Investigação de Risco

After the brilliant ending of the first part of the trilogy, I expected a lot from this second part. In the beginning, this follow-up didn't meet my expectations but after I've had accept the new style and the new story line I began to appreciate this movie a lot.

This movie takes place six years after the ending of the first movie. Peter Hunter, played by a brilliant and insightful Paddy Considine, comes back to Yorkshire after he had investigated on the shooting scene that took place in the end of the first movie but he wasn't able to resolve the crime at that time because his wife had lost a child. A few years later, he comes now back to resolve the crimes of the Yorkshire Ripper who had killed thirteen young women. But the demons of the past are still present and Peter Hunter wants to resolve the case he had once to abandon. But as he is torn into a circle of lies, corruption and criminality, his enemies tries to stop his investigations.

The second part of the trilogy has a slow paced beginning as the first one and the connections to the end of the first part are not yet visible. Later on, there are some flashbacks and memories that explain what has happened after the tragical ending of the shooting scene and in the end of this second part, we get to know what really happened as Peter Hunter meets an eyewitness that was present during the shooting and what happened afterwards. The ending of the movie is well done even if it is a little bit too predictable.

A part of this interesting story line in relation to the first movie, this film is much more a personal drama than a suspenseful thriller. The search for the Yorkshire Ripper is not really addicting and the solution of this case is rather silly and boring. That's the main weak point of this movie as this investigation is an unsatisfying deception. They should have elaborated a little bit more on that or they should not have included this detail at all.

What is interesting about this movie is the personal drama part of it. The movie talks about love, passion and loss and Peter Hunter who lives all kind of difficult moments and uneasy emotions. The movie talks about such difficult topics like isolation or abortion and those details make this movie really authentic and emotional. Maxine Peake as Hunter's colleague and lover Helen Marshall does an outstanding and credible job as well as Bob Craven as a menacing, provoking and ugly police officer or Peter Mullan as the religious and mysterious Martin Laws. Every character is quite well developed and this is the strongest point of this movie.

All in all, this movie is a different genre than the first one. It is rather a drama than a thriller. Once you have accepted that, you will like the profound characters and the talented actors in this movie as well as the interesting connection to the first movie. What rates this movie down is the weak side story line around the Yorkshire Ripper and the fact that the second part of the trilogy has not the same intense atmosphere of a film noir as the first part that did a slightly better overall job. But still, I think that a seven star rating is acceptable for this second part, too and I recommend you to watch this follow-up.

I'm assuming you have watched "Red Riding 1974" before you watch this movie or read this review. I'm saying this, because I will talk about the first part of the trilogy as if you've seen it. So while Garfields character is "gone", we get a new main character played by Paddy Considine. And while many might know him playing comedies, he definitely is up to the task at hand here.

This one feels quite a bit different tonally then the first one. While the characters remain appalling (new ones and the known ones from part one), it still has a dark appeal to those who get involved in it. But through all that, I still felt that it wasn't as good as the first one. I thought the first one was more to the point, whereas this one tries to connect and tell a new story. Still very good and if you have seen the first one, you surely have to see this one too. And as another reviewer said, if you like movies like Zodiac (Finchers one), than you will love this one.

After the nonstop dark intensity of 1974, 1980 plays things a lot more reserved and close to the chest. Like it's predecessor, this one opens up by throwing us right in the middle of a serial murder case, led this time by Paddy Considine's Peter Hunter, and then slowly delves more into the world of corruption within the Yorkshire police force. Whereas the first film took us into this terrifying world through the eyes of a journalist, here we are right in the middle of the police, studying the corrupt within the force along with those outside of it.

Director James Marsh gives the film a sharp, stated tone that does a great job of putting us in the shoes of Hunter. We suspect everyone and everything, even those closest to him. When he's talking to fellow officers, we feel that all of them are dirty, especially the ones higher up on the ladder. The individual case for this film is the Yorkshire Ripper and the film makes a compelling race for Hunter and his team to bring this man to justice. However, the more interesting aspect of the film is when we get to see Hunter dealing with the corruption within the force.

After the climatic events that concluded 1974, we see that Hunter was the one who investigated the epic shootout and made a lot of enemies when he dug into corruption within the force. There is always this looming danger surrounding Hunter throughout and Considine plays his brave paranoia expertly. He keeps his emotions just under the surface, a very reserved protagonist to counteract Andrew Garfield's explosive one in the first feature. The film as a whole is much more subdued than 1974 and it works well.

1980 is a real slow-burner, which makes the picture slightly less compelling at the start but builds and builds into a final act that is intensely gripping. The final fifteen minutes had my heart racing like a maniac, with a powerful final twist. It's left me very hungry for more, I'm eagerly looking forward to finishing the trilogy.

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

Detective Peter Hunter (Paddy Constantine) is assigned to head a Covert investigation into the West Yorkshire Police's handling on the Yorkshire Ripper case, authorized by the Home Secretary. He handpicks two of the best associates he knows, including one he was once romantically linked with, and the investigation starts. A prostitute, seemingly another Ripper victim, puts a dramatic turn on things when Hunter learns of her history with the head of the police force years ago and this leads to a dramatic twist involving corruption, betrayal and murder.

The Yorkshire Police's handling of the Ripper enquiry was notoriously criticized at the time it was going on, and provides an interesting, if questionable, backdrop for this superior second part of the Red Riding trilogy. The only part of the series to deviate from the original story into something completely different, it's a dour and humourless affair but at least there is a clear and intelligent story to follow here, that doesn't get too lost in deep, dark monologues and moody atmosphere.

In the lead role, Constantine fits the material with a straight laced and serious demeaneur that is matched by the rest of the supporting cast. Hopefully, the relatives of the Ripper's victims didn't find it too disrespectful but this is quite possibly the most well made and gripping part of the story. ***

The second film in the Red-Riding trilogy is another haunting almost hallucinatory tale of revenge and justice. Paddy Considine is excellent as the slightly cerebral and introspective officer assigned to review the failing investigation into the Yorkshire ripper, and the whole cast give performances of a very high class. The shocking corruption of the Yorkshire police revealed in the first film now intertwines into the real life history of the ripper's crimes and the bumbling investigation which was still fixated on the (hoax) tapes and letters in a fascinating but terrifying way.

It feels like a lot of material is woven into the film which expects you to pay attention and work stuff out. Having said this I found the film easy to watch, it didn't drag at all but like many great films it requires you to think a little. I really will need to see it a second time to try and piece together all of the threads, this is dense and exciting storytelling - perhaps not for everybody but hopefully this will find the audience it deserves.

Some say that the corrupt police story is too fantastic, but we know for a fact that some people were fitted up (via beatings and falsifying/withholding evidence by the police) for major crimes during this period (Birmingham Six, Guildford Four etc.) and that some police such as the Vice squad in London were running a very lucrative protection racket in Soho with senior officers (DCS) directly involved. Without giving away the plot the story here only goes slightly further and seems 'believable enough' to me.

Although essentially produced as 'TV Movies' the first two films (and I expect the 3rd to be the same) have been of a higher standard than about 95% of film releases, I strongly urge anyone who likes intelligent crime noir to see these films if you get the chance.