The second in what is now a trilogy of a third retelling (Cus ow, ar, us farmhands like a bit of Essex glamour, bah) of a gang hit eighteen years ago from the date of Retribution's production and i'm bored already. Why the hell was this made!
Nonetheless, that comparatively prolific production company Press on Features did it again. Another TV movie masquerading as a feature existing only for that sweet, sweet tax break son.
The best thing about this by the numbers Essexploitation is the plot, which is the closest any of Press On's output has gotten to psychotronic. I thought when i first saw the, yeah, decent cover on my local Asda shelf that no, seriously? A sequel for a film that based (and prided) itself explicitly on a true story, no false names or nah'ing? Yes son, they even have in this one of the convicted for the murder played AGAIN by Billy Murray (Rise of the Footsoldier AND Fall of the Essex Boys, playing same REAL guy) and he's the narrative spine!
What were they playing at? A plea for parole? An awkward fix to get just that bit more of Murray's Kray inheritance pumped into this vanilla? I'm not going into more detail about this character's role because I'm not risking the ire of the keyboard warriors of the frappe table for something as non-existent as this... this. But in safely short, Murray's character's role in this is the most WTF element of the whole film and is the only thing worth seeing it for, unambiguously exploiting real life murder and turning it into some kind of brand recognition boll*cks. Christ, only in South-East. At least up north with efforts such as crime/found footage joint Diary of a Bad Lad (2010), they have had the common courtesy of creating a fictional story with fictional characters and left the oh so "USP" realism at just the aesthetics. Not down 'ere, we want bloody autopsy photos.
So what's the point me harking on about the morally dubious story? Well because everything else is just a TV pilot with swears and a bit of the ol' ultra violence. Was there sex in this? I can't be asked to remember, i honestly can't. But if there wasn't, another star down.
What really gets me about this arena of filmmaking is when these clowns get the idea that audience satisfaction is not the end all goal. Sure, ambition, go for it. But it's no social taboo why these films have any rightful claim to popularity at all. It's the violence, it's the sex, it's the drugs. With hooligan films, maybe add a sprinkling of hawkishness and machismo to the mix, but still, DELIVER! Deliver us from reality! All reality! Not just drop us off at that ruff pate a tane and have us wait around for last orders!
Concerning the film's content, there are a gang of four who just look liked they graduated from J Wills U, oh and one of them, or all of them, are computer genius', and of course all this is somehow linked to the Rettendon murders (You remember, the real murders that has inspired this dead on arrival sub-genre). There are some cops who want to take em 'dain, cat and mouse, there's a decently improvised and edited interrogation scene, some torture, some killing, oh my, blink and you miss it, ah and that's it i think. Crap.
Gentlemen filmmakers wanting to make such efforts (and ladies, but who am i kidding), the scenes of carnage and sex/filth/debauchery/lasciviousness/whatever the fu*k you wanna call it are all. Build your story around them, cause these UK armchair critics might scoff at these efforts, but when they say "expected descent drama/acting/direction" (please loveys, you fooling no one), but are actually saying is "no blood, no t*ts, no service". CARNAGE PLEASE! WHERE'S MY VIOLENT PRAGMATISM? Might as well watch mock the bloody week! Got more of a chance seeing t*ts and dramatic tension there then you do in A f**king Paul Tanter Film.
Fair dos to Tanter and all involved, as much as i want to one star such a redundant and passion impoverished film, i can't comrades. Socialism is dead. Stop pretending you're a wizard and get back to work! Brexit ain't gonna work by it's... well it ain't gonna work, but u still look bloody stupid in ya sandals. Why daunt u wear sneakers and beat your children like a real man an all dat. Where was i?
Retribution is not a bad film, but just a very unremarkable one. Moment's of cinema sleepwalk in and out as the great British gangster film wanders the care home hallways like as in most contemporary efforts. A good delivery here, a spiffy line there, some good shots even, minus the stock that wasn't shipped over from the first film. But none of it's enough to save this film from just being no more original than the seven hundred entries into it's genre before it and technically being no more dynamic than a TV pilot. All this with the consideration of the aggro an independent feature production brings and you have grim faces all around.
Cheap nothingness.
Nonetheless, that comparatively prolific production company Press on Features did it again. Another TV movie masquerading as a feature existing only for that sweet, sweet tax break son.
The best thing about this by the numbers Essexploitation is the plot, which is the closest any of Press On's output has gotten to psychotronic. I thought when i first saw the, yeah, decent cover on my local Asda shelf that no, seriously? A sequel for a film that based (and prided) itself explicitly on a true story, no false names or nah'ing? Yes son, they even have in this one of the convicted for the murder played AGAIN by Billy Murray (Rise of the Footsoldier AND Fall of the Essex Boys, playing same REAL guy) and he's the narrative spine!
What were they playing at? A plea for parole? An awkward fix to get just that bit more of Murray's Kray inheritance pumped into this vanilla? I'm not going into more detail about this character's role because I'm not risking the ire of the keyboard warriors of the frappe table for something as non-existent as this... this. But in safely short, Murray's character's role in this is the most WTF element of the whole film and is the only thing worth seeing it for, unambiguously exploiting real life murder and turning it into some kind of brand recognition boll*cks. Christ, only in South-East. At least up north with efforts such as crime/found footage joint Diary of a Bad Lad (2010), they have had the common courtesy of creating a fictional story with fictional characters and left the oh so "USP" realism at just the aesthetics. Not down 'ere, we want bloody autopsy photos.
So what's the point me harking on about the morally dubious story? Well because everything else is just a TV pilot with swears and a bit of the ol' ultra violence. Was there sex in this? I can't be asked to remember, i honestly can't. But if there wasn't, another star down.
What really gets me about this arena of filmmaking is when these clowns get the idea that audience satisfaction is not the end all goal. Sure, ambition, go for it. But it's no social taboo why these films have any rightful claim to popularity at all. It's the violence, it's the sex, it's the drugs. With hooligan films, maybe add a sprinkling of hawkishness and machismo to the mix, but still, DELIVER! Deliver us from reality! All reality! Not just drop us off at that ruff pate a tane and have us wait around for last orders!
Concerning the film's content, there are a gang of four who just look liked they graduated from J Wills U, oh and one of them, or all of them, are computer genius', and of course all this is somehow linked to the Rettendon murders (You remember, the real murders that has inspired this dead on arrival sub-genre). There are some cops who want to take em 'dain, cat and mouse, there's a decently improvised and edited interrogation scene, some torture, some killing, oh my, blink and you miss it, ah and that's it i think. Crap.
Gentlemen filmmakers wanting to make such efforts (and ladies, but who am i kidding), the scenes of carnage and sex/filth/debauchery/lasciviousness/whatever the fu*k you wanna call it are all. Build your story around them, cause these UK armchair critics might scoff at these efforts, but when they say "expected descent drama/acting/direction" (please loveys, you fooling no one), but are actually saying is "no blood, no t*ts, no service". CARNAGE PLEASE! WHERE'S MY VIOLENT PRAGMATISM? Might as well watch mock the bloody week! Got more of a chance seeing t*ts and dramatic tension there then you do in A f**king Paul Tanter Film.
Fair dos to Tanter and all involved, as much as i want to one star such a redundant and passion impoverished film, i can't comrades. Socialism is dead. Stop pretending you're a wizard and get back to work! Brexit ain't gonna work by it's... well it ain't gonna work, but u still look bloody stupid in ya sandals. Why daunt u wear sneakers and beat your children like a real man an all dat. Where was i?
Retribution is not a bad film, but just a very unremarkable one. Moment's of cinema sleepwalk in and out as the great British gangster film wanders the care home hallways like as in most contemporary efforts. A good delivery here, a spiffy line there, some good shots even, minus the stock that wasn't shipped over from the first film. But none of it's enough to save this film from just being no more original than the seven hundred entries into it's genre before it and technically being no more dynamic than a TV pilot. All this with the consideration of the aggro an independent feature production brings and you have grim faces all around.
Cheap nothingness.