Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Casey Duggan It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

Kamila Bell This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Cassandra Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

NateWatchesCoolMovies Pains me to say this, but London Boulevard is a whole lot of nothing. Like, a disgraceful amount of nothing when you step back and look at the talent involved. I read a review on IMDb saying that "every element of this film is so right, but how did it end up so wrong?".. Sad to say, I couldn't agree more. This is one unfocused, meandering, royal catastrophe. Where does the blame lay? Who can say, really.. I don't want to lay it on the director, even though his only other feature, Mojave, was pretty dismal, but he'll find his groove. The cast is capable and willing, none of them totally phoning it in. No, I feel like it's the script, a botch job of a story consisting of scenes mired in a never-ending doldrum where nothing ever really goes anywhere and the characters get caught up in the purgatorial nonsense of it all. Colin Farrell is a tough guy who is hired to act as pseudo-bodyguard to a reclusive, neurotic film star (Keira Knightley), after which all sorts of freak occurrences and oddball Brit-bag characters get in the way. He's got a wayward sister to protect (Anna Adriel), a volatile partner in petty crime (Ben Chaplin) a nosy DI on his trail (Eddie Marsan) and all these chess pieces converge upon the arrival of London's most fearsome crime boss (Ray Winstone), who has a bag of bones to pick with Farrell for a number of different and equally muddled reasons. Winstone tries to pull him back into the game with vague homoerotic intimidation, Knightley wistfully wallows in depression with her druggie friend (David Thewlis, looking like he forgot to read the script) and hides from paparazzos, the story clumps along missing every beat and wasting a decent score as well as some stylish flourishes on events that no one seems to care about, least of all the audience. Perhaps that's why Farrell scowls his way through the whole thing, and not in a smouldering, potent way either, more like a confused, begrudging participant in a pointless exercise. They really should have gotten their act together a little more with a cast and budget like this, found a better script and given us something worth seeing. Instead we're given the cinematic equivalent of a pocket of lint, promising on the outside before we look in, ripe with potential but filled with nothing remotely worthwhile once we look inside. Shame.

Ole Sandbaek Joergensen I have been wanting to see this for some time, there is just something special about British action movies, the language is just so much cooler and the characters for some reason gets more evil without being anything different or doing anything different then what they would if it had been an American flick.This is just moving a bit slow, there are some very nice scenes and good dialogs, but the pace of the movie is a bit boring. It never really gets into fourth gear, sometimes gets up to the third, but never higher and that is a shame. The acting is great, the characters also great, the scenery very fitting and the story also quit good, but the fast paced, hard hitting action is missing.

siderite This is one of Collin Farrell's better movies, I would say. He actually plays a man with a complex personality and large emotional range. Unfortunately the plot of the film is somewhat thin. You have this London underground which immediately attacks freshly freed from jail Mitchel. He has it so tough to stay straight, with offers for more or less disreputable jobs and a lot of "gangsta" shenanigans that don't really make any sense if you look at it from afar. The obsession of the gangster boss with Mitchel is as difficult to explain as is Mitchell's inability to use his God given skills to get out of a sticky situation.It's not that the movie is bad, it's that the story is pretty obvious and teaches nothing. There is no humor, Knightley as a love interest was never my cup of tea and by now it's gotten really old, and the London gangsters and their propensity for showing off is not the crowd pleaser that it used to be.So, sorry, an average film with pretty good actors is still an average film.

Marc_Lowell It's too bad the rest of the film was not as interesting as the graphics used in the opening and closing credits (I don't think talking about the closing credits can be described as a "spoiler"). This is the kind of film I would describe as a British version of the American genre "mumble-corp". It's one of the few times I wished I had set my preferences to show subtitles along with the English version of the film. The greatest crime perpetrated in this film is that good actors capable of so much better actually got paid for the rote performances they all turned in. The British gangster genre is something that stands on its own for the sheer villainy of the bad guys. However, the histrionic levels of punishment meted out by these gangsters is so over the top that you have to ask yourself: "Was that really necessary?". In the words of the late Toronto film critic, John Harkness, "Wait until it comes out in video and then don't rent it."