Once Upon a Time in the Midlands

Once Upon a Time in the Midlands seems to make naming your film 'Once Upon a Time in.....' seem like a bit of a gimmick. Indeed, a year earlier Robert Rodriquez was left floundering with his over the top, epic tail of mediocrity named 'Mexico' but 'Midlands' does not make the same mistakes and nor does it ever veer too far over the line of 'big budget television drama'. However, if it doesn't veer too far over the line that's not to say it does not veer over the line at all, because it does and truth is; 'Midlands' is a pretty ordinary film.

The film can either be a big budget TV drama or a small budget film; like I said, it becomes a little too much of the former for my liking and thus fails as an engaging and intriguing tail of love, loss and family values. In fact, what it ends up as is a story that comes; sticks around and then goes again with a disappointing anticlimax and a series of scenes that remain interesting given the situation but lack any atmosphere. The story revolves around a man, named Jimmy (Carlyle), as he returns to where he once lived upon seeing a live (those things are broadcast live?) daytime chat show in order to seek out the one he loved and fathered a child with – she is Shirley (Henderson). Trouble is, times have changed and she has moved on; she's with Dek (Ifans), a well respected but somewhat eccentric mechanic. The problem is with this idea, albeit a brilliant one, is that Jimmy is shown as a far too good-a person to make us want to hate him and Dek is put across as a far too funny-a person to make us want to think he is up for the challenge; thus it is no surprise when the film meanders and wonders around in a bit of a daze.

It is true to say that the opening scene focuses on Jimmy as he lies there, lost and unhappy we feel; but he is then shown to be a bit of a lad; a bit of a criminal as he and three Glaswegian thieves steal a case of money from four clowns. Even then, we can empathise with the thief in Jimmy because the heist scene is funny and why would four clowns get out of a Ford Galaxy whilst carrying a case full of money? Whatever they did, it seems they might have deserved what they got. So, so far we have spent time with Jimmy: the film could have gone down two routes: 1; make him seem evil and give him antagonistic traits meaning that when he comes for Shirley, we will be wary of him. Or 2; do not show him at all so that the impact of this rough looking guy who has shown up wanting to be together with Shirley again is a jolt to the audience and character alike – 'Midlands' does neither, it makes Jimmy look like an ordinary guy, like a 'lad'; harmless yet humorous.

But what the film does isn't necessarily bad, just a little out of place. On the flip side; Dek, at least to me, came off as a bit of an eccentric and out of sorts guy who did not embody the traits required if he was going to be a hero of any sorts. Consequently, any scene in which he and Jimmy face off or are put in a location together should be filled with tension as a perhaps evil, Scottish criminal and an upstanding but strong hero come face to face – what we get is a misunderstood, comic Jimmy and a wimp of a hero Dek, in an office, having an anti-climatic square off. Secondly, Jimmy really could've been established as a psycho with a few scenes in which Jimmy is perhaps stalking Shirley or drawing attention to himself through anti-social and foreboding behaviour but what we get is a couple of silly scenes at his sister's house but a good scene when she tells him what's what, however that further deflates any menace about him because there and then, the 'villain' is beaten and by his own sister, too This shows us he is vulnerable.

So onto the supporting characters; the sister is Carol (Burke) who does a lot of shouting and screaming in that annoying accent Kathy Burke carries; her husband Charlie (Tomlinson) is an introduced but underdeveloped folk singer that doesn't have much to do; the girl in question the two leads are fighting for, Shirley, is a one dimensional character who speaks as if she has something stuck in her throat and just when the film's crucible gets interesting when the Glaswegians come back for Jimmy, they disappear after one failed ambush but don't worry, they're there at the end in time for a 'funny' scene on the motorway and the running joke that they steal every car they drive feels out of place. So, Once Upon a Time in the Midlands feels anti-climatic; it feels empty in its atmosphere and development of its already familiar characters and it certainly ends in a disappointing manner leaving you with a feeling of 'So, what was all that for?' When you are supposed to feel anger, suspense, joy, fear or anything else; you'll feel nothing and that is a shame as it was a good idea, just executed a little heavy-handedly.

Shane Meadows' first film, 'TwentyFour Seven', was dark, intense and arty; his second, 'A Room for Romeo Brass', is one my favourite movies, atmospheric, wildly funny and moving. But this, his third film, is not quite as brilliant, and indeed Meadows has acknowledged it as something of a wrong turn. Compared to it's predecessors, the mood is less claustrophobic, the humour a bit broader brush, and ultimately the movie is less poignant. Perhaps part of the problem is that whereas one of the highlights of Meadows' earlier films were the brilliant performances he coaxed out of largely unknown actors (Bob Hoskins was just about the only name of note in them), this film features a regular gallery of Brit-acting talent: Robert Carlyle, Kathy Burke, Ricky Tomslinson and Rhys Ifans. And while I have enjoyed movies featuring all of these actors, it's a bit hard, especially in the case of Tomlinson, to really see them in their roles, as opposed to as themselves. Sometimes, they almost seem to be performing too hard to fit into Meadows' sparsely filmed backdrops. One can also note that the cod-western theme is pursued with insufficient vigour to really define the movie. I don't want to be too harsh on the film overall, because there are still some very funny moments and excellent acting from Shirley Henderson and the young Finn Atkins. But it's certainly less ambitious than its two predecessors, which set the highest of standards by which to judge their successors.

`Once upon a time in the midlands' is the next instalment from Nottingham director Shane Meadows, indeed it concludes his `Nottingham trilogy' along with previous efforts `Twentyfourseven' and `A Room for Romeo Brass'

I saw this film at its world premier as part of Directors fortnight at Cannes, and I am glad to say that it surpassed all my expectations. It's a tale of a loner Jimmy (Robert Carlyle) who by chance manages to see his ex, Shirley (Shirley Henderson) on a television show turning down a proposal from her new boyfriend on national television, this prompts Jimmy to return to Nottingham and try to win her back, along with the Daughter (a brilliant debut from 12 year old Finn Atkins) he also left years previously. There's just a few problems for Jimmy on the way, Shirley's wimpy yet loving new bloke Dek (Rhys Ifans), Jimmys mouthy step sister and her wannabe country singer husband (Kathy Burke and Ricky Tomlinson) not forgetting his shady friends who pursue him down south after he rips them off after a strange robbery goes horribly wrong.

All members of the cast shine and its fun to see a `western' style angle being adopted – the classic tale of a loner coming into town to win back his girl, chased by villains and ready for a final confrontation with the man who his girl is now hooked up with. I hope this film gets the exposure it deserves when its released in the UK.

Firstly, let me say how much I like Shane Meadow's work (particularly 'A Room For Romeo Brass'). However 'Once Upon a Time in The Midlands' is, in my opinion, his weakest work to date. That's not to say it isn't a good film, it is, but somewhere along the line the Meadow's formula went wrong. It smacks of too much development, something Meadows complained about himself, almost as if Film Four wanted to bottle the distinctive spirit of his earlier work, mass produce it and sell it to the widest audience possible. The characters end up as caricatures and whereas previous Meadows films examined the wonderful humanity and quiet dignity inherent in everyday life this one ends up in danger of being patronising to its subjects. The title and tag line are great but I wonder if they weren't thought up before the actual story and at the expense of the film. I personally found the Western elements a little superfluous, the deluge of famous faces distracting (what on Earth are Reeves and Mortimer doing as clowns?!), and the Glasgow gangsters subplot unnecessary. Once these elements fall by the wayside however, as they do in the second half, the film settles down into telling a decent little story. The central love triangle comes to the fore and we actually begin to connect with the characters. All the performances are good but special mention must go to young Finn Atkins who is outstanding. If this is your first taste of Meadows then don't be put off, just know that there are better films in his back catelogue than this. The 2 disc DVD is worth investing in though as the extras include Shane's World and a really nice documentary on the film's promotional tour.

Respect is definitely due to Mr Meadows. He has made films about Britain that qualify as top notch cinema. He is a true artist - he portrays conflict both within and between people with his own style and bizarreness. He is making films about the people that fill British streets but do not on the whole have their own biographical art. His insistent use of everyday public and private space (the yellow brick semi, the grubby flat, the suburban street, the dilapidated bunch of in-town shops) gives his films a hyper-realistic, hallucinatory quality, like memories of childhood made flesh again.

The kaleidoscope of humour that dazzles the viewer of `A Room For Romeo Brass' or the first half of `Once upon a time.' is a gorgeous normality - a concentrated sniff of the glue that keeps working people and families together. These films know that this humour is an art form - akin to any other kind of oral culture through history, its purpose is to give its user's lives meaning, be it while fighting predators, invaders or the daily grind.

Meadows' plots are more overtly psycho-political than socio-political: the evil and darkness in his film comes from the past, from childhood. The families affected by that darkness tend to be the source of light and laughter which combats the darkness. Parents on-screen are loving and nurturing - it is orphans, or offspring of violent parents that bring this darkness from their off-screen histories to the films. This is where the dramatic power comes from - when Morrel in `Romeo Brass' alludes enigmatically to his violent father, our imaginations are left to their own devices. Similarly, though with less dramatic import, we are informed briefly in `once upon a time' that Jimmy is Carol's foster brother, and again we get that sense of how a fractured childhood creates a damaged adult.

Unfortunately Meadows cannot keep the dramatic quality up in `once upon a time' in the same way that he did to such devastating effect in `24-7' and `Romeo Brass'. The cowboy conceit that is one of the strands of amusement and pleasure in the film's first half gets strangely discarded just as it might be most effective - when Dek the cowardly geek finds his manhood. It is replaced by a strangely witless and conformist soap opera seriousness as the two dads tussle for one family. The surrealist streaks are still there (for instance Jimmy's penchant for haircuts, which I'm sure says a lot about his character) but the overall feel is that Meadows and his co-writer Paul Fraser repressed what had previously made the characters interesting in a kind of commercial dumbing-down attempt. `If Eastenders can get 19 million people watching it 3 times a week', they seem to have reasoned, `Then surely we can get some of that Ganesh magic to rub off on us'.

In the light of public indifference to Meadows' previous two glorious films, though, you have to be sympathetic to this. And it's worth watching for the first two thirds, some lovely acting (particularly by Rhys Ifans) and a kind of existential glow that I seem to get from Meadows' films and which makes him a top director in my book.