Bonded by Blood

Im not understanding all the bad reviews here. I think to watch this movie for a start you need to have the acquired taste of east-end London cockney slang and gangster culture (drugs, sex and a lot of the word c**t) I was sceptical about this one... i kind of gave up with anything Tamar Hassan is in due to the disappointing movie releases he has had since The Business by Nick Love. I watched the likes of city Rats for example and was shocked he would take part in such a crap movie after the success of the Business. I feel like Tamar Hassan has been trying to get that 'right movie' of the cockney gangster that works well and has failed until this one! I saw this on Netflix so on a rainy day gave it a go with super low expectations expecting to turn off by the quarter way through mark. I was wrong, i was hooked on this one. Had a good few laughs at the raging scenes which are full of colourful language and i thought the storyline was enough to keep me watching. Stunned at all the bad reviews on here.

How many times will low budget tales about these Essex lads need to be told. The film made no effort to show anything other than the tough guy 'gangster' side of Tucker or Tate. They were thoroughly unlikeable, and whilst Hassan gives a decent performance, I still couldn't care less about the fate of his gobby bully. Stone, meanwhile fares less well. Not sure what this guys background is, but he's not a very convincing tough guy. I think he has a slight speech impediment which may have been a character choice, but it didn't seem right for the part. I didn't believe him at all, and he only really seems to have one emotion. Angry swearing. The direction is competent without ever being very imaginative, and the film does seem to have been put together quite well, zipping along at a good old pace. It's not a terrible film, it's just not really very interesting. It's been done better, many times, before. There is a very clear market for these films, and I guess whilst this obsession with cockney geezers remains we can expect more offerings like this one. Shame.

Didn't know a third film had been made about this subject but whilst stuck indoors waiting on a delivery (DHL late again) I just watched Bonded by Blood. First impressions after having just viewed the film are that it was not very good. Not totally terrible but only really worth watching if you have absolutely nothing better to do and want something to occupy your interest.

As has been picked up by one of the better revues of this film on here my main criticism is that the actor portraying Darren Nicholls (Adam Deacon) is annoying and unconvincing throughout. You spend a lot of the movie wanting to smack the petulant little fake scowl off of his face (the character not the actor) and you certainly don't empathise with him or indeed anyone else in the film.

I also concur that Craig Fairbrass's portrayal of Pat Tate was more convincing and accurate than that of Tamer Hassan. Hassan's Tate seemed too considered (albeit still a bully, steroid using f##k up) at times when the reality is he was far from that. Not a terrible performance just not as good as the one that Fairbrass did where he nailed the character in Rise of the Footsoldier.

The actresses used all seemed out of their depth if they were called upon to do more than be giggling fluff. I don't personally have a problem with that as this is a bloke's film and don't particularly want it ruined with dialogue about the wife's/girlfriends perspective. Suffice to say though the little acting that was required by any of the actresses was poor to awful. The only actress who was convincing at all was the "tart" in the nurse's outfit who was passenger in the car crash with Tate (Hassan).

I liked Neil Maskell's performance as Craig Rolfe, and this was a lot closer to reality than the one portrayed in Rise of the Footsoldier by Roland Manookian, although I don't necessarily think that was down to bad acting by Roland, just that the character was different (inaccurate?) in that script.

Terry Stone rocks up once again to play Tony Tucker and although his first attempt in Rise of the Footsoldier was a bit too cartoon this version seems a little undecided? To be fair I'm not going to criticise the fella as he is still learning his game in the acting world and how many different ways can you portray a one dimensional character like the fictionalised Tony Tucker? I'm sure the script called for more of the same but lose the wig.

Finally the Bernard O'Mahoney character played by Johnny Palmiero seemed totally miscast? It's not that it was a terrible performance by Palmiero but that it bore absolutely no resemblance to the real Bernard O'Mahoney in accent or stature. I much preferred reading Bernard O'Mahoney's books than watching this film.

I give the film 4/10. Just my opinion and I suggest you watch it yourself and make your own mind up. If you have the time spare of course.

As someone whose taste in cinema does not usually run to much violence, choice language or blood (vampires excepted); I really enjoyed this film! No mere fest of foul language, tough guys, hot chicks, dangerous drugs, big guns, oh, and a Porche for good measure - although it's all there - "Bonded by Blood" has much more going for it. Cleverly directed by Sacha Bennett, this film has excellent touches of visual humour, some very funny lines, and a number of intense performances. There is even a Shakespeare reference - but don't let that put you off! Tamer Hassan as Pat Tate, high on cocaine and drunk on machismo is superbly scary. You have to duck when he starts pumping out the expletives. Altogether a much classier offering than previous efforts in this genre.

"Bonded by Blood" is yet another movie telling the story that "Essex Boys" immortalised. Many people wondered why we needed another one (it was the third released adaptation of the story, and there are now nine).

So what sets it apart from the pack?

Not a lot, it has to be said. It's really just more of the same for a British gangster flick; this one seems to neglect the real life details to just give you all the c-words, shouting, middle aged British 'hard men' and guys contorting their faces into masks of anger. There's also the usual violence - though nothing on a par with "Rise of a Footsoldier" - and bare breasts.

What's strange about the movie is that it seems to introduce its protagonist early, and then ditches him for other guys. I'm not even sure who the protagonist of the movie is, or if it really has one. It sets you up in the first scenes to see the world through the eyes of a young guy... but then it keeps cutting to other older criminals until it leaves the young guy out, making you wonder what he's there for. It seems likely that he had more scenes, but they were removed in post production, leaving a strangely rudderless movie. The older gangster types are pretty much interchangeable.

The movie is still entertaining enough, and for fans of British gangster flicks, it will give you what you want.