The Red Riding Trilogy: 1983

And finally the loose ends are tied up in the last part of the acclaimed RED RIDING trilogy. This time around, a low-rent lawyer and a cop with a conscience combine forces to expose the child killer who has been eluding police from the very beginning.

I'm a sucker for a happy ending and this film gives us one - well, sort of one. I found the story punchier and although events become even darker - and more shocking, if that's even possible - there is hope, finally, in the full-on powerhouse ending.

What a coup in casting Mark Addy as the sympathetic lead (he's usually typecast as lovable rolly-polly types since THE FULL MONTY back in the day)! David Morrissey is given a chance to shine, too, putting memories of BASIC INSTINCT 2 into the distant past. The series definitely ends on a high and it's nice to have some closure after everything that happened.

In two words, brutal and disturbing. But also complex, adult, respecting the viewer who wants more than a linear tale with loose ends all strung up very neatly; its a close-up of a society in decay, of a police force that fails to have a moral compass, of some dark perversions lurking where one least expects to find them. The performances are uniformly excellent, and each of the tales, separated by a few years, showcase a specific individual into whose motivations and feelings we are allowed access: a journalist, a federal investigator, a local policeman. Be warned that there are graphic scenes of torture, that often a clue dropped in Part 1 is not picked up until Part 3, that character motivations, like those of our own, are not always crystal clear. There are 300 minutes of intensity, filmed with immediacy if not always clarity, and worth an immersion for the willing viewer.

The seemingly untouchable, corrupt West Yorkshire police, and the true evil mastermind behind the child abductions and murders of the last 14 years, can't resist doing it again. "Red Riding: 1983" sets the story that another young girl has vanished from the same area, nine years earlier. "Red Riding: 1983" cycles back to the terrible events set in motion in "Red Riding: 1974", when a series of young girls went missing and a mentally retarded man, Michael Myshkin (Mays), was wrongfully convicted for the crime. Detective Inspector Maurice Jobson (Morrissey), a regular if mostly background character in the first two films, becomes our first focal point here as a man deeply wrecked by his complicity in the Yorkshire Constabulary's general lawlessness.

In 1983, another young girl disappears, and Jobson decides to do some actual police work--and reopening several old cases his colleagues would prefer to keep closed--and sniffing around the likes of series constant Rev. Lawes (Mullan, with the omniscience and eerie stillness of a very dark angel). Simultaneously, in the trilogy's first dual narrative, another lead emerges in the form of John Piggott (Addy), a sad-sack solicitor and Yorkshire native who reluctantly agrees to file an appeal on behalf of Myshkin. Piggott marks the trilogy's most uncomplicated hero.

It may come as a surprise that the ending of "Red Riding: 1983" adds a dose of hope to its brackish main course. "Red Riding: 1983" provides a fitting conclusion to a whole that is, in some ways, greater than the sum of its parts." Red Riding" is an effective crime thriller, but it's an even more striking drama about the dark parts of the human soul and man's capacity for inhumanity. The third movie represents the middle ground between the promising-but-uneven" Red Riding: 1974" and its sequel, the shocking and haunting "Red Riding:1980." This time around, there's less in the way of a stand- alone narrative as screenwriter Tony Grisoni, working from the novel by David Peace, stitches closed various plot holes. The finale doesn't answer all of our question, but it provides a sense of closure and clears up a number of nagging questions left over from the previous two segments.

What we can take away from all of this is not just an investigation into a series of child murders. This is an in-depth character study of three (or four) main protagonists--as they slowly unfold a ring of corruption surrounding an era of a very specific locale of the UK. As things get "hairy" within each of our main characters' worlds, rather than dig deeper into the case, they instead spend three quarters of the running time of each film digging deeper into their own psych--and begin to like what they see in themselves less and less.

This third part of the mini series presents once more a different genre with this very insightful and philosophical conclusion. The movie is less darker and brutal than the first two ones and talks more about hope than desperation. The movie talks about moral, forgiveness and remorse and presents once more a few new and profound characters.

The movie has three main actors and begins with the fact that another young girl has been kidnapped nine years after the last murder.

The remorseful cop Maurice Jobson, played by the brilliant David Morissey, wants to stop the insanity and begins to question the corruption, the violence and lies within the police. He falls in love with a clairvoyant and wants to save the kidnapped girl with her while his partners try to find a scapegoat for the new crime. He realizes that he has done some mistakes in his life and wants to change. He is now looking for forgiveness, truth and justice.

The second main character is the fat and disillusioned lawyer John Piggott, played in a rather mediocre way by Mark Addy, whose father was one of the corrupt police officers that has been killed in mysterious circumstances, helps after much hesitation the mothers of the two scapegoats that are or have to go to prison for crimes they didn't commit.

The third main character is the young and homosexual BJ, brilliantly played by Robert Sheehan, who has escaped from Torkshire and travels around the country to come back for a last act of vengeance.

All those three characters come together in a grand finale. But before this conclusion, the story meanders back and forth through space and time and creates connections to the first two movies and even new connections beyond that. Those scenes help to create once more some very diversified and profound characters but it is sometimes difficult to follow this pattern and to understand what is happening right now or in the past. There are many flashbacks and changes of space and time in the movie and that makes it less dynamical and intense to watch than the first two ones. The strong point of the movie are the interesting characters and the fact that many points are explained and many questions are answered to that haven't been before.

But I still felt disappointed about the conclusion. It seems too simple to me and I would have liked to have some more original explications, for example concerning the connection of the businessman Dawson to the murders.

Because of the conclusion and less intense atmosphere, this third part is the weakest one of the series in my opinion. But I still gave seven stars because of the interesting characters and the fact that almost everything is explained in the conclusion of the movie. The philosophical style of this movie is very interesting but I preferred the drama style of the second or the first movie that was a great film noir and my favourite part of the series.

All in all, this trilogy is interesting to watch and really presents three different kinds of a movie and creates connections in between them in an interesting way. Artistically, those series are really well done and most of the actors did an amazing job. But there is a lack of suspense in this slow paced series and the criminal investigations are rather boring. It was a good idea to watch the series, but honestly, I wouldn't but it or watch it again for a while.

1974: 7,5 stars 1980: 7 to 7,5 stars 1983: 7 stars

(The following review is a follow-up on the reviews written for Julian Jarrold's "Red Riding: 1974" and James Marsh's "Red Riding: 1980"; for further info on the Red Riding trilogy and content related to the series' continuity, read the other reviews before this one.) The excellent Red Riding trilogy has finally come to a close...and it went out with quite a bang! Anand Tucker helms the final film, "Red Riding: In the Year of Our Lord 1983" and does a pitch-perfect job of joining the two previous films, solving up most of the enigmas that had been ignored, and closing the circle. Tucker is a master at his characters' catharses and at carefully observing and commenting on the infinitely heartbreaking human characteristics of revenge, redemption and atonement. Tucker concludes Jarrold and Marsh's films in this way: he extracts Jarrold's poignancy from "1974" and Marsh's intelligence from "1980", mixes them and adds his own masterful touch while tying the loose ends of each film's plots. The result is, as I've said before, an excellent closure to this harrowing series and a very satisfying finale.

The film returns to 1974, and the opening scene shows us the corrupt and darkly evil group of villains we've already come to know assembled in a country estate, including Harold Angus (Jim Carter), the seedy police superintendent, and Maurice Jobson (David Morrissey), the mysteriously cryptic and detached crime investigator. The child murders we saw in the first film are only just being discovered by the police, and their shady dealings with John Dawson (Sean Bean) are beginning to be discussed. Then the film shifts us to the year 1983, where attorney John Piggott (Mark Addy) is being commissioned to appeal for the killer of the three girls, whom his family believes to be innocent (and secretly, so do we).

The film dangerously shifts between 1974 and 1983 without letting the viewer know. At first we're confused to see so many characters who're supposed to be dead already involved in present-time events, but as the film goes along it is all explained. Tucker is interested not in the chronology of events or making sense out of the twisted plot...after all, what sense can ever be extracted from such base crime and corruption? We eventually manage to sort the plot out, and by then we just KNOW that no matter whether the events make sense or not, the depravity and evil behind it all can never explain itself to our consciences. Tucker digs deeper into the Yorkshire murders than Jarrold and Marsh could because he can play with all of the characters from the previous two films, giving us everybody's side of the story, everyone's point of view and every person's true face (as opposed to the mask they've been painting all along). And the new character (Piggott, the attorney) who we've only come to know is such an ambiguous, flawed and relatable character that (even through his weak points) he becomes the most human character of the film. Piggott leads the investigation taking place in 1983 and Maurice Jobson leads a covert investigation back in 1974 parallel to Eddy Dunford's (but obviously laden with a corrupt agenda).

Once again, the film builds a steady tension that reaches unbearable heights as each minute passes on, as as the answers to all the questions we had are revealed to us, we can't help but lift our hands to our mouths and stare open-eyed at the horror behind the truth. The first two films dealt with one person trying to expose the guilty murderers and crime lords; this film is about the murderers and members of the Force seeing how they can cover up their footprints, how they can redeem themselves from tainted consciences, and how they can go on living while internal disagreements arise. And Anand Tucker, who has shown us with films like "Hilary and Jackie" and "Shopgirl" that he's a master at exploiting guilt and internal conflict, makes the most of his characters and blows them up from the inside out.

I can't say anything about the ending without spoiling everything for you, but I WILL say that the series couldn't have ended better. I saw these films on DVD, in the comfort of my bedroom, and as soon as "1983" was over I felt like jumping to my feet and clapping my heart out. I'll never tire of repeating this: I am amazed! Overwhelmed, really.

I've recently heard that Ridley Scott's been taken into consideration to direct an American film which joins this trilogy into one full-length feature. That is just ridiculous. These three films put together amount to over FOUR hours and a half, and not a minute is wasted in any of them. Trying to summarizing this will take out the POINT of it all, and is sure to be a flop (after all, there's a reason why the British made this into a trilogy). I seriously recommend you see this before the USA releases its own reduced version. This is as good as trilogies are ever gonna get. Rating: 3 stars and a half out of 4!