Charlie

The strengths of this movie are Luke Goss as the Charlie, and the truth, or at least believability, of the history. The film shifts back and force between Charlie's life as he tells it, and as it is portrayed by the prosecution during his trial. In one version he is respectable thief, stealing primarily from the government, and all-around nice guy. In the other he is a viscous sadist, torturing anyone who displeases him. In both versions he is charming, clever, and competent.

The movie's main weakness is the way that the story skips through small events without ever giving you the big picture. None of the other characters are developed much, and you don't see the progress of his relationships with the other gang members nor how he builds his business. Although the film is only 95 minutes long, it feels longer because it crams so many short scenes in. But because the scenes are disconnected and repetitive, it misses much of the story.

If the film was fiction, I wouldn't have enjoyed it, but as a true story it is fascinating.

I first picked up Charlie Richardsons book ' My Manor' a few years ago, and, as the review by 'Punch' said, its a fantastic read. Its extremely witty, hard hitting and sensitive at the same time with an excellent perspective on how stupidly rigid society can be. It provided an excellent insight into his life - all in all propelling me and my girlfirend to drive miles to the first cinema that cropped up in the paper that had its sneak preview.

A wasted journey? Nearly. The film contained none of Charlie's wicked sense of humour, satire and dark wit. It was structured by different characters standing up in court to speak out against Charlie, with snapshots of his life/adventures in between. Good idea in theory but it just didnt work. Luke Goss [ a good actor in my opinion] looked like a Michael Fabricant fresh from a holiday scorcher in Gran Canaria with that daft haircut and perma-tan. His shirts were even worse. No favours done.

What really dampened its attempt at portraying a genuine South London snapshot of 60's gangland was the accents of the actors. Dick Van Dyke's chimney sweep would have been mortified to hear the 'cockney' accents, which sounded more like your average citizen from Sydney, Australia. They were just trying far too hard.

There were a few flashes of quality, for example the scene where train robber to be Charlie Wilson arrives at the scrap yard to pepper their office with shotgun pellets. Charlie and his brother Eddie are in hysterics [ and i mean laughing not crying] in the office, and hide Wilson from the police who arrive at the scrap yard after hearing the racket.

See it if you must, but i recommend the book. Save the petrol.

Advertised as a companion piece to the splendid "The Krays", as an historical crime thriller about the doings of the Richardson gang on the other side of the Thames. What a dull bunch. Plenty of (reduntant) gory torture scenes of rival thugs, but zilch action and suspense. Mild interest with some half-realized exposure of South Africa's Apartheid and its connection to the British mob, but it plays like a throw-away subplot. Even the director's use of great 50s/60s period music is utterly clueless -- he actually backgrounds the flashback scenes of 40s post-war childhood in urban Britain with a surfing tune! Luke Goss, in the lead role, is quite sneeringly tough, but gives a new definition to "one note". Late in the film, we're supposed to believe that he's aged about 18 years, but he still looks awfully young to me, with that gym build that he insists on showing off at every opportunity like a porn star. Like in that dream sequence where he's cut his wrists in the bathtub... couldn't believe how jarred I was with such intense character summation, and relieved to find out that it was "only a dream". Truly, films do not come worse than this one.

Luke goss shows his worth as charly Richardson the notorious south London gangster who even the krays gave a wide birth so already youve got an intriguing plot with mad frank in the mix, what can go wrong? Well its not bad! It has potential to be alot better but no spoilers its worth a watch.. yet you want a Richardson film watch gangster no1 although lossley based it's a cut above the rest.

Okay, I grew up in Bethnal Green East London and I have to say that nobody and I mean nobody sounds like that! Goss did a good job, really with what he had around him he did okay, but South Africa? What was going on? Literally you can pick the scenes that are shot there it's like they are another colour or something? Have you been to East London? It's grey, very dark and gloomy and that's in July. In this movie the sun is shining every day, it's blinding, you can feel it. Seriously guys it could have been great, really, maybe SA is cheap or something but come on, keep it real please! Nice effort I'm sure you guys all worked hard but come on you can do better than that right?