Borstal

Very dull film. Terrible music. I would not recommend it .

The acting was terrible and really not sure how Patrick Kirkpatrick turned up here with an English accent as the governor set in the UK in a seventies Borstal for young offenders.

Set in 1971 this relates the story of Kris Gray who was sent to Borstal for drugs offences. This is based on the book by Gray and he also wrote the screen play. Then once he gets there he is treated badly by the nasty screws and some of the staff are forward thinking and nice.

He also has his co detainees who are again either nice to him or horrid. He though is an aspiring musician and so his 'rock star' status gains him equal numbers of admirers or haters and one of these becomes a sort of love interest.

Now the first thing that happens in this film is the 'fourth wall' is broken when Gray speaks to the camera stating that he is 'off to borstal' – like we had not worked that one out. This is done numerous times thereafter and is a case of personal preference as to whether this adds or subtracts from an artistic piece. There is also no shower scene – I mean it's the law isn't it?

The other thing is after his groundbreaking announcement we have a montage of what is going to happen to him – this is all the violent bits – and then back to mundanity. Now some of the acting is really good and some is rather poor. The sound does vary a bit but it is not disastrous. We also have a bit of wobbly cam action – and we all know this is done to try to make out the on screen action is actually better than it really is. So for me this left me non plussed – and the sound track leaves a lot to be desired too – so only go for this if you like all indie Brit films or you were in it – this is not even in the foothills of 'Scum'.

The cover of this DVD does not really provide an accurate description of the movie. Goodness knows how anyone could review anything based on a cover! I have watched this film and whilst it appears to be a tough youth prison story like 'Scum' and 'Dog Pound' it is far from that. First thing anyone interested has to get to grips with is just how low budget this is. The scenes are sparsely furnished and you often get shots of the outside of dull buildings before the interior is shown. The telephones on desks are from the 50's and not typical of the ones that the GPO provided in the late 60's and early 70's when this was supposed to be set. It is noticeable just how few extras there are in the movie and how few actors there are. The story is fairly average with a few minor moments of violence which were not very convincing. I noticed that the film was overexposed in some parts and that also made the cost factor apparent. Some of the acting was relatively decent and the plot far from full of hostility and violence is quite warm. I doubt if this would be good enough to get a showing on UK Terrestrial TV channels and looks set to be a DVD only release. All things considered the movie is a huge let down if the DVD cover and notes have been the primary buying decision.

This misses the mark on so many levels... What is it trying to be? This question is core to the films long string of misses...

As has been stated elsewhere, the actors are good, their track records on other mainstream and indie fare is widely recognised and their performances here are what makes this uneven and inconsistent film vaguely watchable.

There is so much potential material in the original story (not that it was particularly well conceived, but... ), that could have been explored and exploited... but it has been muddled into a visionless and amorphous mass...

Forth wall only works when it is juxtaposed against stark reality, consistent plot and character development.

This lacks the direction, dedication and understanding of genre necessary to make it work...