Vingança Final

This is an old master's film, in which an aged director goes back to revisit the kind of story he excelled at when young, with dubious results. A more satisfying example of this kind of nostalgia would be John Frankenheimer's "Ronin," and if you had trouble with that one, you'll hate this one.

What Mike Hodges gives us here is a great wind-up and no pitch. London at night, endless shots of almost-human cars under the street lamps, a threatening bunch of thugs who never really thump each other, it all adds up to considerably less than a whole film.

Much has been made in these reviews about the film's ambiguity. I disagree. All the characters, and I mean all, are painfully aware and articulate about their motivations. Gloomy predictions are made about inevitable conflicts that never materialize, action is either cut short or cut away from. The whole thing is like a Michael Mann thriller with all the thrills scrupulously removed. Or perhaps Hodges is trying to reclaim the genre from Guy Ritchie's jokiness.

The script for this film must really have looked threadbare on the page. The dialog is obvious and arthritic. What works is the acting, the cinematography and the director's depressed atmospherics. Clive Owen demonstrates his considerable presence in a part that is intended to be a deliberate let-down. Charlotte Rampling is fascinating as always, more so than her lines. The rest of the cast ranges from good down to OK.

But in his determination to avoid clichés, the director has also managed to avoid incident, pace and interest. So a nice wind-up, but no pitch, no runs, no hits, and some calculated, deliberate errors.

First the locations. This is London as it has not been seen since The Long Good Friday, Brixton; Holland Park near where I live. The camera loves these locations at night, a London where only the bad guys come out. The beach at the beginning and the end of the film is Newport Sands in Pembrokeshire where I spent many childhood holidays. There is even a shot of Fishguard with the Royal Oak pub in the background.

A plot that is deceptively simple, but is it. Does the Clive Owen character really want revenge or is he out of all that now? He doesn't know and he certainly isn't going to tell the audience, we have to do the work and think, something many cinemagoers do not like doing these days. His ambivelence is shown when he goes to kill Malcolm McDowall (in his best role since Gangster No.1.).

The acting is superb and realistic especially Ken Stott as the rival gang leader who can't tell his left from right. The dialogue is often elliptical leaving us to fill in the gaps, a bit like real life. Owen fills the screen, even when not speaking, he is the smouldering heart of the film with only Charlotte Rampling his equal when both are in shot.

And thank goodness no tidy endings. I am sure this will go down well in the states who had to show us how good Croupier was. I think its on in about five cinemas in the UK.

Will Graham (Clive Owen)is a former gangster boss who gave it all up out of disgust at wasting his life in crime, he now lives out of the back of a van and fleets from one anonymous job to the next, sometimes not speaking to another person for weeks on end. After losing his latest job as a forestry worker, he decides to ring his younger brother Davey (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) whom he left in London three years previous, but when he is unable to contact him, he heads for home. On arrival he finds that Davey has committed suicide, but Will is unconvinced and orders a separate independent autopsy, which reveals the shocking truth behind his death. After his success with Croupier, Hodges again returned to the crime genre, and again called on Owen as well as a host of familiar faces, not least Charlotte Rampling as the former love interest of Owen and Malcolm Mc Dowell as a car salesman with a penchant for rape. In a film that is light on dialogue, a strong acting style is required and Owen delivers in spades in a very downbeat role. Hodges even with a meagre budget manages to instill a fine sense of Noir and he manages to keep a tight grip on his actors who never resort to the histrionics that have marred other contemporary Brit Crime films. I'll Sleep When I'm Dead on the face of it has a lot in common with its directors debut, Get Carter, in that they both have their hero going home to find out what happened to their brother and the resulting revenge plot line, but they are quite different films, if anything this latest offering is even darker. Will Graham is a troubled man, coming to terms with his demons, he doesn't want to return to his former violent lifestyle, a lifestyle it must be said that is never alluded to, but the viewer is left in no doubt as fear of him is quite apparent from the faces and demeanour of other criminals who knew him. Some would argue the films ambiguous ending is a let down, I see it as a triumph, its rare to find films this brave, Hodges despite his checkered past is back on top form.

I have read through about 20 of the users comments after watching this movie earlier tonight on DVD. Most viewers seem to be rather disappointed with this film mainly because they had expectations of the film based on genre, director's and actors' previous work both of which I have seen very little before. The film had my attention from the beginning till the end and I found it very thought provoking.

Will was a gangster who had turned away from crime after a break down (indication of severe depression?). Sometimes when people get overloaded with negative emotions like guilt they can turn into the total opposite of who they once were. As Will mentioned himself : grief about a wasted life. I think this indicates guilt. He coped by turning his back to the world he knew, but also the person he loved most, his brother Davey whom he therefore was not able to help move away from the crime life.Imagine his anger but also the guilt he must have experienced to find his brother raped and having taking his own life! Another wasted life! He could have done something about that but HAD NOT because he ran away from life. In the interactions with former associates and ex-girl friend Helen he established who he had become. Also showing them that they played no role in his life anymore, emotional or otherwise. For his brother who was still important to him he was not able to do anything anymore (and unable via police) except to come up for him by discovering the reason for his death and revenging it. The only way to do that was to take on his former identity again, because the new Will could not do that. Imagine the horror that his brother was hated for behaving the way he himself had before his departure. (Of course this is never a valid reason to rape someone! Rape is hideous crime!) Charming, but cocksure and arrogant!! For Davey Will had always been his role model!!! Davey never got to know the new (more real?) Will. Instead he had lived like Will basing his self-esteem on Will's former reputation as well. Fancy the pain of discovering that! By shooting Boad he kills himself; by intensifying the guilt which had taken over his life. This was exactly as Helen predicted when she said that he was not getting out of it because he wanted to die himself! Nor Clive Owen or Charlotte Rampling acted stiffly out of incompetence, but merely because it was required for their roles of people who had died emotionally a long time ago already! I have greatly enjoyed this movie. It made me think deeply about emotions, motivations an behavior. The above is my interpretation of these, (which doesn't mean I am right).

This story starts with several sets of mostly low life characters in various settings and slowly shows how the characters relate. Davey(Jonathan Rhys Meyers) is the self absorbed party animal, low level drug dealer whose tragic events form the glue to tie the characters together. Will (Clive Owen) first appears as a hard working back to nature recluse, but we soon learn he is Davey's brother. We learn that this morose woodsman was some kind of crime boss. His return to deal with Davey's tragedy kicks off the pivotal events that make up the rest of the movie. What looks at first like several disjointed stories slowly starts tying together. This is not your glorified crime life like the Godfather, or the Sopranos. This story is not about action, it's about how criminals think and feel and act based on those thoughts and feelings. It is a dark world, full of bad choices and painful consequences. It is a somewhat complicated story like these kinds of things are in real life. There are old relationships: loves, friends, enemies that must be dealt with in a time when emotion is hard to control. If you want something fast, are looking for clear cut plots, and easily understood characters you will be disappointed. I personally like movies sometimes that are not afraid to break with clear cut formulas and don't feel compelled to explain everything in clear terms. I found the movie very intriguing. This is a movie about how characters, in this case, criminals, process tragic events. These dark characters living in this dark world had to deal with something that was especially dark to them. The story moves slowly because it is not about action, but the dark setting, the subtle effects on the characters as the story progresses and so on. In reality tragic events are often not clear cut, and the movie is real in its development of the story. I found myself feeling for the characters, albeit mostly sadness and a little pity with a little admiration, compassion, and understanding thrown in. If you enjoy film noir I think you might like this film.