Ash Wednesday

Ash Wednesday so titled because the action takes place on that day of repentance in the Catholic faith and into Lent. Leading character Edward Burns who directed as well keeps the ash cross on his forehead until almost the end of the film. Almost as if he was looking for protection. He and brother Elijah Wood sure needed it.

They play the Sullivan brothers at one time sons of a prominent Irish mobster. Seems as though the Wood killed a pair of Italian hoodlums and their relations are looking for payback.

Burns and local priest James Handy have created a fiction that Wood is dead and spirited him out of town where he's lived in Texas for 3 years. Now Wood is back to get his wife Rosario Dawson who has thought her husband was dead, part of the plan to make the death story believable.

Burns is well out of the rackets, but in his effort to protect his brother he's being dragged back in. Wood doesn't make it easy for him either.

Ash Wednesday is a nice if cheaply made film about family loyalty and sacrifice in a working class Irish American family. Note that this is set in the early 80s when Hell's Kitchen still had some working class blocks. It's pretty yuppified now, so Brooklyn's Greenpoint neighborhood stands in. This was the same setting for the Sean Connery/Dustin Hoffman/Matthew Broderick film Family Business which was done in the late 80s and also about family as well.

The characters are well drawn with no stereotyping at all. James Handy is not a typical priest by any means. No comparison to him and Bing Crosby as Father O'Malley in another film which also was set in Hell's Kitchen when it really was Irish working class.

Burns and Wood have good chemistry as brothers. Ash Wednesday has some fine characterizations done by some talented players.

In "Ash Wednesday", Burns spins a yarn about a Hell's Kitchen bar owner with a checkered past (Burns) whose younger brother (Wood), who's supposed to be dead, has been seen in the neighborhood (duh) giving rise to inquires from all corners while igniting the plot. In typical Burns fashion, this story about low level Irish-American hoods, is a Mulligan stew of relationships and the non-stop yammering required to explain them and give them impetus. Burns keeps his story in a box, revealing a piece at a time, ostensibly to create suspense, while leaving a trail of gaping plot holes necessary to make the story work. In addition to such dents and dings as having the bro prep to leave town while conveniently leaving his wallet at home to be discovered by the bad guys (duh), Burns makes another huge mistake. The protagonists, whom we're supposed to care about otherwise there's no reason to watch, are all murders. (duh) "Ash Wednesday" is a dark, gritty shoot recommended only for fans of the principals and people into bottom of the marquee crimeland flicks. (C+)

Regardless of how you feel about gangster movies, its nice to see a new star come and and take it on his own to make the movie he wanted to make. Edward burns did that here with "Ash Wednesday". With a story-line that might be a little more interesting for catholics and Newyorkers, the movie moves along like a great story with no concern for the lead up that most big hollywood movies have to include. Its nice to a see a person leaving to go meet a character everyone in the audience thinks is going to really reveal the climax of the movie and then get swept away in the "real life like" sidetracks that run us through everyday. Without giving away any of the story here, Id like to say i applaud Burns' obvious conviction to the movie, at times it seems as if he doesnt care if the viewer is comfortable with unfolding events or not. A good suspense mob movie is supposed to do just that, like that first time you watched "Goodfellas" and went crazy when Loraine Bracco and Deniro go for that walk that she realizes will certainly end her life. "Ash Wednesday" doesn't do it as well as "Goodfellas" did but when you are digging around at the video store and cant decide whether to see "Miller's crossing" for the umpteenth time or take a chance; I say Chance AWAY!

I first watched this a number of years ago, stumbling in from the pub after a few too many, and I seem to recall rather enjoying it. As is often the case however, on re-viewing it a second time, stone cold sober, I've completely changed my mind…

First, let's talk about the good things. The photography was excellent, the direction was good, and the casting was inspired in some cases: Malachi McCourt (younger brother of Frank McCourt, of Angela's Ashes fame) as Whitey, and James Handy as the parish priest were both noteworthy, in relatively small parts, but that same casting was monumentally awful in the case of Elijah Wood… If ever an actor was born not to play his part, he is that man… This was even worse than his miscast in 'Green Street', which was so bad it was almost watchable… I thought Rosario Dawson was good in a diluted, under-used sort of way, and looked most delicious in heavy makeup (this is set in the early 80's, remember), and even the man himself, Edward Byrne was believable in places (BTW, note to others-always refer to him as 'Edward'-Ed Byrne is an Irish comedian, which when reviewing this film could get very confusing)… The only really obvious fault here was the woeful waste of Oliver Platt-if you can book talent like him, then you really should use him!..

I had no problem with the linearity of the plot-after all, the whole film takes place over less than 24 hours, so keeping it simple was probably the best thing to do-and if you watched shaking your head in disbelief at the asinine stupidity of some of the characters, watch 'State of Grace'-an infinitely better film, also set in the criminal underbelly of Hell's Kitchen, the consensus is that these are stupid people doing stupid things…

Now the bad bit-and it's simply so bad it lets down the whole film, taking it from what could have been a decent pot-boiler into a risible farce-it's the dialogue-Edward Byrne is credited as the only writer, and it soon becomes obvious that this is simply not his field. The whole film sounds like it's been written by a 12 year-old… I know these are supposed to be 'stupid Mick immigrants of different generations', but really-people (adult people) just don't talk like that!.. It's not the swearing (although God knows, there's enough of it), it's the complete lack of subtlety, double-entendres, jokes & banter-all the things that make up daily conversations… When it's missing, you really notice it… The only really believable conversations are those that Pat McNamara (the barman, Murph) has with his customers-and those may seem more realistic simply because they were ad-libbed… Michael Leydon Campbell as Jimmy Burke was funny, but his were just comments and interjections-no-one really engaged with him… The rest is just too awful for words (pun intended)… And this makes the thing difficult to watch-you'll end up shouting at the screen , losing your temper, and not enjoying the film… It's a shame, because it should have been such an easy thing to fix…

So, I'm afraid my advice is this… If you see 'Ash Wednesday' advertised in your listings, and you've never seen it-give it a go by all means, but don't say I didn't warn you-personally, I'll be watching 'State of Grace' or 'Road to Perdition' instead

This is a film about an ex mafia leader getting into trouble with gangs because his dead brother reappeared in the neighbourhood.

The film is initially boring because of poor character development. The film does not tell people what is happening very well, and only towards the middle do people get an idea what on earth was in fact happening. Elijah Wood is obviously miscast. Elijah Wood is very unconvincing as Edward Burns' younger brother, in fact he looks more like the son of Edward Burns. Looks, height, age and physique wise they are too different from each other. This makes the film a lot less credible than it should have been. Otherwise, the plot is not bad, the direction is good, and the sets are nicely done.