My Kingdom

Overall, I'd vote this a 7.5/10 film, if fractions were available.

I think the comments by L8Hatter (above) veer near the essential tone as to whether or not a person reading these comments might want to view the film. Nonetheless, I am rather more sympathetic than Mr/s Hatter, because I think the film is especially strong in one regard: directing.

I differ with L8Hatter re "We're supposed to believe that this tough, streetwise gang boss would be stupid enough not to see the consequences of his actions..." I believe that is an oversimplification of the presentation of a powerful figure near the end of his life not realizing how his strength and, indeed, bullying conduct of his life have kept him more than a little ignorant of the feelings of those in his own family.

While I disagree with L8Hatter's phrasing, "...the second half of the film becomes increasingly silly...", I agree that there is definite stumbling in the plot line about halfway through the third act, which is a hell of a bad place to have it.

All that said, the directing pretty much single-handedly carries the film. If one particularly enjoys that aspect of the craft, this is a should-see film. And if you haven't some powerfully better film to watch this evening, the character work, cinematography, 92% of the plot line, and definitely the superbly paced directing of action, timing and actors, mean you can make up your mind now.

I like this movie. Someone mentioned in a previous comment that they must be use to the mobsters in the US because of the demur wife etc. I disagree completely. I went to school with a few children of the Mob and they were all very low keyed people. The family of the mob are far removed from the action. My friends mothers looked like most people mothers. They don't walk around looking or acting flamboyant. They are just regular folks married to a mobster. I did not even know they were children of mobsters until YEARS later. That is how low keyed they are. That is why I like this movie. The mobsters in here are not bombastic ala Goodfella's, which is not really true to form. They have problems with their kids like everyone else. They have a life that we the public see but they have the life we don't see. But mostly only their associates see. If every mobster looked and acted the way the Goodfella's portrayed them the Mob would not exist because they would no longer be a secretly run organization. The mob thrives on secrecy and a need to look legit. Mr Harris portrays that type of modern mobster. In this movie his daughters seem to be rebelling. One runs a whore house, one is a ex pro junkie. In the US most of the mob daughters are either married or very highly educated or both. So it is unusual to have all 3 of his daughters rebel. This is a nice small movie, with a little violence. But I feel it is a more realistic portrayal of mobster then the movies we usually see in the United States. Oh one last note the guy that plays the young cop is now on The Wire playing a very ambitious politician...with a New York accent. It is strange seeing him acting in his native tongue.Actually The Wire has more then a few actors from Great Britian

It's a fallacy, of course, that you can't go wrong with great source material, judging by the unholy slew of variable Shakespeare knock-offs perennially cluttering cinemas. This is one of the better ones.

Legendary British director-producer Don Boyd (the man behind Scum and The Great Rock 'N' Roll Swindle), uses 'King Lear' as the premise for an uncompromising tale of family (dis)loyalties, played out against the violent backdrop of gangland Liverpool.

Following his wife's murder in a street mugging, weary crime boss Sandeman (Harris) entrusts his sizeable criminal dynasty to his three daughters - one of whom, Jo (Catherwood), flatly refuses to play ball, as the other power-crazed pair, Tracey (Pilkington) and Kath (Lombard), plot his downfall. Meanwhile, a veteran customs agent, Quick (Bell), is also doggedly on his tail, determined to send him down before they both retire.

Though not the first attempt to ground Shakespeare in such territory (1955's Joe MacBeth was a misguided attempt to transpose the Scottish Play to New York's criminal underworld), My Kingdom delivers with considerable panache. While most of the basic story elements are in place, writers Boyd and 'Guardian' journalist Davies carefully avoid a straight re-telling (many lines here being playful nods to other Shakespeare works, in any case). Instead, they employ smart, darkly funny spins - witness the siblings' competing eulogies by Karaoke to their dead mother.

The performances here, from a top-flight British and Irish cast, are exemplary. Harris, as the shattered Sandeman, proves one needn't have lived the life of a cloistered monk to produce great performances in your seventies.

I watched "My Kingdom" on Pay-per-View. Luckily, I didn't pay for it, my friend did. How anyone can like this movie is beyond me. I like Shakespeare very much, and maybe even King Lear, but "My Kingdom" sucked. I am beginning to hate gangster movie, whether they are American or British. In this one, the plot is so confusing and some of the characters I couldn't figure out either. But I don't need to ask questions about the plot or the characters because I really don't care. I don't remember much about King Lear, I saw it a long time ago and obviously, this movie is much worse. It should have never been made in the first place. Lynn Redgrave was a total waste in that role. Yeah, and for those who liked the movie... well, just shoot me.

Yet another film inspired by 'King Lear'; this time set in the world of drug running and violence in rundown Liverpool. This makes it as quirky a setting as Imperial Japan (Ran) or the wild West (Broken Lance) but it doesn't quite come off.

Yes, the parallels are there. Richard Harris as Sandeman gives up control of his gangster empire to his two unlikeable daughters while effectively 'banishing' the youngest; there is a character who has his eyes put out as Gloucester did ... and yet, behind this inspiration the story is thin indeed.

Beautifully shot and atmospheric in its detail of the bleak Merseyside setting, this film disappoints with largely poor acting and a cop-out ending - where we should have had fire and brimstone, we had a whimper.

Richard Harris however is excellent, as ever, in a towering performance which makes me grieve that we never got to see him play Lear for real. There are few actors who could put this complex character across (a variant on the one he played in 'Trojan Eddie', sure, but a meaty role none the less). He's let down by the script but with what he has to work with he is impressive and the one reason to see this film.