Urchin

This is going to sound weird but I felt their was a slight disconnect between the homelessness I see on the streets of London and the homelessness presented in the film. Mike's clothes were pretty clean and he was pretty lean and in good shape which did not seem realistic. It was as though the filmmakers have never actually seen a rough, dirty homeless human before.

This to me overviews my general feeling, a slight disconnect between the issue of homelessness, and the polished, filmic metaphorical elements which distract us somewhat from the horrors of this daily existence. Was it needed to have these metaphorical tangents, why not simply portray homelessness for what it is, viscerally horrifiying, without the fluff.

The film on many levels was good though, it was at times subtle and you did empathise with the cyclical nature of addiction. It just felt as though if you are going to do a film on homelessness, get visceral. I felt at a distance, as though I was watching a film about the subject, not in the subject.

With his debut, Dickinson wants us to finally see society's invisible man. It's not pretty. The even more uncomfortable truth that perhaps not everybody can be saved? That some people can't be helped?! Insane takeaways from a drama piece about a startling social issue, but you can't say it's not blisteringly real. At every point in Urchin, someone is offering a genuine lifeline. There are so many chances for redemption in this film. Kind characters try to tell him this, the SOUNDTRACK tells him this. This judgment isn't what I go to movies for, nor is it where my values lie...but it's one hell of a honest, brutal character piece. Whatever salvation is being offered in this movie, it's clearly not enough. He could've kept his job if he hadn't walked away from an employer who clearly has his back. His foster parents are described as lovely people without elaboration. His momentary love interest tries to tell him that there's more to life than money. You dismiss it at first as well, she presents as a stereotype. But she's right in that his rot isn't exclusive to his class. He would be this person no matter what hand life dealt him. He's a person with his own agency like any other. And though the ending might be truly too cruel for me in the point I think it's making? This film has more respect for the unhoused than it seems. No stereotype here. Just someone diving into said stereotype without reflection or regret. It won't infantilise disaffected people. They're still adults who deserve chances. If they don't value those chances, things get painful. Painful movie. Dark movie. More unique movies please, Mr Dickinson.

Last nights Cineworld secret screening was "Urchin", Harris Dickinson's debut as feature writer and director. Though this particularly reveal didn't go down well, I think that I appreciated the film more than anyone else in there.

Homeless, and addicted to substance abuse, Michael (Frank Dillane) gets a chance to get his life back together when he's clean and sober, following a prison sentence for aggravated burglary. Living in a hostel and with a job in a hotel kitchen, he seems to be doing well. That is until a restorative justice meeting with the victim of his assault causes him to begin to spiral.

So, the screening itself was beset by walkouts and the general chatter I overheard at the conclusion, was that the audience that remained regretted their decision. Truth be told, "Urchin" is quite a demanding film to present to a general, unprepared audience. It's a tough watch, at times, and whilst Michael is often charming, he's damaged and the arc of the story clues you to the fact his collapse is coming. Harder though for the general audience (and I'm trying not to sound patronising here) is that there is certain an "art-house" feel to the film. Mike mental health issues are, in my interpretation, portrayed by a journey down the plug hole to a subatomic world and then a detour to a beautiful but stark cave structure, before snapping back to the story. His demons are manifested in an older woman, who stares placidly at him. There's maybe a certain level of cinema literacy to 'read' the film that's required. The ending in particularly seemed to cause confusion - though I thought it was pretty apparent what the film was saying had happened.

Whilst I wouldn't say that I "enjoyed" it either, it's not the sort of film, nor that I'll be rushing for a second viewing anytime soon. The performances across the cast are excellent, particularly from Dillane, and I think that Dickinson evidently is as talented behind the camera, as he is in front of it.

While Urchin doesn't have the most wonderful and unique writing on the subject about homelessness and addiction, Harris Dickinson's debut direction and approach to the atmosphere was promising, and reflecting a good solid light and coherence to filmmaking.

Dickinson offers some good concepts and moments about the characters journey going through the troubles and struggles. Including with some good colorful presentation, production, and tone. The themes about society, drug use, and the social class issues are explored solidly throughout. Which made some of the emotional and hitting moments successful. Frank Dillane's performance as the main lead is powerful and strong, as you feel Dillane's personality and his character being the most interesting aspect about this movie. Alongside with the other performances being good.

However, on the writing, the writing does have it's fault. It's clear with what themes and concepts Dickinson is exploring which does work, but at certain moments, it doesn't feel powerful as Dickinson hoped for. As there are moments the concepts and themes feel thin, predictable, and at times, messy. Despite an interesting main lead, unfortunately, the other characters didn't have a strong sense of realism, and at times, some of the side character felt unrealistic, and plot devices used to keep the film going forward. Which made certain dialogue choices and pacing moments feel off.

The usage of music is good, the camerawork is solid, and there are some decent sound designs. Overall, it is clear Dickinson has a good start to a directing debut. However, personally, a tighter approach and script could make this movie more powerful.

I resisted seeing this film as I wasnt in a place where I could cope with anything too depressing. But after listening to a few podcasts I changed my mind.

Despite dealing with current issues that are genuinely upsetting in the UK today I found this utterley engrossing and I was so glad it wasnt formulaic.

All the cast were amazing and felt like real people...not Actooorey!

Frank Dillane is mesmeric playing a multi dimensional character making choices that you may not understand or approve of but are true to his character.

A very very good film that will have you thinking and discussing afterwards.