Rag Tale

Set during the momentous U.S. election week of 2004, this satirical story follows the editor of The Rag (Graves) – a London newspaper - as he embarks upon an affair with the Chairman's wife (Leigh) and follows him as he tries to save his job over the course of the week.

With subtle side-swipes at the establishment, this film delves into the seedy underworld of tabloid journalism. Improvised performances from an established ensemble cast helps RAG TALE create a realistic world inhabited by ruthless, back-stabbing hacks, intent on their own advancement.

The frantic pace of a news room is conveyed by the editing style, which features many more cuts than usual, and with hardly a still moment, the camera flits effortlessly between HD and mini-DV, creating the type of realism you would associate with a fly-on-the-wall documentary. The stunning visuals of the film are complimented by an energetic score and exploratory sound-design. This is heightened by the improvised dialogue and sense of inter-character relationships that build from the start to their shocking conclusion.

More cutting and experimental than television shows which attempt to cover similar ground, RAG TALE convinces us that what we read in the newspapers is very often manufactured by an elite group of people who care more about themselves than correctly reporting the news.

A film for the younger audience, this is one that will leave you thinking.

This had to be turned off after about 15 minutes. It is easily the worst shot thing ever. If you want a masterclass in generation tension without moving the camera, check out The Collingswood Story. If you want a masterclass in HOW NOT TO MAKE A FILM, watch this sh*t. Rupert Graves is pathetic as some sort of Pier Morgan character - about as intimidating as a dead moth. Truly poor, feeble effort. The director should be shot, and so should everyone else involved for not telling her this was a bad style to adopt. I purchased this dung from Blockbutser for 1.99. It wasn't worth 0.01p. You want to see this sort of thing done well - improvised script, floating camera, and so on - see Festival or One for the Road. This joins Confetti in the 'bin' list. Get lost, the lot of you

There is hardly a shot in this film that lasts longer than 2 seconds. MTV style plus plus. A formal choice made to stress the hectic and crazy world of tabloid journalism. The cast is good, but when people get so much visually fragmented and reduced to mere short visual and aural stimuli it's difficult to care at all for them. Foul language is omnipresent and the ending is ludicrous. At least some of the film is funny as absurd headlines for tomorrow's edition of the "Rag" are discussed and a battle for power and control between the chief editor and management breaks out. A big headache is more likely what you take home from this experience than insight, concernment or merely a good time. Textbook example of style over substance.

Here is an all star UK, USA cast all at sea with a great fun idea ruined due to the fact that the camera can't keep still and a director who does not rely on a witty script and the good actors she has.The other problem is that films that deal with that days new's forget that very shortly afterwards or in my case 5 years later, it was bought in a boot sale, very few will remember any of the names and news of that time. A subplot of the editor screwing the chairman's wife is fun but does not go anywhere so one is left with very little. This, despite it's star cast, failed to do any box office here in the UK and most of it would be lost on a USA audience. An all round sad flop that could of been really fun.

It's sad that directors with no talent use odd cinematographic techniques in an attempt to disguise the film's inadequacies. What's worse though, is the stupid sheep-like gullibility of some of the viewing public who interpret such "novelty" as daring and mold-breaking. Mary McGuckian is plainly a person devoid of talent, vision or taste. Do I hear you say "But it's refreshing to see a director explore new ideas"? Yes, it is refreshing but this no-talent director has simply exhibited pretension and stupidity - any fool can do that. Mary McGuckian is not going to be part of cinema's future. - She'll just slink into the shadows of obscurity and those few who remember her so-called efforts will regard the experience with revulsion. I would have rather been able to sum up Rag Tale as MINUS 10 but 1 out of 10 was the lowest I could award. 1 out of 10 is clearly undeserved praise and might (horror of horrors) encourage this egregious blight on cinema to direct another movie. - I (as I'm sure most other people will) shudder at the thought.

Somehow, I imagine this breathtakingly inadequate director could even mess up sweeping the streets, so I won't suggest she takes this up as a profession. - If she did, walking around her home town would be a whole lot harder than it is now.

Ed Wood's movies were so mind-bogglingly superior (even at their worst) to this woman's pathetic offerings that I feel embarrassed at those who awarded Ed Wood the soubriquet as "worst director ever". At least we could watch his films and laugh at how amateurish they were. In Mary McGuckian's case, we can't even do that. There's nothing in Rag Tale to raise a smile - not even a smile of poignant sadness. What in heaven's name was the producer thinking about to allow this claptrap to be released? He should be jailed for inflicting cruel and unusual punishment on the audience. Don't watch this film within 5 hours of eating food - it'll come right back in your lap.