This is England

→ in
Tools    





I'm a big admirer of Shane Meadows having followed his career since seeing Twenty Four Seven in the late 90s, he's just getting better. Met him briefly a few years ago at a film screening and he's such a nice bloke. He's a naturalistic film maker, one who uses improv and non-actors in a lot of his films. They may not be some people's cup o' tea as they're unglossy, maybe sometimes a little bit of amateurishness slips in, but to me they're an endearing and charming product of his enthusiasm for film.

This is England is his latest film, just out this week. Set in the weeks following the Falklands War it's a small capsule of time in the lives of a band of youngsters who've adapted the music and fashions of the skinheads. The laughs and camaraderie that draw in a bullied 12 year old lad are soon cut short by the return from prison of an old aquaintance for whom the skinhead way of life equals the National Front.

It's this nasty turn that sets of a chain of events that opens the youngest lad's eyes to racism and violence. The film is based on Shane Meadows own childhood experiences growing up in Staffordshire. I won't spoiler the film so won't say any more about the plot.

The acting is superb. The little lad who plays Shaun is a natural, and Stephen Graham who plays the psychotic Combo is truly frightening. There's some very moving scenes here and a lot of feeling been put into the characters. If you were around in Britain in the early 80s then the clothes and the music will set you off on a nostalgia trip!

Sadly the only other people in the cinema were some lads in their 20s who were agreeing with the NF rantings shown during the film. You have to despair sometimes that a film setting out to highlight racism and the effects of violence can be so willfully misinterpreted by people who cannot use their brains to think things through. You wouldn't believe me if I told you one of the group was black too. you really gotta wonder sometimes.



p29's Avatar
p29
i thought it was a great film, again meadow's showing his ability as a director it gives real insight into the characters and depending on the success and reviews in gets in america i reckon stephen graham could be a nominee for the best actor award at the oscars



What were you expecting?
Not sure really, i never saw any trailers for it or anything i just watched it, i guess that you shouldn't always rely on thing's you hear about a film.
I'm not taking anything away from it, it was a really good film, for me it just lacked something, i just can't put my finger on what, i'll have to watch it again i think.



Sounds interesting.... I'll try to check it out... thanks christine...
__________________
You never know what is enough, until you know what is more than enough.
~William Blake ~

AiSv Nv wa do hi ya do...
(Walk in Peace)




The People's Republic of Clogher
Bugger. Sorry I missed this review Chris, and as the person who introduced me to Shane Meadows I owe you a debt of gratitude.

Glad you liked This Is England and here's my little review:

This Is England (2006, Shane Meadows)





In one word – astounding.

Shane Meadows’ semi-autobiographical tale of an 11 year old boy, befriended by a gang of skinheads in The Midlands of the early ‘80s is as visceral a piece of filmmaking as you’ll see all year. Perhaps the most visceral for a good few years, as the film it brought immediately to mind was Dennis Hopper’s almost-forgotten Out Of The Blue.

This Is England is that raw…and a lot better.

The director has a great knack of pulling wonderful performances from his actors: Bob Hoskins in Twentyfourseven, Paddy Considine in A Room For Romeo Brass and Dead Man’s Shoes and now Stephen Graham as the troubled, volatile Combo.



Graham is possibly best known as the little pitbull-faced guy in Scorsese’s Gangs Of New York. He’s been around for a while but, with This Is England, his time has definitely come. His portrayal of the skinhead-in-chief will probably be compared to Ed Norton’s turn in American History X, but that wouldn’t be fair as, in my eyes at least, Graham’s Combo blows Derek Vinyard right out of the water in terms of humanity, believability and pathos.

It’s an Oscar-worthy performance in a film that’s not going to get within a million years of The Academy’s nonagenarian dodderers. Shame.

The rest of the cast are on top form, with Meadows regulars such as Andrew Shim, Vicky McClure (who’s grown into a fine-looking young woman – think Keira Knightley with attitude ), Jo Hartley, George Newton and ‘Big’ Frank Harper peppering the supporting roles. Thomas Turgoose, in a debut performance as the 11 year old Shaun, is solidly believable.

In fact, anyone who’s seen A Room For Romeo Brass can testify to the aplomb that Meadows writes and directs children, and This Is England is definitely seen through a child’s eyes.

The film evoked strong memories in myself – I was around Shawn’s age in 1983 and can well remember gangs of skinheads, mass unemployment, grotty council estates and the Falklands war. The spectre of Thatcher haunts This Is England but echoes remain today in attitudes toward immigrants. We’ve not learned much, have we?

That was England and, in some respects, it still is…

__________________
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how the Tatty 100 is done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves." - Brendan Behan



He's a naturalistic film maker, one who uses improv and non-actors in a lot of his films. They may not be some people's cup o' tea as they're unglossy, maybe sometimes a little bit of amateurishness slips in
I'm not familiar with this fellow or his film, and I certainly don't intend any disrespect to him or you. After all, if it wasn't for differing opinions, there would be no need for horse races.

But I'm puzzled by any "nihilistic" approach to art, especially film, through the use of improv (which says that a prepared script is unimportant) and non-actors (which also denies any need to study or practice the art of acting). If there is anything at all to such a "less is more" theory, then why negate only the plot and knowledge of acting? How about bringing in a "non-director" who has no idea of what story he wants to tell, no knowledge of how to tell it and no ability to elicit from his non-actors the non-performance that he can't evision since he hasn't a point of view? How about a non-producer as well, who's inept at raising money to buy film and rent a camera! I guess the ultimate amateaur approach to movie making would be to have the film "shown" by a projectionist who doesn't know how to operate the projector.



The People's Republic of Clogher
I'm not familiar with this fellow or his film, and I certainly don't intend any disrespect to him or you. After all, if it wasn't for differing opinions, there would be no need for horse races.

But I'm puzzled by any "nihilistic" approach to art, especially film, through the use of improv (which says that a prepared script is unimportant) and non-actors (which also denies any need to study or practice the art of acting). If there is anything at all to such a "less is more" theory, then why negate only the plot and knowledge of acting? How about bringing in a "non-director" who has no idea of what story he wants to tell, no knowledge of how to tell it and no ability to elicit from his non-actors the non-performance that he can't evision since he hasn't a point of view? How about a non-producer as well, who's inept at raising money to buy film and rent a camera! I guess the ultimate amateaur approach to movie making would be to have the film "shown" by a projectionist who doesn't know how to operate the projector.
I'm guessing that your opinion of 'improv' was formed after watching a particularly bad episode of Whose Line Is It Anyway?

The way Meadows works, and I'm taking Dead Man's Shoes as my citation, is by gathering the cast and assorted crew together in a quiet location where they, through a series of workshops (God, I hate that term but can think of nothing more appropriate), develop notions of plot and character which augment the already-realised screenplay. If something works and feels natural then Shane, as the writer, will expand on it. Rehearsal with knobs on, in other words.

A far cry from setting the camera rolling on day x of shooting and telling your lead actor that he feels sad because his gerbil has piles...

Organic filmmaking as championed by Meadows is hardly new - ask Ken Loach and, to a certain degree, (presumably through a medium) Bob Altman.



I'm not familiar with this fellow or his film, and I certainly don't intend any disrespect to him or you. After all, if it wasn't for differing opinions, there would be no need for horse races.

But I'm puzzled by any "nihilistic" approach to art, especially film, through the use of improv (which says that a prepared script is unimportant) and non-actors (which also denies any need to study or practice the art of acting). If there is anything at all to such a "less is more" theory, then why negate only the plot and knowledge of acting? How about bringing in a "non-director" who has no idea of what story he wants to tell, no knowledge of how to tell it and no ability to elicit from his non-actors the non-performance that he can't evision since he hasn't a point of view? How about a non-producer as well, who's inept at raising money to buy film and rent a camera! I guess the ultimate amateaur approach to movie making would be to have the film "shown" by a projectionist who doesn't know how to operate the projector.
no disrespect taken, but merely a suggestion that if you watched one of his films, you might understand what I meant!

Sorry Tac I missed your review too! Silly me not looking at your review thread. Yeah t'was great huh? Really enjoyed it. Shane Meadows continues his run of excellent films (bar Once Upon a Time in the Midlands which was a wrong 'un)
xxx



The People's Republic of Clogher
no disrespect taken, but merely a suggestion that if you watched one of his films, you might understand what I meant!

Sorry Tac I missed your review too! Silly me not looking at your review thread. Yeah t'was great huh? Really enjoyed it. Shane Meadows continues his run of excellent films (bar Once Upon a Time in the Midlands which was a wrong 'un)
xxx
Yep I feel much the same about OUATITM. It's got some great performances from Rhys Ifans, Shirley Henderson and the little girl who's name escapes me. The modern Western theme is bold but the whole thing is just...I dunno...misplaced. It's also shot like a TV show and doesn't get anywhere near the levels of pathos that his other films do.

And to think he almost walked away from the industry because of it...



dammit t'was really good too, with Shane talking MB around all the places he filmed TiE and talking about his way of directing. Can you download it anywhere?



The People's Republic of Clogher
Heh, the first thing I did after reading your post was to check the SBS website - no joy. If it had been on the BBC or C4 they might have had it in their archive.

Then I checked the *cough* usual places but the only South Bank Shows I could find were about George Michael. I'll give Usenet a spin later, they might have something on alt.tv, though knowing my luck I'll get something to do with transvestites...



The People's Republic of Clogher
Excellent! Thanks Chris, you're a star.

Good little doc (and needing binoculars to make out what was going on in the podcast, it was indeed 'little') and great to hear that Shane's still planning on making the Bartley Gorman film with Paddy Considine.