My Kingdom

This film is about gangster in the mean streets of Liverpool about the ups and down of the underworld and one man who was at the top became bottom after what the family did to him. There is some nice acting northing really bloody in the film but can't understand why its an 18 and over to watched this film but anyway it had a fine cast but really felt sorry for the little boy.

I did find Sexy Beast alot better then this but My Kingdom is worth watching and mostly BRITISH GANGSTER FILMS ARE ALOT BETTER THEN AMERICAN GANGSTER FILMS

Give this film 5/10

It's a fallacy, of course, that you can't go wrong with great source material, judging by the unholy slew of variable Shakespeare knock-offs perennially cluttering cinemas. This is one of the better ones.

Legendary British director-producer Don Boyd (the man behind Scum and The Great Rock 'N' Roll Swindle), uses 'King Lear' as the premise for an uncompromising tale of family (dis)loyalties, played out against the violent backdrop of gangland Liverpool.

Following his wife's murder in a street mugging, weary crime boss Sandeman (Harris) entrusts his sizeable criminal dynasty to his three daughters - one of whom, Jo (Catherwood), flatly refuses to play ball, as the other power-crazed pair, Tracey (Pilkington) and Kath (Lombard), plot his downfall. Meanwhile, a veteran customs agent, Quick (Bell), is also doggedly on his tail, determined to send him down before they both retire.

Though not the first attempt to ground Shakespeare in such territory (1955's Joe MacBeth was a misguided attempt to transpose the Scottish Play to New York's criminal underworld), My Kingdom delivers with considerable panache. While most of the basic story elements are in place, writers Boyd and 'Guardian' journalist Davies carefully avoid a straight re-telling (many lines here being playful nods to other Shakespeare works, in any case). Instead, they employ smart, darkly funny spins - witness the siblings' competing eulogies by Karaoke to their dead mother.

The performances here, from a top-flight British and Irish cast, are exemplary. Harris, as the shattered Sandeman, proves one needn't have lived the life of a cloistered monk to produce great performances in your seventies.

I watched "My Kingdom" on Pay-per-View. Luckily, I didn't pay for it, my friend did. How anyone can like this movie is beyond me. I like Shakespeare very much, and maybe even King Lear, but "My Kingdom" sucked. I am beginning to hate gangster movie, whether they are American or British. In this one, the plot is so confusing and some of the characters I couldn't figure out either. But I don't need to ask questions about the plot or the characters because I really don't care. I don't remember much about King Lear, I saw it a long time ago and obviously, this movie is much worse. It should have never been made in the first place. Lynn Redgrave was a total waste in that role. Yeah, and for those who liked the movie... well, just shoot me.

A film found in DVD/VCR recorder I just bought. I would not have seen it otherwise. So thanks to whoever tested it with this film and left it in it.

This film is a story about a family in the criminal underworld. The terms Gangsters and Mobsters give the wrong impression, it is supposed to be inspired by King Lear after all. My wife who studied King Lear at college, found the underlying story and characters did resemble that of King Lear.

A controlling father toward the end of his life finds rebellion in the family. It is quite believable that someone as busy as he appears to have been in his life misses out on the most important things with his daughters,(love etc) and finds a chasm he did not know existed.

Events unfold and he has to set straight the dishonourable way his daughters treat him. The cold and calculating way in which this is done is what makes a "gangster" not the usual portrayal of beating up everyone who disagrees with them, but if you cross them that is a different matter. People like the Krays, were in the minority in doing this, or they would not have been so infamous.

All in all an enjoyable dark film.

Overall, I'd vote this a 7.5/10 film, if fractions were available.

I think the comments by L8Hatter (above) veer near the essential tone as to whether or not a person reading these comments might want to view the film. Nonetheless, I am rather more sympathetic than Mr/s Hatter, because I think the film is especially strong in one regard: directing.

I differ with L8Hatter re "We're supposed to believe that this tough, streetwise gang boss would be stupid enough not to see the consequences of his actions..." I believe that is an oversimplification of the presentation of a powerful figure near the end of his life not realizing how his strength and, indeed, bullying conduct of his life have kept him more than a little ignorant of the feelings of those in his own family.

While I disagree with L8Hatter's phrasing, "...the second half of the film becomes increasingly silly...", I agree that there is definite stumbling in the plot line about halfway through the third act, which is a hell of a bad place to have it.

All that said, the directing pretty much single-handedly carries the film. If one particularly enjoys that aspect of the craft, this is a should-see film. And if you haven't some powerfully better film to watch this evening, the character work, cinematography, 92% of the plot line, and definitely the superbly paced directing of action, timing and actors, mean you can make up your mind now.