain due to my preconceptions but it only got better. Charlie is the depiction of unchecked ego,something most of the planet knows by now.A deleterious sham of a human who believes that words matter more than action,that perception can be fueled to the point of plausibility no matter what the circumstance. His world comes undone but no consequence follows which seems appropriate considering how the elite need only circumvent,using language and our expectations,the question of responsibility and reflection to continue their grip on position and control. I'll refrain from waxing lyrical on this most amazing work,Watch it!!!

Ignore all other reviews,If you are interested in an original voice no matter what the medium,this is for you.