IslandGuru Who payed the critics

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

paul2001sw-1 Peter Mullan's film about Glasgow's Non-Educated Delinquents is not quite as straightforward as it may at first seem: there are some fairly common elements (the bright kid trying to learn his way out of poverty, the drunken father, the violent street gangs) but also some odd, surreal imaginative scenes, and an overall narrative that grows more opaque the longer the film lasts. It's the scenes set at school, which showcase the diversity of approaches employed by the teaching staff, that are most powerful, making the point that if your rear children as animals, animals are what you're going to get out the other end. The almost total absence of any positive virtues: humour, love, progress are all absent from the narrative; ultimately make for hard watching. Mullan himself is mesmeric in a small role, but the failure to make that role more central is just one of the film's narrative oddities; as a writer, Mullan could have done with some help to better shape his material.

Theo Robertson This is the sort that wins lots of plaudits and it's not difficult to see why . It's like jumping in to the Tardis and finding one self in a distinctive time and place so much so you sometimes find it difficult to believe that you're watching a mere film and genuinely believe you're stuck in the time zone it's set . Then suddenly the social realism of the film starts over doing things a little and the hyper realism starts detracting from the reality There does tend to be an element of British cultural bourgeois mind set called " The cult of the proletariat " . By this I mean the bourgeoisie have an instinctive intrigue of all things relating to the lower working class environment but have a dread of ever experiencing it . It's no coincidence that protagonist John McGill is academically gifted and instead of pursuing the academic dream of attending University starts descending in to a path of crime and self destruction . There's no convincing incitement for any of this and the fact McGill could have been someone instead of a no one is quickly forgotten . All this gives the impression that McGill's life is a Shakespearian tragedy From a technical point of view there's absolutely nothing wrong with Mullen's film and shows what can be achieved with a small budget . It's superbly and convincingly acted by everyone especially by Conor McCaron as John McGill . The problems lie in exaggeration . When the film was released Mullen was on record as saying what violent times the 1970s were and he's not wrong . The strap was commonly , perhaps too commonly used by teachers at school but yet would you ever hear a teacher swear ? The dialogue might be authentic but the Glasgow vernacular constantly using the F word and the C word and ending nearly every spoken line with " Man " will make it very difficult for a non working class Scottish audience and one suspects the working class Scottish proles may not be the target audience

homer-simpson66 As per previous review it is episodic but an excellent piece of film. Throughout the film I was able to reflect on my youth and others I knew. Several segments where exceptional reflection. Characterisation was spot on.Belts whipped out from the shoulder and the flowing gowns - who'd have thunk it wasn't only my school!!! Looks like it ran out of an ending. Should be thought provoking but director should be able to direct to the end. Thrown to the lions is poor explanation for what has went before. Yes the Jesus vision is poor - but this is tempered by the almost anonymous but iconic cameo by the director.Anyone any other insight to the contrived ending?I would like to think that there are some insights that I have not considered that will improve this film scoring in my view. Maybe I just didn't twig to the ending!!!

sarashetty2006 Saw this film as part of the Tribeca film festival in New York yesterday My biggest concern with this film is that it's too White washed. I have lived in that part of the country and now living in New York with friends from that part of the world I find it hard to digest that everyone in the movie was white. I do understand that its not set in current day but even back in the day ethnic groups existed. They would have called for a greater conflict had they been represented. The movie doesn't seem to a true representation.Also the has moments of being too cheesy or calculated. The Jesus scene is completed uncalled for and it almost feels its a scene belonging to a different genre. I was extremely disappointed to see this film part of Tribeca's programming because there is nothing unique about this film.