London Boulevard (2010) Reviews

• Welcome to the disappointment

  mattbaxter722010-11-29

  In a lot of ways, this is a puzzling movie. Every single element of it is so right, so how does it end up being so completely uninvolving that I ended up nearly falling asleep halfway through? The problem isn't the casting; Colin Farrell makes a hell of a gangster, all smouldering machismo stomping through the streets of London. And with a supporting cast that includes Eddie Marsan (sleazy), David Thewlis (sleazier) and Ben Chaplin (sleaziest, and very, very good), Farrell has some excellent support. Ray Winstone has never been scarier, but of all people it's Anna Friel who takes the acting honours as Farrell's sister, a woman who out-sleazes Marsan, Thewlis and Chaplin combined. The problem isn't the locations, or how true to life they are. I lived in London for a long time, and I've rarely seen the city depicted better, all back streets and alleyways with nasty bastards lurking around every grubby corner. Considering the film's writer and director William Monahan is from Boston, I was worried that this might be the tourist's eye view of London, but that really isn't the case. The film positively drips with atmosphere, and the expletive-heavy dialogue rings true. And yet it all sits there, lifeless on the screen, a collection of images and characters that seem only vaguely related to one another. It doesn't help that the main plot - will Farrell become a proper gangster, or will he end up with Keira Knightley's way-too-good-for-him actress - is hardly new. But that doesn't have to be a deal breaker, and there are plenty of interesting minor characters to pass the time. The problem is really that the film feels rushed. Those minor characters aren't given nearly enough time - Marsan gets three scenes, none of them remotely important to the plot, and even Anna Friel doesn't get a lot to do. She's still better off than Stephen Graham and Sanjeev Bhaskar, great actors who are cast in completely pointless roles that could have been played by anyone. And so much of this movie feels tacked on, from the dozen or so subplots, to Winstone's pointless murder of the wrong man halfway through, to the stalker, obviously based on Mark David Chapman, who makes several ominous appearances and is then dismissed in a single line of dialogue. If some subplots and characters are pointless, though, the ending made me feel that way about the whole damn film. Without giving too much away, it's a horrible, limp lettuce of an ending, with none of the resonance that the film-makers clearly thought it had achieved. That's the film in a nutshell - it wanted to be profound, but ended up as a giant 'so what?'

• Good movie, better cast.

  lewiskendell2012-02-25

  "That's why nobody wants me to be a gangster. Because I could not stop if I started." I mainly wanted to see London Boulevard because of the pairing of Keira Knightley and Colin Farrell, and that part of the movie certainly didn't disappoint me. This is definitely Farrel's film, and he carries it well. Knightley is much more a side character, despite her prominent place in the posters and advertisements. And while she's good in her part, Farrell is what makes this interesting. The guy is absolutely ferocious in this movie, and any fans of his will be pleased.  The story of a man, fresh off of time in the prison, struggling not to be drawn into the violent criminal world that everyone around him seems to think he belongs in, is an average one. It feels a bit haphazard at times, which seems due to the way the plot continued to change as the film was being made. It progresses in leaps and fits and starts, without ever really establishing a steady flow. The scenes with Knightley and Farrell together seem from a completely different flick than the scenes with Farrell in his violent criminal element, due to the drastic differences in tone between the two. That's not a flaw in itself, but it highlights how piecemeal the whole film can feel at times.  What makes London Boulevard a memorable movie despite its issues is the characters. Beyond Farrell and Knightley's hounded actress, Anna Friel, David Thewlis, and Ray Winstone each help carry the story along with interesting roles that they play just perfectly.  I recommend London Boulevard if you're a fan of anyone involved, but don't expect a traditional English gangster flick. Or a perfect one. 

• Entertaining if you can look past some of the poor writing & clichés

  Jaime-b2011-03-24

  This film was brimming with potential, an adept cast, some stylish directing & gritty yet beautiful set locations. However some of the story & the actions taken by its characters were implausible, & most of its ideas didn't develop effectively on screen. Recently released gangster Colin Farrell meets a young female friend of reclusive celebrity actor Kiera Knightly & offers him a job protecting her from intrusive paparazzi. He shows up for work & What feels like a scene or two later they have (unconvincingly) fallen in love. parallel to this Farrels character is finding it hard to escape his past & is soon roped into a feud with gangster boss Ray Winstone. He is now faced with the dilemma of either returning to his previous nature or beginning a life of new found love in LA. All this is played out with some very stylish moments, such as the dialogue between Winstone & Farrel in the restaurant or the artistic but realistic way in which the environment is captured. All the acting is well done & Its accompanied by a great soundtrack, but a huge amount of the script feels rushed & underdeveloped. As a whole it is entertaining if not taken to seriously but may not appeal to any serious film enthusiast. I also felt that the ending of this film was brave but what I had seen prior to it lacked enough substance or attachment to make it stick & I think I would have been more satisfied with a conventional ending.

• You wouldn't believe how underrated this movie really is...

  snookie-62011-03-18

  It just kills me that once again I had the (un)fortunate chance to trust someone with an answer to a simple "Is it any good?" question. People all around me were bashing this movie before I watched it and I heard so many things. I heard it stole the plot from Carlito's Way, I heard the ending was disappointing, I even read comments like "Keira Knightley has no tits and less talent". The only thing I'm disappointed of is myself for believing all of these s... tuff. Yet I'm kind of glad I read and heard all the negative responses, because it caught me off guard even more than it probably would've if I'd seen it without somebody's thoughts. The acting and script were superb. Knightley's performances almost made my heart skip a beat, Farrel's teeth grinding and weird expressions got me all worked up about his problems, Winstone was giving me the creeps and Thewlis got me laughing out of my breath. "I'm an actor - I can feel anything about anything". Great script, superb acting - if you're a fan of one of the actors in here, a fan of British cinema, a fan of the crime genre or a fan of quality pictures in general - this is the movie for you. Oh and remember - when it comes to art and judgement - trust ONLY yourself! You owe it to yourself to go see this movie! 10/10

• From the writer of 'The Departed', a British gangster movie with a twist…

  ajs-102011-11-13

  I remember when this came out it didn't make any big ripples in the pool of critical acclaim. Just another British gangster movie was the vibe I got from various sources. Even so, when it recently aired on TV I decided to give it a look. I must admit I was pleasantly surprised to find a very understated, but at the same time, quite violent film that I quite enjoyed. It does have its faults though; I'll get to them after this very brief summary. When Mitchel is released from prison having done a three year stretch for an assault he finds it all too easy to slip into his old ways. An old friend, Billy Norton, sets him up with somewhere to live and takes him out collecting protection money in the high rise flats. It's not what Mitchel wants though and he is tempted with an offer of a job looking after reclusive actress, Charlotte. Her assistant (for want of a better word) Jordan shows him the ropes but he is always being dragged back into the world he is trying to escape. A big crime boss, Gant, wants him to steal from Charlotte, but he has become very attached to her. Can Mitchel get away from the life that sent him to jail or will he be sucked back into that life to protect what he holds dear? There is much more to it than that but the Spoiler Police have threatened to take away my PC if I say any more. A very well made film with some interesting performances. I thought Colin Farrell did a decent job as Mitchel, although I did find his English accent a bit odd. Keira Knightley also put in a decent turn as the slightly paranoid Charlotte. David Thewlis as Jordan and Anna Friel as Briony (Mitchel's sister) were excellent. Finally, Ben Chaplin as Billy Norton and (of course), Ray Winstone as Gant both did excellent work also. I found the film quite confusing at first, there were many threads that started and didn't really seem to go anywhere. Once the Mitchel/Charlotte storyline gets established though, it does become more coherent. As I said at the beginning, it's quite violent and so maybe not one for the more squeamish. Rather a lot of time is spent on establishing Mitchel as a gangster and not enough on his blossoming romance with Charlotte. This meant that I ended up not really convinced by their relationship in the end and so it didn't quite work (for me). It is still worth a watch though and I'd still deem it… Recommended (just). My score: 7.1/10 IMDb Score: 6.3/10 (based on 13,450 votes at the time of going to press).