|Page 1 of 8:||       |
|Index||72 reviews in total|
Where to start? No on-screen violence. No identities for the hoodies or
any real reason why they decided to kill everyone. Not a single likable
character. The protagonist is an alcoholic who hits his own 16 year-old
daughter! There's no one to root for, I wanted them all to die. It's a
These 'hoodies', you still can't see any part of their faces even in scenes where there are big fluorescent lights above them! Logic check! If you go by the start, they are also supposed to be 'F' grade students taking revenge (although this isn't clear), but they must have 'A' grades in Athletics because they run about on large bookcases in the library, fall from the ceiling at every opportunity, they act like stealth ninjas from start to finish.
The ending. Well, there isn't one. The few people that had actually stayed in the cinema just muttered "What?". It's all a very confusing and badly put together mess. Avoid.
In "the making of" on the DVD the writer/director claims it took him 2
years to write the script. One can only conclude that he lost most of
it and ran out of money before he'd finished shooting it.
The acting and horror are all at "Hollyoaks" level. This mess lasts a pitiful 75 minutes including titles AND HAS NO ENDING.
A school is attacked by hoodies except the hoods are completely pitch black with nobody inside. And you're never going to find out who they were or what their motive was because the film just ends.
Complete dreck and a waste of time. Even the digital grading has been messed up - it's a green/yellow mess.
This is a great independent effort. They really take an old fashioned simple concept and make it entertaining. The only real character to speak of is an alcoholic Teacher who appears to be coming slowly undone more and more. After being attacked by a student one day everything just seems to be going wrong for him. I'll just leave it at that. As the viewers were just kind of watching a regular day at school that goes horribly wrong when menacing faceless(which is also a nice touch) killers start slowly taking out all in their way. The movie works with a lot of camera angles, but has a couple of decent gore shots. The directors seemed to be making a more cerebral approach which worked with the breathing and spooky sound tracks. Also, the movie didn't wear out its welcome at an hour and 15 minutes. I would say this is a very watchable British horror flick indeed.
In North London, the teacher of the Wittering College Robert Anderson
(David Schofield) is hit on the face by a student and is forced to take
three months vacation to be not sued by the parents of the kid.
Robert is affected by the incident and a couple of months later, he is emotionally disturbed, alcoholic and separated of his wife Helen (Juliet Aubrey). Their daughter Kate (Eliza Bennett) lives with her mother and has classes with Robert, but she does not respect her father. The principal of Wittering College, Sarah Balham (Ruth Gemmell), loathes Robert and wants to get rid of him, but the Union does not allow her to fire him.
When Robert reads about violence in another school, he sends a memo advising the employees of the school and he is considered paranoid and delusional by everybody. One day after hours, Robert notes some strange movements outside the school and he advises the security guard James (Finlay Robertson) that does not give much attention to the discredited Robert. But sooner Robert realizes that the Wittering College is under siege of a gang of hooligans and he need to find Kate to protect his daughter.
"F" is a film with that had potential to be a great movie. Unfortunately the inconclusive story is shallow and does not develop the characters that are unlikable or the situation, and has a weak ending.
Robert is a looser and emotionally unstable; Kate is a bitch; Sarah is another bitch; Helen is also a bitch; James is coward; Kate's boyfriend Jake is a douchebag. Robert seeks out Kate in the school without any weapon (a piece of wood, a ax or whatever) to defend himself and his daughter from the gang. The conclusion is absolutely disappointing. My vote is five.
Title (Brazil): "Adolescentes em Fúria" ("Teenagers in Rage")
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Where do I start on how bad this film is? There is no gore or violence
so the DVD cover and marketing are very misleading. As is the 18
certificate which is hugely unwarranted. A group of teachers and
teenagers get stuck in a school late at night and are stalked by a
group of' hoodie' teenagers because one of them was given an 'F' in
class. That is literally the whole story and telling you that much
information saves you having to sit through 76 mins and still be none
the wiser. You never see the teenagers faces, they don't speak and you
never actually know why they are there or what the point is to any of
this nonsense. However they have the ability to leap around onto
lockers and tables like trained gymnasts and kill (although you never
see the killing, presumably the budget wouldn't stretch that far!) like
trained special forces.
The acting is barely average but the appalling script, low budget, awful direction and amateurish camera-work make this feel like a student film. And not a very good one at that. In fact they'd probably get an 'F'!!!!! This is genuinely one of the worst films I've ever seen and I wouldn't say that lightly. Everyone involved in this film should seriously consider changing career, with the possible exception of Roxanne Mckee (from Hollyoaks) who is a pretty rubbish actor but looks good in a pair of gym shorts!
This is a great little psychological horror/thriller, and I really wish
it was tagged as psychological because it seems as though some of the
marketing and expectations of other viewers was more geared toward a
standard gory splatter film. If that's what you're into then this may
not be the film for you, but if tension and filling in the blanks with
your own imagination is your thing, then you can't go wrong here.
The film does a great job of creating a realistic atmosphere and then slowly raising the suspense and this trend continues throughout. There is some graphic gore but it's used sparingly and parts of the narrative that would otherwise turn this into a non-thinker are wisely left out, which allows for a far more immersive experience as you draw from your own thoughts to complete the film. That isn't to say that the filmmakers have been lazy or simply ran out of ideas or money; it's all done purposely and it certainly achieves the intended effect. The unknowns are what make this film scary, and fear of the unknown is a far stronger emotion to draw on than fear of blood or gore. Also, the film doesn't fall into the (lazy) trap of using shock scares to make the viewer jump; the film stalks you as the assailants stalk the victims. This, as with most successful psychological horrors, is a more mature take on the genre and I am very glad of the break from formula.
In terms of production values, this doesn't fall into the B-movie category at all. The casting is great on all but one of the characters (I won't mention who, but it's a really very minor role which doesn't damage the experience) and the other actors all manage to realistically convey the fear that comes from being stalked by unknown predators. The video is crisp and the direction doesn't rely on cheap tricks like quick cuts, shaky-cam, or constant extreme close- ups, but goes for a more sedate approach which, again, allows for the tension to rise and rise. Audio production values are also top notch with an unassuming soundtrack peppered with the odd hint of spooky melody. Sound effects aren't over the top and increase the realism of the experience. I would have liked to spend more time in the college during a normal day to get an idea of the size and general layout of the place, as well as to contrast the emptiness of the building at night, but that's a minor gripe.
A lot of people appear not to have liked the ending, but (without spoiling anything) I will say that it fits with the rest of the film. It's largely a set piece production and, with the ending the way it is, there is scope for a sequel to expand on the events that occur in this film or, again, the viewer can draw upon their own thoughts and perspective.
Overall I found this film to be gripping, suspenseful, and with just enough innate malice and hold on reality to create a 'what if' situation where anybody, teacher or not, could see this happening to them at some point. I sincerely hope that a sequel will be made which maintains this level of self control over how much of the gore the viewer needs to see. It's certainly a cut above the formulaic slasher/splatter films that are all too common, and it's a lot more scary too.
First thoughts : This will going to be something good. No zombies, no aliens, no sadistic crap ... just pure it-could-happen-to-everyone horror movie. Maybe with expected ending, maybe something new, but I thought let's give it a try. And movie continues that way. Each human has some boundaries that either he is kept in them forever, or (if pushed too hard) breaks them and escapes, does something (super)natural or at least ... something. Both ways are good, which is human end of the day. But no. Not this one, not our hero. This movie tries to show something new, some alternative perspective while it enters into a nonsense experimentalism, virtual apparent calmness, which is just not realistic. This movie can even make you nervous as it is that silly. It would be better if movie would continue into direction of psychological internal battle of the main "hero" (whether to do something or do nothing) or deeper character analysis than entering into some very poor horror atmosphere, which at the end leaves you empty as shell. So why even bother to write a short poor review about this poor movie ? Purely for the reason that someone else would not make the same mistake I did by watching it. Actors are good, no doubt, but their performance and story they want to tell is just awful. For the beginning of the movie I give 10, for the ending 0. (if this would exist). Sooo average ... or even below.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
If you are looking for a gripping thriller with a suspenseful plot and
relatable characters, go elsewhere. After watching F tonight, I really
can not see where it's motives lie.
Let's get the good bits out of the way. There's a nice bit of gore here and there. The hoodies (yes here we go, playing off the fear the press has instilled in us huh?) can be interesting to watch at time, stalking their prey from above. Cougar-like really. Speaking of cougars.... the female side of the cast. Well, anyway, there's the good bits.
The rest is drivel. Most of it's been done before and better. Especially the driving theme of "father must save estranged daughter". That is such a rip-off of Taken right there.
Though my main problem here was this; the hoodies' identities are never revealed even though the all the way through the film, it felt like it had a "whodunnit?" vibe going on. Though the film did give us the main suspect right at the beginning, it then never expanded on it. The motives behind the main antagonists is never revealed and just umbrella'd under "Teens being teens" as though all teens are destructive beings. This didn't sit well with me at all.
The acting in places also left a lot to be desired. Characterisation was poor, the old horror tendency of making you want to walk up to the screen and slap the main cast for being so stupid is right here.
Anyway, F had some good concepts but didn't put them down well at all. I think if we had had more closure (seriously, when the credits rolled half the cinema stayed in their seats just going "Wait, what?". I won't go into it, but a character makes a decision which is very out of character compared to his previous self in the rest of the film) and if the identities of the hoodies and their motives been revealed, this would have made for a good film.
In the end. You just have to give this film an F.
An alcoholic teacher has to save his estranged daughter when a group of
hooded youths attack the school at night....
I liked the idea behind this film, but sadly as written, it doesn't quite work. The characters are largely unappealing so you don't really care what happens to them. For an 18-rated film, there is a surprising lack of on-screen violence. You don't actually see much on-screen, instead usually only seeing the bodies afterwards.
As a result, then the writer/director Johannes Roberts has to rely on his skill with a camera to create tension and any scares he can, and to be fair he does get the building tension as the film progresses just right. There are a couple of scares, but not many.
The cast do their best to look scared or terrified, but as said, the script makes them mostly unappealing people so you have no feelings for them and don't care if they live or die.
Another fault, for me anyway, was the apparent lack of motivation for the attack. Was it revenge for something? Did they attack out of boredom? Something to indicate why they were doing it might have helped I feel.
But Johannes Roberts does managed to partially redeem the film with a truly unsettling ending. I can't recall a recent film with an ending like this, and it actually works brilliantly.
Sadly though it is his writing that lets him down, which is a shame, as potentially this could have been very good indeed.
A missed opportunity.
F is written and directed by Johannes Roberts and stars David
Schofield, Eliza Bennett, Ruth Gemmell, Juliet, Aubrey, Roxanne McKee,
Finlay Robertson and Emma Cleasby. Music is by Neil Stemp and
cinematography by Tim Sidell-Rodriquez.
Robert Anderson (Schofield) is a teacher at Wittering College, when he is assaulted by a student for giving an F on his paper, it sends his life spiralling into a blur of alcoholism and broken families. 11 months later and back at work, Robert's worst fears about youth violence towards teachers and auxiliary staff comes true as the college comes under night time siege from a gang of faceless hoodies.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't, in horror, if you spoon feed your audience solutions and full on gore you get called unoriginal. Flipside of that, if you retain an air of mystery, keep the violence off screen forcing the viewer to fill in the blanks, and offer up a finale that makes you to think as the credits role, then you get called a cheat or ridiculous. What side of the fence you sit will most likely determine how much you like or dislike F. Roberts' movie follows the latter course of action, an acknowledged homage/spin on Assault on Precinct 13, it's the latest British film to tap into the growing adult fear of the "seemingly" lawless spurge of violence perpetrated by the hoodie generation. The generational gap and understanding appearing to be widening by the year.
Coming a but late to the party after Eden Lake, Harry Brown et al, F does carry with it premise unoriginality, more so considering those links with Precinct 13. Yet the director paces his story superbly, keeping the cat and mouse games at its core genuinely nerve shredding. The hoodie assailants are deliberately kept faceless, they are entity like, they move about the school interiors like Panthers, no words spoken, no cussing or street speak. When they attack, we only see them closing in to enact unspeakable crimes. We get aftermath shots, and they are horrific, but our minds have already done the work before that. Roberts also shows a good knack for prop unease, witness a basketball and a floor buffer used for some quality supernatural effects. All this is aided by Stemp's minimalist low plinking score and Rodriguez's stripped back photography.
David Schofield (Gladiator) gives a very compelling performance as Anderson, he is the key to the film's motives and means. Anderson is a broken man, betrayed by what he deems as an unjust system that saw him-the victim-as the guilty party. His paranoia signifying that of many an adult today, his fears and borderline madness are the central plot device, come the end it's at his feet that the questions and answers fall. You the viewer will need to reevaluate what has gone before and piece it together by using your brain. Bennett (Inkheart) is effective in the only youth role of note, Gemmell (Fever Pitch) scores well as the spiky headmistress, Cleasby (Dog Soldiers) does what she can with a small role and Finlay Robertson does a nice line in cowardly creepy as security guard James.
Those who loved the lamentable and unoriginal Scream 4 will hate this with a passion, and judging by internet reaction to it thus far, many went into F expecting a blood letting slasherthon. It isn't that sort of film at all, the creator going for something more to do with suspense, paranoia and using the noggin. Amazingly, in spite of familiarity of set-up and villains, Roberts' movie is a fresh alternative to the ream of boring slashers filling the theatres every other month. B-
|Page 1 of 8:||       |
|Plot summary||Ratings||External reviews|
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|