User reviews

I haven't really watched many (any?) Scottish films but I am familiar with Peter Mullan, having seen his completely depressing TYRANNOSAUR previously. NEDS is equally grim, but also uplifting. It's a film with a nostalgic '70s ambiance and an autobiographical feel, featuring the misadventures of a shy, chubby schoolboy who ends up becoming a fearsome teenage gang member.

NEDS is a lengthy, slow-paced and frequently hard-hitting movie that tackles some uncomfortable home truths. It's a little off-putting, with sometimes impenetrable dialogue from the Scots cast and a simmering undercurrent of violence that sometimes erupts on the surface. This is very much a realistic movie that tackles cause and effect without sugar-coating the answers.

I found it compelling and often heartfelt, managing to elicit pathos and humour from the grim situation. Conor McCarron delivers a quietly effective turn as the put-upon lead and Mullan himself has a strong supporting role as the frightening alcoholic father. But it's the young cast who really shine in their parts, giving performances so authentic that this feels like a documentary at times.

A good film that gives a very accurate portrayal of what life can be like for a young kid growing up in Glasgow. The film is set in the 70's but the main themes are just as applicable for youngsters in 2011 (trying to fit in, feeling like part of a group/gang).

The highlight of the film is the performance of Conor McCarron as a bright student who makes the wrong choices and finds himself part of a young gang. Peter Mullan does a good job of keeping the film at a high tempo and he avoids all the familiar clichés that are common in these types of film.

However, the last twenty minutes or so are a bit of a struggle as Mullan seems to find it difficult to find a suitable ending to the film. At just over 2 hours, it could be argued that "neds" is a tad too long. Perhaps omitting the "Jesus vision" would have been a good start.

Peter Mullan's film about Glasgow's Non-Educated Delinquents is not quite as straightforward as it may at first seem: there are some fairly common elements (the bright kid trying to learn his way out of poverty, the drunken father, the violent street gangs) but also some odd, surreal imaginative scenes, and an overall narrative that grows more opaque the longer the film lasts. It's the scenes set at school, which showcase the diversity of approaches employed by the teaching staff, that are most powerful, making the point that if your rear children as animals, animals are what you're going to get out the other end. The almost total absence of any positive virtues: humour, love, progress are all absent from the narrative; ultimately make for hard watching. Mullan himself is mesmeric in a small role, but the failure to make that role more central is just one of the film's narrative oddities; as a writer, Mullan could have done with some help to better shape his material.

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

John (Connor McCarron) excels as a child in his studies, but the rough, hard environment around him soon has an effect on his personal character and, as he grows up in 1970s Glasgow, he moulds into one of the pack, as problems at home and school breed the violent character within him, going up against the hard drinking, knife wielding thugs that are the sworn enemies of the hard drinking, knife wielding thugs he's in with.

Glasgow still holds the notorious accolade of being 'the knife crime capital of Great Britain', so this could have been just as hard hitting and unflinching as it was setting out to be being a modern day drama. Instead, director Peter Mullan has presented a sprawling, overlong if I'm brutally honest, exploration of a young man's despairing, senseless dessension into mindless thuggery, possibly based on his own experiences. As a result of this, it comes off as very hard to get into to start with, lost as it is in it's own mood, atmosphere and style. But it's these same things that somehow manage to make it a more absorbing experience if you stick with it long enough, slowly drawing you into the life of this troubled character and the various ups and downs he encounters as he trawls through the rough landscape of his youth. Still, this feels like quite an undisciplined effort from Mullan, which veers into outlandish, arty moments (such as the lead character duking it out with the Lord Jesus Christ) that only serve to make it an even more alienating experience than it already is. ***

First off, let me point out a few things, to people who obviously didn't get this.

People who complained about the silly music, you really couldn't see that the director was trying to show how ridiculous the violence was?

People who didn't get the Jesus thing, well, you've obviously never come from a dark enough culture, where solvent abuse is rife, and people have extremely vivid hallucinations.

I was raised in the area the movie is set, and the time it was set, and i can tell you, its very accurate. Yes, they have accents, its set in Scotland, did you expect them to say "Kwoffee?" and no, there are no bothers in this movie, but take it from me, i never seen anyone of African descent until i was in my teens, and even then it was quite a rare thing in Scotland, and a real minority.

The movie itself is very well done, and tells a cautionary tale, that could translate to anywhere in the world. The production values of the movie are good, and its certainly way better than average and keeps you entertained, i watched this as a piece of "World Cinema", even though i come from the area, and had no trouble at all with the dialogue, but then again, thats me, i can see who others would find it difficult, then again, i would moan about this spoiling the movie, when in Rome ... i would accept it for what it is.

If you get the chance to see this, then do so, with an open mind, its entertaining, moving, shocking, and everything a good movie should be.

:)

This is the sort that wins lots of plaudits and it's not difficult to see why . It's like jumping in to the Tardis and finding one self in a distinctive time and place so much so you sometimes find it difficult to believe that you're watching a mere film and genuinely believe you're stuck in the time zone it's set . Then suddenly the social realism of the film starts over doing things a little and the hyper realism starts detracting from the reality

There does tend to be an element of British cultural bourgeois mind set called " The cult of the proletariat " . By this I mean the bourgeoisie have an instinctive intrigue of all things relating to the lower working class environment but have a dread of ever experiencing it . It's no coincidence that protagonist John McGill is academically gifted and instead of pursuing the academic dream of attending University starts descending in to a path of crime and self destruction . There's no convincing incitement for any of this and the fact McGill could have been someone instead of a no one is quickly forgotten . All this gives the impression that McGill's life is a Shakespearian tragedy

From a technical point of view there's absolutely nothing wrong with Mullen's film and shows what can be achieved with a small budget . It's superbly and convincingly acted by everyone especially by Conor McCaron as John McGill . The problems lie in exaggeration . When the film was released Mullen was on record as saying what violent times the 1970s were and he's not wrong . The strap was commonly , perhaps too commonly used by teachers at school but yet would you ever hear a teacher swear ? The dialogue might be authentic but the Glasgow vernacular constantly using the F word and the C word and ending nearly every spoken line with " Man " will make it very difficult for a non working class Scottish audience and one suspects the working class Scottish proles may not be the target audience

Just watched this at the cinema and had to write my first review! Having lived in Glasgow for eight years and seen the number of Chelsea smiles on show, this film hits the nail on the head as to how brutal Glasgow is for deprived kids. The acting is first class. Connor McCarron puts in a mighty performance as a child with a promising future, only to see his dreams disappear as he gets increasingly involved in the Glasgow gangs. 1970's Glasgow is flawlessly recreated and the mood of the film grips you within the first minute. If you've seen it you'l know what i mean! The pace is perfect, Peter Mullan does an excellent job in showing the downfall of the characters and asking questions of society and how tough life can be for a young kid in what is a violent city. I honestly came out of the cinema traumatised and spellbound, which is no mean feat. I would recommend to all, but warn you it will affect you, the violence is intense and the language is pretty grim, but realistic, thats how it is! Possibly s good as Scotlands finest film: Trainspotting, which is something i never thought i'd say.

Yes, not everyone exists under an environment conducive to success & achievements. This is the discomforting reality 2010's hard-hitting drama Neds spotlights. Here, Peter Mullan conveys without remorse, the downward spiral of the initially promising John McGill, set against the backdrop of hooligan culture around the 70s Glasgow youth. With this premise, John's descent, ushered from societal pressure & personal demons, was then quite the tragedy to witness. Mullan's unrelenting screenplay paves the way, as he captures the brutal consequences brought by systemic failure, toxic masculinity & class warfare, unearthing the violent world of street gangs which is easily the picture's most gripping facet. Where the picture makes a point but also succumbs to cinematic question marks is its refusal to give its characters redemption, teasing audiences at every possible opportunity. This undermines the efforts for authenticity, for the sake of perceived melodrama.

Of course, the performance of Connor McCarron deserves mention, carrying Neds engrossing beats through fantastic portrayal of internal conflict and transformation. He conveys the state of lost innocence with depth and captivating intensity, worthy of our emotional distress when Mullan takes the confrontations a notch more haunting.

In case not clear, Neds is far from the heartwarming kind. It is a discomforting watch experience, with Mullan's searing portrait of youth that comes devoid of morals. Nevertheless, this is a must see for those enamored with raw performances & poignant themes while those squeamish from violence, should probably steer clear. 7/10.

John McGill is a bright student and hounded by a local bully. His father is a volatile drunk. His older brother leads a local gang. He is put into the lower class due to his brother's reputation. He gets out at the first opportunity by being the top student of the lower class. As a teen, John becomes more brash and more rebellious. He becomes a volatile leader of the local kids taking on all rivals.

I like these two movies and they are two separate movies. John McGill as a kid is interesting in his struggles. Then the movie jumps in years to a teenage John McGill and he's a completely different character. The in-between years is missing. It seems like interesting things happened during that time but it's not on the screen. The teenage years do hold some fascinating violence but it gets a little repetitive and the movie goes on a little too long.

Not an original film in many ways, and not the most uplifting movie either, "Neds" is one film that will not appeal to everyone.

For those not au fait with Glasgow patter, a ned is basically a social delinquent or casual. Clichés of shell-suits, drink bottles, smoking and loitering in parks and you get the idea of what a "ned" is meant to be.

Peter Mullan makes this partially biographical film about the slide of a precocious teenage boy from star pupil to the dregs (in the 70s). Filmed without taking any shortcuts, the crew all speak undiluted Glaswegian (with no vulgarities cut) and use cutting humour. The film show physical abuse as it was, first in the classroom, then at home and finally in the streets (gang fights and the like). It doesn't dwell or linger on the violence which is thankful (avoiding pandering to some) but it is strong when it comes.

Acting is exceptionally good and the story is intriguing, plus there is a good soundtrack that captures the period very well. In some ways, it's a film that follows in the same sphere as "This is England", but it follows its own path nevertheless.

If you want social realism, then I'd say this is a good film to watch. Won't appeal to everyone, but most people will find it of interest. A good watch.

John McGill is a boy with promise. He is well-mannered, respects his elders and passes exams with scholarly ease. He is unique in Peter Mullan's depiction of 1970's Glasgow, where the only real aspiration for him is to not become a NED – a non-educated delinquent.

Connor McCarron, who plays McGill, is cruelly put through his paces in his debut film. He does things many seasoned actors wouldn't. Sometimes it seems his acting can't hide that he doesn't want to do some of those things. He doesn't give as urgent a performance as Martin Compston gave for Ken Loach in 'Sweet Sixteen' nearly 10 years ago, but my goodness do you feel for him.

I couldn't quite figure out who is to blame for McGill's plight; everyone is condemned – from the Catholic Church (the fight with an imaginary Jesus is silly when it wants to be profound), to bellicose teachers, a bigoted police force and even the middle class.

We feel sorry for McGill because he never feels sorry for himself. He never challenges those who do him harm. A teacher lashes him for lying about not knowing the answer to a Latin translation. McGill takes the lashes and asks for more. Intelligence is a weakness and being a swot is dangerous. He has no choice but to become a NED (although he is more an ED than a NED).

The violence is upfront and brutal. Call me a wuss, but those gang fights are terrifying. Mullan makes you a victim. I'm sure I detected a semblance of Mike Oldfield's 'Tubular Bells' – a wise musical choice to dramatise McGill's declining sanity. Every time I predicted something the story surprised me, though it loses its way a bit as McGill is drawn deeper into delinquency.

Mullan is honest in interviews about his inspiration for the film's content. The drunken father he plays worryingly well is meant to be his own dad. So, when McGill smashes his face ceaselessly with a frying pan, that's Mullan exorcising a demon. You're closer to authenticity with autobiography, and Mullan is closer to being the heir to Leigh and Loach than any one else Britain has.

www.scottishreview.net

"You are a swat Mister Mcgill"

Peter Mullan's Neds has become one of the small number of electrical Scottish films that have been made within the last 20 years. As it goes Peter Mullan has always been interested in directing and from my point of view has a Ken Loach appeal about it when it comes to writing and producing scripts.

NEDS a film which portrays a young mans will to succeed in any circumstance and every hurdle which is played by society must be dealt with-in an appropriate 70s fashion. Living in Scotland not only is there defaults within any of the class systems but a constant bombardment from Parents,Police and Schools to do well. John McGill (Conner McCarron) becomes victim to this. He has the potential to fulfil any career prospect which is becomes knocked around by his unstable nuclear family and his authoritative teachers.

I have read some of the reviews on here and are somewhat critical. It is hard to understand what living in a poor background with an alcoholic father, a troublesome brother and horrible weather if your not partial to any of the surroundings. If you do not reside in any of these categories then it will be hard to acknowledge why (NEDS) want to fight each other over a measly piece of unfurnished turf which they themselves have no own-age rights.

If you liked Small Faces,Sweet Sixteen then this is a must. All credit to Peter and Cast. Please make more films in the future.

After spending much of the 1990's making a name for himself as an intense character actor in the likes of Trainspotting and My Name Is Joe, Peter Mullan announced himself as a director to watch with 1998's Cousins. He followed that four years later with the powerful The Magdalene Sisters, but didn't make another film until eight years later with his most personal project to date, Neds. His tough upbringing in a rough area of Glasgow meant that his talents in front of the camera would normally be employed in tough, intimidating roles, and Mullan drew upon his experiences as a young man for Neds, a social realist drama depicting an academically promising young boy's descent into gang culture and into the footsteps of his notorious older brother.

'Neds' stands for Non-Educated Delinquents, a term I heard often during my time living in Edinburgh, and one applied to the sort of tracksuit-wearing hooligans also labelled as 'scallies' or 'chavs', depending on which area of the UK you're from. The 'ned' here is John McGill, played by Greg Forrest as a youngster growing up in 70's Glasgow who hopes to use his intelligence to make something of himself, but finds himself pulled onto the streets due to a number of factors: from his disinterested, cane-happy teachers to the pressure of living up to his brother's reputation. He grows taller and broader (to be played by Conor McCarron) and quickly makes a name for himself, participating in petty crime and street fights, and rebelling against his school education. His home isn't a happy one, and the family live under the tyrannical rule of John's father (played by Mullan). Mr. McGill isn't much to look at, but he has a presence terrifying enough to silence a room when he enters, and a tendency to come home drunk and bawl abuse at his long-suffering wife.

Mullan has a real talent for staging tense situations, with some of the events played out in Neds no doubt taken directly from real experiences. A booze-fuelled neighbourhood party quickly deteriorates into smashed windows and a mass brawl, with the thugs brandishing the ugliest of weapons designed to cause maximum harm. There's heart and humour too, and Mullan manages to keep John sympathetic throughout, despite his questionable behaviour. Despite his concentration, Mullan drags the film out longer than is needed, and a number of the climactic scenes are suited to be the film's final moment. A swerve into drug-fuelled surrealist territory is well-intended but doesn't really work when wedged into the film's ultra-realist aesthetic, and the scene feels out-of-place and unintentionally amusing. Still, this is raw, unflinching film-making from a director clearly hoping to draw attention to the plight of youngsters growing up in such grim working-class surroundings, where respect is earned through brutality and allegiances are decided by which side of the bridge you live on.

This is the story of a boy who goes of the rails due to a destructive home life and the fact that he lives in a deprived area of Glasgow . I usually love gritty movies like this , they remind me a little of my own childhood and i can relate to a lot of what happens to my namesake , John in this movie but i have one big problem with Neds. I couldn't understand the accents. The Glaswegian accent was so strong i desperately needed subtitles to understand what they was saying. It spoilt it for me. The biggest plus point from this film was the fantastic soundtrack. Pure 1970's glam throughout and it gave a welcome respite from the harsh accents. Neds is far from perfect but i appreciated the acting and the authenticity of it looking like the 1970's. I'm interested to see Director , Peter Mullens previous films to see how they compare.

Although the first hour is controlled and captivating, the second hour becomes script-messy, loses intensity and is too long: the movie should have been 15-20min shorter.

As for John's character, though there was material, he lacks depth, his psychology and increase in power are not enough controlled, and I failed to feel strong emotions towards him.

Neds can be compared to This Is England, and though the latter was a little different, I preferred it because everything was better described: script, character, psychology, message. Neds, still, is a fair movie.

It looked good and was a fun watch, even if I couldn't find subtitles. The shift from good to bad was great but the struggle back seemed rushed and incomplete.

To be perfectly honest, I believe the struggle of trying to put that old lifestyle behind would have left a much larger impact on me as I walk away from having seen this film. I don't think that showing the darker side of the violence and gangs would have been lost if it had taken half the time it did.

7/10 is a little generous but in the end. I was entertained.

I think I said what I needed to say but sadly I cant submit this without a certain number of sentences. It seems slightly ridiculous to me that I need to be forced to add text after saying what I came to say. Sad to think that fluff needs to be added to meet a length quota, I'm sure there is something to be said about this and the extra fluff in a lot of today's cinema as well.