Rise of the Footsoldier

I thought this was a great movie. I don't get all the bad comments. In truth this movie was based on real events, that's what makes it so great. They're trying to get across the grit and situations of the characters, attempting to make them more real rather than a stylized ideal of what they're supposed to be. If you can't appreciate the realism and would rather see mass produced soulless productions go see something else. For me it did the trick and is representative of the genre, i.e. movies based on real events. Take Ghost in the Darkness, it had a star, Val Kilmer, and a substantial budget yet failed to be a box office success. When a director, and actors are relating a story of this type you expect a rougher display and style. A refined actor would try to change the roll and make it more noble or classy than it was. I'll take unknowns, an interesting story, and a desire to make something more than a box office titan every time.

In American gangster movies the protagonist finds himself pursuing the American dream via the American existentialist capitalist nightmare . By this I mean he finds a violent purpose in a meaningless uncaring world , a purpose that usually leads to his destruction either literally or metaphorically . Brtish cinema doesn't have a long tradition of this type of movie and perhaps the closest we have in this country is the football hooligan film . Mindful of this director Julian Gilbey has made a film trying to bridge the gap between the two

Is he successful ? Yes and no . Yes to the fact that he's made a dark violent thriller but no judging by the amount of comments along the lines of " I watched this movie thinking it was a biopic on Carlton Leach only to find he disappears halfway through " What the film is not is a biopic but if proof is ever needed that crime does not pay then an audience could do a lot worse than watch RISE OF THE FOOT SOLDIER

It's certainly memorable but I mean this in a dubious way . It's certainly not pleasant and Gilbey concentrates on the gore and violence . Perhaps too much so as he introduces conspiracy theories as to why three violent gangsters are executed gangland style . Why does he do this ? Simply to show three criminals get blasted to death in the most graphic way possible . You can't get enough of seeing a naughty boy get shot in the face with a shotgun ? Good because you'll be able to see it happen at least three times from different angles . Gilbey is trying to emulate Scorsese though he's not entirely successful . That said one had hoped he'd be more prolific . After all who wants to watch British art house or period dramas all day ?

I've just seen this at the cinema, and I can't believe it's had such bad reviews. I can only think critics are offended by the subject matter, as this is a pacey, well-acted, stylishly shot exploitation movie. Yes, the central characters are unpleasant, but when did that have anything to do with the quality of the film itself? That's like saying Guernica is a bad painting as it portrays a bombing, and bombings are NOT NICE...

Seriously though, if you like hard-boiled, brutal, gripping "TOUGH GUY" cinema, you will enjoy this. The 80s/90s period detail is captured very well, with haircuts, fashions and soundtrack, and the violence doesn't let up. I was half expecting some sub-Guy Ritchie cringe-worthy thing, but it's not like that at all. The plot focus does shift from Leach to his cohorts in the film's latter half, which some viewers seem to have a problem with, but not I. ROTF barrels along and seems shorter than its near-two hour running time. Plenty of brutality, nudity, swearing and drug abuse. Sweet!

This movie could have been great. It is not in my opinion. The storyline is fragmented, the editor appears not to be able to choose between a Guy Ritchie-style of storytelling and a more straightforward one. There is a great emphasis on excessive violence, including torture. Too much so if you ask me. The characters are very shallow and stereo-typed, I would have liked to see more depth there. It is hard to identify with the main character. As a result the movie remains shallow as a whole.

The movie says it gives the spectator an inside view of the British criminal underclass, more in particular the Essex underclass. Football-hooligans, steroids, cocaine, heroine and violence, lots and lots of violence. Violence resulting from paranoia and fear in general. In this movie no-one seems to use his (or her) brain, we're looking at a bunch of animals in clothes. Like I said, there is not much of a plot and the storytelling leaves a lot to be desired.

If you're a male below 30, like gore and hardcore violence and think that's entertaining, than this is a movie for you. If you're looking for a movie portraying real people with a well developed storyline, suspense and depth, well... you can skip this one.

I'm always wary of saying that a film is excellent after only seeing it once, but me and my wife and friends have been talking about this film since we watched it.

Although extremely brutal in places this movie is one of the best British gangster titles i have seen in years now.

The story is gripping and the football firm fighting scenes although perhaps a little over the top with the blood make sorry titles like green street and football factories seem like a walk in the park.

I was extremely impressed with Terry Stone (known to those who have been in the rave scene as terry turbo) and as a fan of this genre was delighted to see some great bad boy actors from eastenders (jonny allen and dan for those who know).

A great take on a subject that has certainly been done before, but it was also nice to see the early rave scene being covered as well, something i'm sure as time goes by we will see a lot more of.

All in all if you are a fan of the genre i have little doubt you will enjoy this movie.

I have a feeling once it is released on DVD this will become a cult movie. And rightly so.