Holstra Boring, long, and too preachy.

Cleveronix A different way of telling a story

Stephan Hammond It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Catherina If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

FlashCallahan Nineteen year old Colin is trying to find his place in life. He believes in equality for all, regardless of race, colour, creed, sex or sexual orientation. He has nothing against money, but doesn't like what some people have to do to obtain money, or what money does to people. He loves Suzette, and she loves him, but is focusing on her career as a fashion designer. Colin drops his principles to do work for money to impress Suzette, as a photographer. Through this process, Colin finds that he ends up being the public spirit of the London teenager. But that work takes him from his own ideals, from which he may not be able to escape to find his way back to his self and to Suzette...........Somewhere in this pile of rubbish, is a wonderful work of genius trying to get out, and despite the fact that Temple is an artist in his own right,Mathis is a failure of epic proportions.And it's a crying shame, because there are some flashes of genius between the tiresome, tawdry dance scenes, and the first ten minutes really does build you up for something special.And that's the problem, just when you think its in danger of getting boring to the point of wanting to turn it off, a set dazzles you, or Lionel Blair pops up in a cameo, and this is how the film is for it's running time.Kensit and O'Connell are impressive as the Romeo and Juliet of the story, but the addition of some wonderful side characters such as Ed The Ted, and The Fanatic, leave them waiting in the sidelines just looking pretty.And then we have the Notting Hill Race Riots depicted using the medium of dance. Is this a flash of genius, or just pretentious prattle prattle aiming to challenge?It doesn't challenge, it baffles, because something that affected so many back in the fifties, has been resorted to the jitterbug.Like I've said, there are some flashes of genius, but at the end of the day, it just feels too pretentious for its own good.

hawksburn I always had a soft spot for this film for reasons rather intangible. It possesses that unmistakable 80's energy visible of a pre-ADHD era and a colour & style palate that not only screams at you but effectively bludgeons you over the head for extra measure. If you want to know what this film is about, it's all up there on screen.Unfortunately the visual vivacity does not extend to the script. In fact it outpaces the script, literally teasing it to catch up, and in the rare moments it does you're reminded exactly why it doesn't work. Somewhere in there is a story of young love torn apart, set against a background of rising fascism engineered by opportunistic property developers seeking to gentrify what's more or less a somewhat idealised version of a 50's London working class multicultural neighbourhood where everyone is poor but still able to dress stylishly and emanate urban cool. In other words "Slum chic". Temple just doesn't have the talent to manage it properly and at times it feels like one is watching two or three completely separate films. This feeling is most jarring during the complete lack of transition between the supposedly intertwining film plots. Instead of flow you get the abrupt introduction of a musical number and one that usually doesn't feel like it bears any resemblance to the scene you watched 5 seconds before. It feels like papering over the cracks primarily due to a complete lack of ideas as to how to properly hang it all together.That said some of the musical interludes are fantastic. Particularly enjoyable is Ray Davies lamenting his home life in the middle of a superb three level set from the bottom floor kitchen to the top floor attic, complete with nagging unfaithful wife (played by Mandy Rice Davies, there are many great cameos for film, music and history nerds to enjoy spotting), a lothario boarder and a energetically masturbating sex obsessed teenage boy.The performances are generally fine. I liked Eddie O'Connell tho it appears the complete box office failure put paid to any chance of a burgeoning film career as, other than the odd British TV series episode over the years, his place in the acting universe has become that of a rather minor character actor. Patsy Kensit does what she can but her role is tossed about on the confused whims of the director and screenplay more than any other, so it's no wonder that she comes across as emotionally unstable and I'm not entirely sure it's all down to her acting. Btw her name in the film is Crepe Suzette and that's far too easy to belittle so I won't.I've always been a big fan of the greatly underrated late Anita Morris and she does a role she can do in her sleep more than adequately. I'm also a big fan of 80's era Bowie (my formative teenage years) but his American accent is like a forced pastiche of every movie trailer voice-over guy you've ever heard. It's pretty awful.My favourite part of the film is the opening scene which is a wonder of marvellous choreography set amongst a magnificent urban set (obviously constructed inside a studio). The camera tracks our narrator and main character as he weaves in and out of streets, stores and alleyways, surrounded by the activity of probably a couple of hundred actors, musicians and dancers interspersed with moving vehicles of multiple types. It lasts for a good couple of minutes and it's a wonderful sequence. The The problem is it raises the viewer expectation level for the rest of the movie, something it simply fails to achieve.It's a film that seems like it's trying very hard to be an inner London West Side Story, set in an 80's ideal of what the 50's "should have been like". In that respect it almost feels like a companion piece to Streets of Fire, a mythical mostly recognisable land that isn't really here, especially given both films share a vaguely similar musical backbone (tho Streets does it better). Despite this it's still a remarkable curiosity that in the hands of a better filmmaker could have been a pleasant memory for many more than the few who bought a ticket to see it. As it is it's a colourful gaudy confused mess with the energy to power 10 films.

atlasmb Absolute Beginners was released in 1986, the same year that saw the release of another musical film about the 50s, Little Shop of Horrors. Little Shop is an edgy but camp doo-wop love story. Absolute Beginners is a much edgier, much campier view of society with a romantic back story. Some films that influenced AB are West Side Story (1961), Tommy (1975) and Streets of Fire (1984). Streets of Fire featured a similar story of a girl choosing a rich guy, trading the streets for security, against a backdrop of urban nightlife and confrontation, set to the lush music of the 50s and later.But the film AB reminds me of the most is One from the Heart (1982), Coppola's sound stage masterpiece. AB employs the same kind of stylish presentation, with sets bathed in primary colors and moody shadows, and camera movement that flows through the sets or insinuates itself through odd angles or unique perspectives.AB is very ambitious. With a talented cast of actors, singers and dancers, it reflects on the "invention of the teenager" in America, the search for monetary success and the "inevitable" selling out, the gentrification of London and its racial implications, criticism of capitalism through its (supposedly) representative advertising and marketing industries, and the proliferation of hate groups, especially those grounded in racial prejudice.But the music is what drives this film and it is worth seeing for the music alone. David Bowie, Ray Davies and Sade--among many others--are showcased on a soundtrack that includes 50s rock influences from rockabilly to punk.AB stresses style over substance, but there is plenty to think about. I think repeated viewings would reveal more and more as this film is dense with imagery and dialogue.Watch for the beautiful Patsy Kensit playing Suzette. And the credits show that Bruno Tonioli (Dancing with the Stars) plays a Maltese lodger--something fun to look for.It is also fun to note the 50s references in the film. For example, a hula hoop. And the coffee shop beat scene.

itc-emma I remember watching this film back in 86' when it first came out & what an awful film. The acting was atrocious the plot was so flimsy it would or is that should have blew away in a breath of wind. I think it put me to sleep on more than one occasion & i was not tired that i remember. Please avoid at all costs better still have all your teeth taken out with no anaesthetic cos that would be more entertaining. It's just a pity i couldn't give it a zero or a negative score. I wish i had not wasted my money getting this one from the video shop all i can say was that the tape it was on was still brand new practically hardly surprising as the film was so poor. If i remember right i sat & watched it with a girl i really wanted to go out with & the fact she was sat next to me was still not enough to keep me awake thats how bad this film was.