Four

I probably shouldn't have watched this. I'd skimmed through some of the bad reviews but thought maybe it would still be OK. After all, I'm a sucker for a four-hander play, set in one location. Anyway, as you can guess from the title of this review, I should have heeded the message. It is a poor film. Funnily enough it seems clear that the makers have genuinely tried hard to make something good. It just isn't.

The dialogue is poor and unrealistic, the writer constantly betrays his characters, scenarios are derivative and the movie just feels too contrived. In addition, although a useful premise to start with, the ending is far too weak. Less is more might have made for a more effective film. A better writer would've done too.

Having not heard a great deal about this movie I assumed that it would be passable at best. WRONG. It's a thoroughly entertaining and tightly made piece, with tight directorial pace and sharp dialogue. It is undeniably and unashamedly a film made on a lower budget than Hollywood fare but this is to the films credit rather than it's detriment. A lack of extraneous whistles and bells leaves a script which is economic and witty, delivered very competently by the cast. The location (which incidentally is beautifully lit)acts as the fifth member of this ensemble cast. The direction is stylish without being intrusive. There are a couple of lines of Dialogue I found clumsy but they are few and far between and given the nature of a dialogue and character driven piece not entirely unexpected. Bottom line, It is defiantly a film worth a look.

Possibly the best low budget film I have seen to date. The director uses the desolate location and some amazing acting talent to bring to life a clever, intricate and often funny script. The language is shocking, as is the level of violence, but this created for me an almost morbid, edge of seat fascination, wondering what would come next. The ending was unexpected and not for the faint hearted! Interestingly, it was difficult to like any of the four characters, and the audience were left knowing little more about them than we did at the start of the film. Definitely a film to watch, perhaps more than once to really appreciate the subtle inferences of the script and direction.

Some good things about this. The production design, the directing, the acting from most of the cast. The general movement of the story is interesting and compelling, but some detail in the dialog is clumsy and comes across as not clever and a bit cliché. On paper it may work, but the film has been ruined by one miscast actor. This actor in the business man. He may be a fine actor for a different script, but here he delivers the lines in a very unbelievable way. He has not crafted a character who we can connect with because his characters personality is never nailed. They needed a different actor to play this main protagonist. Unfortunately he is the weakest link when he is supposed to be the strongest. It might not be his fault. It is likely a casting and/or directing issue. He may be very good in other scripts.

So film makers out there, take this as a lesson - casting is the next most important thing after script - without question.

Although this film has a very theatrical feel and could, perhaps, be better performed on a stage, it has a script full of very black humour and some very strong language. At times the script mocks itself as four people go through a tangled web of deception and counter deception. It is a film for which you need to have an open mind right from the "go" or otherwise you'll miss its razor sharp patches of dialogue delivered by a cracking cast (especially Pertwee).

The action is largely confined to an appropriately dark, derelict and isolated warehouse and is very script driven. There is much violence but it is, thankfully, never overdone. It doesn't need to be for the faces of the actors tell us all we need to know, and that is why I cannot believe the low score this film has accumulated. I just think cinema audiences have never much liked stagy films as many directors have found to their cost no matter how good the material has been.

Although much of the writing is first class there are some patchy moments and it is arguable that one or two scenes didn't quite add what they were supposed to give to the drama. Put another way they were wasted because of a lack of sharpness.

But this is much better than three or four out of ten, and is certainly much better than a whole series of some crime capers.