Passagem para o Inferno

it could only be two reasons; 1, you're here because you've seen a single, somewhat dog-eared, copy of rancid alu in your local woolworth's for the last hundred years and you're wondering if, yes, maybe you should buy it. how bad could it be? 2, secondly, you're here because you've seen it (probably on c4 the other night) and, being so utterly bewildered by the following; a, it got released. b, actors read the script and signed up. c, someone, somewhere at a studio gave it the go ahead. d, (AND MAINLY) you were thrown by a plot that made so little sense, a film so badly made and where none of the ideas (it's unjust to call these premises ideas really) made any sense or worked at all. ahem, so being so bewildered, you thought there was a deeper meaning, something you missed or didn't get that made it worthwhile. you didn't, it really was that bad.

This film is about a man's life going wrong. His business is failing, and he cannot impregnate his wife despite multiple attempts.

The plot is complete chaos. It simply does not make sense. In fact, nothing in the film makes sense. The story is so poorly told that I simply could not understand it. It is a shame, because the sets and costumes are done well, and are visually stimulating enough. The shots are well composed throughout the film. However, these redeeming features still cannot make up for the bad plot and poor story telling. I am amazed by the big names who agreed to star in this film. It is such a waste of their talents. This film is very bad. Avoid it!!

Pete Thompson's father dies and leaves him the whole business. However his friend and business accountant, Sean Deeny, reveals that the business is in major trouble with the taxman. To get past the problem Sean and Pete go into business with the Russian mafia. However Pete has other plans to get rich, while Sean just wants to have kids and have a quiet life.

In the past few years the spate of British gangster films has been very much one of copies of `Lock Stock' etc. Some of them manage to be different and clever enough to work, but many are poor copies that lack any style or substance. Unfortunately for my evening, Rancid Aluminium falls within the latter category. The plotting is very poor, it is rambling and has nothing resembling tension or gripping narrative. In essence it is a short film with all the scenes stretched out to longer than they can sustain. The end result is a loose mess of a plot that doesn't really hang together at all.

The film can't manage the style of Lock, Stock – instead it feels forced, maybe this was the director's first film – it certain feels like he is trying to impress someone with old ideas that are fresh to him. The script also fails to really bring any characters out, instead they are pretty much all flat clichés. Now, I know the same is true of those in Lock, Stock and Snatch, but at least these had some redemption by being funny and tongue in cheek at points. Here that is pretty much not the case with any of the characters. Ifans makes good effort but is hampered by the script, he is the best of a poor bunch. Fiennes is awful, no sooner had he got the perfect career springboard in `Shakespeare in Love' then he does this. His accent is awful and his overall performance is weak. Fitzgerald, Frost and Behr all just line up to be naked and have their sex scenes. It is slightly degrading to see the film be so unimaginative that it just has regular sex scenes to keep the audience interested. Berkoff and Allen are hammy and pretty pointless.

Overall this film has few if any redeeming qualities. Any it does have are because it copied it from other, better films. It is full of nonsense that the director mistook for style or modern wit. A real waste of time and effort.

Just before I saw this film, I met James Hawes at a book signing. He seemed pretty upbeat about the release of the film however reading an interview with him later he knew at the time that the film was rubbish.

An brief, Rancid Aluminium is a good book, it followed on from his debut (White Merc With Fins) which was probably the best book I have read for a long time. But when he came to make the film he rewrote the book to fit the character of Rhys Ifans which was a big mistake.

The old main character was a suburban, early 30s guy, they changed this to a twenty something urbanite and the whole premise for the story was broken.

Add to this some major twists in the plot which have no explanation, holes you could drive a truck through and and ending which leaves you thinking 'what the f**k happened there then..?'.

Also they made a major mistake adding in a scene to get the only funny bit of the book (the fight on the motorway) into the film which only seemed to disjoint the film even more.

I was a big fan of James Hawes books, but this film (and also his latest book) have really dampened this enthusiasm. I only hope that his other book (WMWF) which is being shot now continues and makes a better picture than this.

First of all, I should've known better than to go to see a film that was being flyposted around London with a recommendation from The Daily Star emblazoned at the top of it. Second of all, the only reason I went at all was because my girlfriend was in a post-Shakespeare In Love Joseph Fiennes phase.

And oh dear god it's bad. It doesn't help that it makes absolutely no sense, mainly due to some of the most jarring cuts I've ever seen outside a GCSE film project. One scene in particular threw me entirely when Rhys Ifans' character was in London one minute, being vaguely threatened by some cliched heavy, but once I'd glanced away for a second (probably checking my watch) I looked up to find that he was suddenly in Russia, being sneered at by some different cliched heavies. Elsewhere the editing is seriously misguided - several times the film lingers on pointless scenes featuring female flesh, while seemingly integral plot points are rushed through, patched together unsatisfactorily by a hammy voiceover.

Both Fiennes and Ifans - actors I rate - are quite terrible, but words can only hint at how appalling Steven Berkoff is in this film. He pretty much only says one word (several times) - "Beeeeeeeezneeeeeeesss", and every time he did I couldn't help but think that he was gradually making his villain in Rambo 3 seem like an acting tour de force.

I've never once walked out on a film before. I'm clearly too stubborn - we were the only two people that DIDN'T walk out at the screening we attended. Comfortably the worst film I have ever paid so endure.