hey_treacle

Lunatic is essentially like a GCSE (note: not A' Level) media or drama project and a rushed one at that. The mentioned lack of editing seems to be in place because either they couldn't be bothered or couldn't actually find a semi skilled editor. The script seems to be totally improvised and doesn't seem to have advanced beyond treatment stage. Improvisational material is famously hit and miss even when skilled actors and Directors are in charge and seeing as none of the actors have skill here.... and the director certainly has none this aspect falls totally flat on its face. Indeed The acting is of such a poor quality, as is the camera work, that you are constantly drawn to the fact that you are watching a really poor narrative. Suspension of disbelieve is never contemplated, never mind reached. At one point I wondered if this was a Brechtian approach before realizing very quickly that it was an approach borne of utter ineptitude.

The story itself is sub Nick Love Danny Dyer territory lacking any charm, in fact in comparison it makes the work of Nick Love as complex as Godard or Lars Von Trier and as technically accomplished as Kubrick. If that sounds like hyperbole I would challenge you to watch the film were it not for the fact that pernicious clichéd representations of London and Londoners like this should be ignored. The pernicious aspects of the film come to the fore trivially with a casual misogynistic approach and constant stream of swearing that eventually indicates a lack of imagination. More seriously though the 'dip' into the world of the pedophile is hackneyed and reactionary whilst at the same time hypocritical in being exploitative. the subject of pedophilia is introduced not in any organic part of the narrative but simply as a means of the writer director to stand on a soap box and preach anger, which while understandable on a base level is neither enlightening nor engaging. This is exactly the type of coverage pedophilia gets in the red top newspapers which Chris Morris lampooned so cleverly in Brass Eye.

It is a painful film to watch. Not in any engaging way about the story itself...It is literally painful to sit through. It may provide initial laughs considering some promotional material mentioned Hitchcock and Scorsese as comparisons but after ten minutes one realizes how dull Lunatic is. And therein lay the real problem, minuscule budgeted films that are downright bad can often be very amusing one time over but only if they have ambition, Lunatic has none. This is simply a cynical ploy to ride the Nick Love, Guy Ritchie Cockney bandwagon whilst also wanting to be partly a Ken Loach film. The result is a terrible unwatchable mess unfortunately. Its a shame in hindsight they didn't actually try and remake Goodfellas in London.... in fact they could have remade on Golden Pond in London. I do not jest when I say I would have likely preferred the end result. And to know this won an award from an unheard of niche festival! I genuinely have curiosity for the films which were beaten.....The mind boggles!

Review Score = 1/10

I just saw this on FilmFour (uk)and wanted to say how great it has aged. I saw the departed when it came out and thought it was good but something about the hype detracted from it. The fact that it was a remake also impinged. Looking at the deprated now though one of the first things to stand out is the quality of the cast. Great actors turning in top shelf performances bar none. It might be the last great Nicholson performance as well. Leonardo is excellent and Ray Winstone shines. The narratiive itself drives forward and is pleasingly complex - it fills up the long runing time well. There is no shortage of brilliant individual scenes either. It surely has the best bravura opening of any Scorsese film - 18 mins before a title. I realize I am frothing, I just love this film and it seems to be aging like a fine wine. I prefer it to Goodfellas for example now although that would of been unthinkable when the departed came out. One of Scorseses tighest and best films I think.

HBO again scores a success with a comedy / drama series following the life of a male prostitute. After an initial shaky start this series has warmed up to be an amusing tale with dramatic sophistication populated by well observed characters. The series manages to handle its source material well being human without being mawkish, while the quality that Alexander Payne resonates is stamped all over this series. Like Paynes work the comedy is in the subjects themselves with a fine line between tragedy and comedy being drawn. special mention here has to be given to the woman as the down trodden pimp. Fans of well written television with edgy subject matter would do well to check it out. With this new series along with the new eastbound and Down HBO continues to be head and shoulders above all other networks when it comes to artistic merit. Not perfect but Hung after six episodes is starting to hit its stride.