Genres

Visitors Review

robson-rudd 2012-05-25 06:34:13

Utter Nonsense - Why is it so bad?

A one eyed monkey given half a crayon and a pad of paper could haveperformed the necessary script revisions on this film so how it came tobe released in this state is utterly shocking. The locations areatrocious, most of the action takes place in fields and barns and theplot makes feeble excuses - "He's hidin in da countryside"! You canpull so many holes in the it that after a while there is nothing left.The world in which this film is set is full of oddities - my favouriteis the newsagent that for no apparent reason has a wall of TV's - OHand the "training sessions" are hilarious. A terrible film really.The subject of vigilantism is not in itself without merit however thecharacters are so poorly written, motivations so sketchy that the wholepiece fails to make any impact because you are too busy laughing at thestupidity of it. Danny Dyer - who seems to be carving an entire careerout of playing the same part - is initially motivated by a brutalattack on himself and his girlfriend whom he later abandons at thealter for no apparent reason - up to this point the couple areportrayed as in love and planning for their future. Danny Dyer aside their are some good actors floating about - howeverwith nothing remotely interesting to say and no meaningful directionthey may as well have used potatoes with false eyes and noses; in factin respect of Bob Hoskins I strongly suspect this was the case. Not worth seeing all in all - a brave idea too poorly executed toowarrant your attention.

Juleskid27 2012-05-24 13:27:15

7/10 because of the concept - go see Boondock Saints

It really was a disappointment. Slow start and the last 20 minutespicks up. But I had to give it a 7/10 because of the concept. "BoondockSaints" was better. => maybe see it! Better to rent.Plot: The law & govt in London lets down several average citizens interrible crimes committed against them and their families. Corruptofficials are in league with the govt who allow criminals to get off.Soluion = vigilante group forms to right the wrongs.Lot of reasonably well known actors in here but it has a B qualitymovie flavor. Maybe you could say more of live or real budgetproduction. It moves a long a bit slowly, but despite all of this Ireally have to draw attention to..+ves: - it almost follows a pseudo real life pace not a Hollywoodblockbuster - the incidents that occur are believable. It could happenin South London. - bully's & punks with top people in collusion withpolice - corrupts govt and police - a few wrong people pushed too farand of course the social path who is drawn to the group - and apredictable or realistic ending.. Don't worry no spoilers.-> The longer I consider it the more the movie has drawn me in, like acar crash and it deserves it's 7/10

worthlessbilly 2012-05-17 06:22:26

Please do not watch this film

I've been a member of IMDb for about 4 years and have never before feltso duty bound to comment on a film.The camera work was obtrusive constant re focusing and unsteady shotsfor that "gritty urban feel" made me feel like i was watching somethingshot on a mobile phone.However worse that the technical execution wasthe fact that neither the story, nor most of the characters made anysense at all!Sean Bean,having chartered his own Hurc,returned from the Gulf andfound that his missus was over the side, and a couple of chavs call himsome names (Nick Love has clearly never actually met a Para as thatwould have been your first scene of violence)which clumsily wassupposed to represent the "Lawless streets of London".OK I can buythat, just. Then the hotel security guard:he's a loser with a taste forviolence, and the ability to install several thousand pounds worth ofCCTV equipment in to a hotel!How did that happen? MAID 1 "why's thesecurity guard walking around with that drill again"? MAID 2 "Er.... noinglesa" He knows the barrister, who previously represented him for"Some football thing" (A VERY subtle nod to some earlier work!)So he'sa thug that the barrister helped evade justice? Moving on to thebarrister then, "I need to know what type of people we're dealing with"Surly Bob's answer should have been "Er, being the chief prosecution wewere kind of hoping you'd already have some sort of clue. He's agangster. There's a trial today.Ring any bells? The wig? Big brownfiles (They're always brown in films) with lots of pictures of himdoing gangstery type stuff?. No?" I'm amazed that some people havereferred to this film as realistic.Chose your own adventure, your inthe toilet and a big slab of meat head threatens your pregnant wife doyou: tell the protection officer assigned to you- Turn to page 7 orBrush it off, those crazy organised criminals always making idlethreats wifey'll be fine. Don't turn to page 12, she's dead. So Bob"The police can't lie straight in bed"(presumably, like the barristerhas forgotten why he's at court as well) is the only descent copper inLondon/the world. So who arrested and built the case against the mainvillain? Anyway, this is turning in to a ramble now so; Danny Dyer'sDanny Dyer, take from that what you will. The long hair'd guy is therefor no reason at all. All of the character's actions and thoughtprocesses seem completely random, actually I don't want to get married,since I stopped that bloke flicking my ears at work I'd rather shootpeople.The plot holes are comically numerous, where did Sean Bean's Punisherstyle armoury come from?Wasn't the main bent cop an Inspector?If so whywas he referred to as Sgt when giving the press conference.How did theyteleport halfway across the woods? Why did I watch this through to theend?To echo other used's thoughts though, this film is certainlyprovocative, it makes us all wonder: Were we to become so disillusionedwith the judiciary in this country, would any of us have the strengthto kidnap a load of villains but then not kill them but shoot a loadpolicemen like they were Imperial Stormtroopers and not bat an eyelid.All in all 10/10

2012-05-16 23:22:18

terrible waste of talent

Soldier returns to the UK and with the help of a small group - decide to take justice into their own hands. A great cast including Sean Bean and Bob Hoskins are unable to do justice to a terrible script.Although this does show a little of the underbelly of the UK it is bleak and unpleasant and Bean's character has no redeeming features at all which makes it hard to sympathise with his views.SPOILERS...As an example of how this fails to work - within a couple of days one character (a barrister) goes from balking at executing a murderer to getting involved in a machine gun shoot out with the police! There are few characters you associate with and this tagged onto a tedious script makes for some very poor viewing.Best avoided, even if you (like me) enjoy action films

robar-4 2012-05-15 04:19:26

How do we stop this movie madness

I had not heard of this movie until it turned up at my local videostore. Although my instincts told me to leave it there, I read thesynopsis and thought with its topical subject matter and reasonablygood cast it could make an interesting movie. However, this time myinstincts proved right and this movie can be summed up with one word -"unwatchable". The appalling camera-work makes one physically ill as itdarts back and forth, up and down, rarely keeping the subject in theframe. Directors and cameramen like Nick Love and Sam McCurdy fail tounderstand that the camera should not draw attention to itself. If itdoes then the audience is distracted from what they should beconcentrating on - the story. In this case, as the director is also thewriter, one would think that he, above all those involved in thisproduction, would want his story about a subject that concerns us all,to be understood, otherwise why bother making it as it all becomesrather pointless. Maybe the director chose to use this camera techniqueto distract the audience, as there are so many holes in the plot. Thereare some horrible examples of "Stupid Cam" out there, including the 2ndand 3rd installments of the "Bourne" trilogy directed by PaulGreengrass and Peter Berg's "Kingdom", but "Outlaw" has to be theworst...And it took 42 producers to put it together. ..Shame on theBritish film industry..

SirYesSir 2012-05-14 17:21:54

OUTLAW fails because Nick Love does not have the skill.

I went to see the film yesterday.The opening credits ended and the film began, the first thing that Inoticed was that it was shot on video, the wide shots look very poor asvideo cannot handle the detail, particularly wide shots. Then thecamera began to shake, like the beginnings of a repressed epilepticfit, I found this mildly annoying but continued to watch.And pleasantly I have to admit that I was actually really enjoying thefirst 20 minutes of the film. The characters were established quietlyand slowly, and I was involved with their lives, I wanted to see whatwould happen to these characters, the actor who played the CCTV expertwas especially good, very scary and believable.But then everything fell apart from the time they all get into a pubfight and do some male bonding. As soon as there was any action thecamera would have an epileptic fit of astronomic proportions, then whenthe action ceased, the camera would rest. Very annoying, it shows thatNick Love cannot handle action sequences, instead relying on pointlessgimmicks to hide his weaknesses.Bean supposedly trains them, and for some reason when you want to traina group of vigilantes you hire an entire sports hall to do it, verydiscreet, although he never trains them, they never train to doanything, they just stand around in their tracksuits while Sean Beanrants at them. One of the most perplexing and unintentionally funnylines Sean bean states is something like this " if you get aids or blowup a bus with a rucksack the government gives you things..." HUH?? Aidsvictims and suicide bombers, whats the link here please??They fail to go ahead with their plans and inexplicably Sean bean tellsthem to disband but in the meantime in another inexplicable moment inthe film (the film has many of these) Sean bean kills or seriouslyinjures, not sure which, the CCTV guy because they have a row aboutmethods?? Its like Hitler and Goerring discussing whether they shouldhave black or blue uniforms!!! So the gang of pathetic outlaws disband, we are then shown that most oftheir problems of fighting back have been solved, Danny dyer punches anoffice bully, while Rupert friend, who does absolutely nothing for theentire film apart from stand in the background, suddenly becomes moreconfident and girls begin to smile at him and not notice his scarredface. The gang then reforms a few minutes later, by which time Seanbean who is being hunted by the authorities and whose face is on manyTV screens being described as a dangerous army veteran, is seen sittingin a busy pub in an army jacket??? Very undercover.Bob hoskins was only on this film for a few days as he is ina handfulof scenes and the majority of them he is in his tiny office not hetelephone spouting out clichés like a constipated parrot. I think bobcollected the cheque and ran away as fast as he could. Its been yearssince Mona Lisa ey Bob, how the mighty have fallen?It all ends in shoot out in a country mansion, which we are shown issurrounded by the police, but then miraculously we cut to them in aforest and they have gotten away, HOW DID THEY GET AWAY? by this pointI didn't really care anymore, they then talk to each and laugh abouthow Lennie James's character swore at the police, yeah hilarious, theyare bonding again, they then all get shot, but again miraculously DannyDyer rises up like a monkey who has been chewing on amphetamines andruns away making his escape.We then find the head of the crime syndicate, the target of the gangsraid not he mansion, PERSONALLY making a payment to dyers workmate whoset dyer and th gang up, this is one of the many ridiculous andcontrived bits of the plot, of which there are many, when would agodfather go in a car to pay off some little underling PERSONALLY??I'll tell you when, when Nick Love needs to have Danny Dyers charactermiraculously show up in the underground car park and shoot him, so hecan end the film quickly.I really have to say Nick love is not a writer or a director of muchskill, he doesn't know where is going with the film and he does nothave the technical skill to make action sequences riveting. But he alsodoes not have the intelligence to say something with such an intriguingtopic. You can imitate Michael Mann as much as you want Nick, you canhave muted colours, you can have helicopter shots of London litteredthroughout the film, you can have your characters spout monosyllabiclines, but the difference is that Micahel Mann knows his characters andknows what he wants to do with them, Nick Love has no idea, he simplywants to imitate the surface value of Mann, without understanding whathe is imitating.Its a shame as we need strong British directors working in the industrytoday, and as I said the film begins with a lot of promise but thenjust dive bombs into a great big contrived mess.

vgreene111 2012-05-13 19:50:34

Disappointing

This film had promise - a motley band of wronged men gather together tomete out justice in a very base sense. It's a solid premise, and thewriting here isn't actually as bad as it could have been. And with theassortment of actors gathered here, this really should have been anexercise in just sitting back and letting them perform. But the problemis that for some reason, the director and the DP chose to film theentire film in this jerky, hand-held, shifting focus...why? Maybe theyfelt the performances of the actors were somehow insufficient to carrythe film, or they were trying to develop further tension. Ultimately,the tricky camera work ruins the film. Why obscure the actors withoverly close-ups, or disguise their emotions by jerking the camera leftand right throughout a shot? A real shame.

goldgreen 2012-05-13 15:35:26

Should never have been made

There are parts of this film where you really want it to take off, butit always disappoints and becomes a farce by the end. Living in a bigcity with crime issues like London, many of us are in the mood for alittle revenge fantasy on the some of the thugs that make lifeoppressive at times on the streets. However the plot never allows theviewer to identify with a single character. Instead we get disjointedsnippets of five cardboard characters. Most disappointingly of all wenever get to relish the dispatch of the bad guys in this film. Considerthe 'are you feeling lucky punk' sequence in Dirty Harry. How on earthOutlaw got funding is beyond me, why not get a writer with someexperience. Christ there are enough bad British films already.

Steven Smith 2012-05-09 14:19:55

A Decent Movie.... kinda.

Overall I think this movie is...pretty good. It's not particularlyground breaking or original but for people who enjoyed the FootballFactory and the Business this film will be quite entertaining. Peoplehave complained that the free-hand camera work is poor. I disagree. Forthe most part, this camera technique works well and gives the film agritty, urban feel. I do think Nick Love went a little over the topwith it though. It certainly wasn't necessary to use the free-handcamera so excessively and would've been more suited to the fight/actionscenes only. There are moments when the free-hand camera movement canbe quite off putting. Nick Love should've used this technique sparinglyI believe.This film isn't a masterpiece or a genius piece of film making, let'sget that clear. There are some problems I have with it. Firstly, havingGene (Danny Dyer's character)as being close friends with the SecurityGuard is nothing more than a lame attempt to tie in the characters sothat eventually their paths would all cross. We have Bryant meeting theSecurity Guard and the Security Guard just so happens to be friendswith the protagonist of the story whom we are introduced to in the verybeginning of the film. That just doesn't work for me. Nick Loveshould've though this through more. It becomes glaringly obvious to theviewer that Gene and Bryrant's path will cross soon -- and for very,very unconvincing reasons as well. Another thing I don't like about the character development in this filmis the fact the Security Guard just takes it upon himself to go aroundtelling people he knows someone who can "help them" with theirtroubles. (That someone is Bryant, the soldier who he's only recentlymet). But why on earth does he do this? He's barely met the bloke(Bryant) and he's off telling Cedric (the guy whose wife wasattacked)that he knows someone who can help him get revenge. He doesthe same thing with Gene when they are talking in the security roomtogether. Why does the Security Guard assume that Bryant will willinglyhelp these characters? I just don't get it. The Security Guard evenrefers to Bryant as a "mate of his" Why does he assume he's "mates"with him? When these characters first meet they hardly exchange anydialogue together. Bryant seems to only respond to be polite to theSecurity Guard. He doesn't show any signs at all that he considers thesecurity guard a "mate" at all. I don't think Nick Love thought throughthis development properly. And why does Bryrant's character suddenlychange from being this troubled, reserved character who want to keephimself to himself to someone who's being the arbiter of justice forpeople he's never met? I don't understand this at all. There are also some useless, unnecessary characters in this film aswell. The guy who got attacked by three people and is left with scarson his face was a pointless character in my opinion. He could've easilybeen omitted from the film without it greatly affecting the story atall. Another useless character was Gene's work buddy who decides to tagalong with the newly founded crew (For what reason, I have no idea).Again, this character could've been omitted without the overall storybeing affected (or altered). I could write more about some of the problems I have with this film butI think I'll leave it there. If you watch this film for what it is andforget some of the problematic story developments then you'll enjoythis movie. The story itself is pretty straight forward and there'splenty of action/fighting for the viewer to enjoy. This film isn't amasterpiece...but it's not absolutely terrible either. 6/10

ben-810 2012-05-09 00:49:21

Not a "Layer cake", but one of Love's better films

Having seen The Business and Football factory recently, plus missingthe media campaign around this film, I went into this flick with arelatively open mind. I have to say it more than just watchable andcertain tones and moods of society were adequately portrayed. Bean'sperformance was solid enough, utilising his faraway stare and harshvoice/ accent to full affect. I guess tabloids and lads mags wouldcomment on this film being gritty, but I think it was more the factthat it offered scarily realistic 'fight or flight' scenarios that20-something males are more than familiar with.I would say the first 60mins or so offered the better acting,cinematography and story points of this film and it was unlikely to beable to continue at that level throughout given the plot. There were afew loose ends, though not enough to stop the film doing it exactly'what it says on the tin' and keeping the audience amused till the end.Of the Nick love films to come out in the last few years I would saythis is the best. It covered it bases well in establishing the premiseof vigilant action and identified different types of citizens that canall come up against the social empidemic of hooligan culture. By nomeans a master piece, but in the context of the directors previousefforts and films of a similar nature it was pleasant (though violent)viewing.

dirk-s 2012-05-05 17:26:53

An excellent, mature, relevant British film

Nick Love makes his most mature film to date. Those who hated FootballFactory and The Business (I liked them) will still find a lot to likeabout this one. Within the first few minutes (and its entire length),Love distances himself from the gangster, drug dealing yobs who havebecome his fan base due to his prior efforts. Instead of gettingstraight into the violence (and it is violent) Love cleverly takes histime to cement reasons for the characters' frames of mind andsubsequent actions. It is very relevant in today's climate and veryBritish. Sean Bean (surprisngly), Lennie James and Bob Hoskins (lesssurprising) are all excellent. Danny Dyer, much like the director,plays his most 'different' character to date. Again, even if you hatedhim before, you (may) think differently here. Special mention must goto Sean Harris who is, as he was as Ian Brady in ITV's See No Evil,delightfully menacing. Like 'Children of Men' before it, 'Outlaw'paints a bleak view of Britain in the new Millennium, but excels indoing so.

Lester-71 2012-05-05 05:40:20

An hard edge film but almost unwatchable because of camera shake

Why Oh WHY did they decide to ad camera shake in the editing ? Everysingle close in shot and segment shifts manically up, down left andright even on natural pans - the result is sickening. On some TV showsthis works when done a little but on this film it's totally over thetop.Outlaw has quite a good cast but it really needs something to ad moretension and I think at time that could be the music.There are elements of Fight Club at times tho obviously with adifferent goal in mindTo be honest I think the film is a bit Made-For-TV. Bad soundtrack thatsounds like its been put together in an afternoon.Don't hold your breath and take sea sickness tablets and anti Fittingdrugs before watching !

just-claire 2012-05-05 02:11:20

Brilliant Raw British Drama!

I am utterly shocked that people obviously didn't enjoy (or understand)this film. Every Nick Love film I have ever watched has been nothingshort of genius and this is no exception. Rupert Friends character (forthose of you without enough neurons to understand it), was intended tofade into the background like a "wallflower", as a result of the attacklaunched at him-ever been attacked, people? Gives your confidence aknock, I speak from personal experience! Lennie James' uhming andaahing? This could be due to the fact that he is a barrister, educatedto uphold the law,and now has to deviate against his own morals andbeliefs, and has just suffered a disturbing, double bereavement that hehas blamed himself for! Bob Hoskins? Although it wasn't written inblack and white, for those of you who may be a little slow, was the onereally calling the shots, not Sean Bean-think about it, the criminalrecords that Beans character has obtained, are not through his owndoing! Sean Bean-a typical man scorned, he feels the need to releasehis aggression upon criminals on the street, instead of his estrangedwife. Understandable, really, don't expect his heart has an on/offswitch, eh? Sean Harris' character was designed to be psychotic,deviating from the usual casting, of an over-sized oaf, who everyone isafraid of playing the role, be fair, this was new, refreshing and quitechilling! And as for Danny Dyers acting skills not being "up to par",you're all having a laugh, the film is following him through phases heis going through, eg at the beginning, he has little confidence inhimself (which also makes a nice change considering his past roles), sohe lets his fiancée ignore him when hes speaking to her. By the end ofthe film, however he has realised that he is big enough to walk awayfrom a relationship that has died, although, admittedly, a bit toolate! Now all you dunces at the back of the cinema, go back and watchthe film again, only this time, rely on my comments to understand thecomplexity and thought that has gone into each and every one of thecharacters in this film!!!!! Happy viewing-British film winsagain!!!!!!!

2012-05-04 13:28:51

Outlaw

'Outlaw' started out looking very promising with a good premise and cast. Sadly by the end it has descended into farce and strayed away from the themes of the film, namely that of a fractured society and a vigilante group fighting back against injustice. If it had stuck to this then this film may well have impressed me more. It moved from a wider dissatisfaction and fighting back against wayward society, to a personal vendetta against one mans criminal activities. Never-the-less it is pretty well acted, shot and directed and it managed to keep my interest for most of the film. The violence is pretty shocking in places but is integral to the themes in the film. Sean Bean is good as you would expect and the other actors hold up their end well. Overall this is a good film, with timely themes and portrayal of modern society (sadly), it's just a shame it wasn't followed through better. A solid 3 stars and still worth a viewing.Feel free to check out my blog which can be found on my profile page.

2012-04-27 09:11:44

Keep your empty popcorn bag at the ready

I had the misfortune of seeing this film in preview This film couldhave been good, it's got a passable if not remarkable plot and couldhave been an OK film. However I couldn't watch most of the film due tothe fact that the god awful camera work made me feel motion sick formost of the film.I mean camera work is an important part of any film however having ashaky camera for the sake of having a shaky camera does nothing exceptmake people feel sick, its not even during fight or chase scenes, itsall the time, people can be stood still and the camera will be movingfrom side to side up and down and all over the place.My advice, keep your empty bag of popcorn for when the motion sicknessfinally gets you

lordsamson69 2012-04-26 22:34:31

What a load of old bilge!

The trailers for this film made it seem as if finally someone had madea daring, provocative film about the state of Britain today. However,what is actually delivered is a transparent look at five loserspretending they are some sort of renegade society.Much of the dialogue is geared towards the idea, that even though itmay seem difficult to take the law into their own hands, it is anecessary measure. However, when it comes down to it, none of the fiveleads are capable of doing what would appear obviously necessary.Not enough violence and too many attacks of conscience from thesupposed 'outlaws'.As for the acting Sean Bean is wasted in this film, and as for DannyDyer, he should never be allowed to act again ... terrible! I've got tobe honest I was looking forward to this film, but it was a hugedisappointment. All in all a film that could have been excellent, butis generally just a wishy-washy attempt to be provocative.

Stephen Shield 2012-04-26 09:28:49

Absolute Pony

This film is ridiculous. The idea actually seemed pretty decent - people taking the law intotheir own hands. But the delivery is laughable. I was actually laughingout loud by the end of it. For me Nick Love has always had a problemwith dialogue and building believable characters but this isridiculous. And this is the major flaw, you see the group of peoplethat are to be 'trained' as vigilantes. I don't believe that the barristers' character would take a machine gunand start shooting at the police even if his pregnant wife has beenmurdered. I would have gone with him paying Sean Bean to find and killhis wifes murderers but not this obviously intelligent man doing ithimself. The rest of them well, meh..If you use the 'loved it' filter on this site you'll read someoneexplaining the plot to users. Thanks for that. Heh heh unbelievable.This is linear idiot diarrhoea with so many flaws and unexplainedrandomness it's funny. There's a point at the end where Dyer, Bean andthe Barristor are in a shoot-out with the police then all of a suddenthey are in some woods! I thought the rental DVD had jumped or I hadmissed a bit through laughing. No it was just Love forgetting to makesense of his film.

johnnymotorbikes 2012-04-26 05:06:49

could of done so much better

When i first heard about this film, i thought what a great idea for afilm Things started to look really promising with Sean Bean who is a qualityactor being cast as the lead.Oh dear what a let down.The first 15 to 20 mins are OK it heads down hill fast in the midsection and the less said about the ending the better.This film could of and should of been so much betterThe idea of a group of well trained vigilantes seeking out anddelivering justice is great , the film however is just the opposite

ronmoes80 2012-04-25 04:16:44

Awesome movie!

When i saw this movie the first time i had several WOW moments. I likeSean Bean (Lord of the Rings, The Hitcher) Because he can play prettyconvinced and that's what this film is about. I also liked the plot andthe castings. I did not noticed any weak acting of any actors. howeverthis is a typical English film, and in a English films they alway cursea lot more and the violence is also a bit higher. But then again whodoes not like action movies? All the characters are real different,like this lawyer who in the beginning does not want to be of any partin this group. It is always a hard job for actors to play a turningpoint and make your audience believe it. I think they did a reasonablegood job in this film with this. This movie contains a few coolsurprises, so you will be watching this awesome movie till the end..

gary-444 2012-04-24 11:24:50

Vigilante Makeover Fails To Deliver

I wanted this film to work. The much derided "Death Wish" of theSeventies struck a popular chord in the same way that "Falling Down "did in the nineties - both owing big debts to the "Revenge" Westerngenre before them. The time is right for a 21st century makeover andupdate . For the first twenty minutes or so I was expectant. Good scenesetting, interesting characters, punchy dialogue. Then the filmimplodes into a direction less, scarcely believable mess from which itnever recovers.Sean Bean is good but ultimately wilts under a poor script and littlelight and shade for his role. Although touted as a "lads" film there isan almost total lack of female interest to amuse and entertain. Theaction sequences are uniformly unbelievable, and the band of vigilantesfails utterly to convince. The wonderful Bob Hoskins performs whatamounts to a hastily arranged bit part, whilst Danny Dyer continues his"Football Factory " persona as the kid who hangs out with the hard ladsand looks tough just to avoid them beating him up.The risible finale is poorly conceived, clumsily executed and is closerto farce than Armageddon. An opportunity missed.