DVD Reviews

Dead Man’s Shoes

Posted by Jarvis Mishler (jarvis@filmschoolrejects.com) on May 9, 2006

Final Grade: D

Dead Man's ShoesHot on the heels of incredible films like V for Vendetta, Lucky Number Slevin, and Hard Candy comes yet another revenge movie that’s, well, not so incredible. The worst part is that I was looking forward to a good thriller from the UK, but that was not the film that I got.

The whole experience began with a somewhat unremarkable storyline. A soldier returns to his home town to avenge the mistreatment of his mentally-challenged brother while he was away. Sound simple? It was. Although, it is important to keep in mind that a simple storyline does not necessarily equal a bad revenge film.

Normally, this is the part where I would elaborate a bit on the plot. This time, however, there’s nothing to elaborate on. Richard leaves town to go soldier, his younger brother Anthony stays behind. A group of recreational drug users and small time dealers decide to have a little fun with simple-minded Anthony while no one was there to protect him. Now that Richard is back, he’s making each one of them pay for what they did. That’s it!

Through a series of decently timed flashbacks, Dead Man’s Shoes elaborates on the exact crimes that were inflicted upon Richard’s younger brother, Anthony. The problem created by telling the story this way is two-fold. In the beginning of the film, I had no idea why Richard was harassing the gang of thugs because the film hadn’t told me yet. Secondly, Dead Man’s Shoes chose to enlighten me about the most grievous act done to Anthony only at the very end of the film. I had seen Richard kill several people for what seemed to be the only crime of pressuring little Anthony into smoking some pot. Now I could talk about the moral issues involved (or not!) with recreational drug use all day long, but I think we could all agree that talking someone into smoking weed is not a crime deserving death! As the movie continues, we learn that not only did the gang get him high, but they talked a girl into taking his virginity too! Shocking, I know. The bastards. And then we watch more people be killed for these crimes.

Are you beginning to see where the bad taste in my mouth originated? I spent over an hour watching a crazy soldier kill people for nothing more than sexing up his brother! It was disconcerting to say the least. The movie does redeem itself a bit in the end. The final few flashbacks finally show crimes that (for some viewers) may deserve death. The end of the film also includes an interesting fact, it seems Richard is a little torn up about playing his Spirit of Vengeance role. Learning this at the beginning of the movie could have created a powerful film about the inner struggle between justice and morality. Too bad that wasn’t this movie!

Aside from falling short on plot, action, and . . . well . . . good revenging in general, there is one nice thing I can say. Paddy Consadine’s performance as Richard was interesting. I’ve seen my fair share movies from the ol’ UK and consider myself quite a fan of the vast majority of them. Some how though, I’ve never seen him before. Was his acting superb or his emotion infinitely believable? Not really. But he’s got that mysterious quality that made him fun to watch and very enjoyable. I’ll be keeping an eye out for Paddy. (Now I just feel weird for saying that.) Consadine’s average performance was still not enough to save the below average Dead Man’s Shoes. It could have included better action. It could have given the audience some interesting moral quandaries ponder. It could have been a better revenge movie. But it wasn’t. I would recommend Dead Man’s Shoes only to such incredibly hard core fans of the lead actor that they absolutely have to see everything he’s done. Everyone else, STAY AWAY! You’ve been warned…

The Upside:
It wasn’t horrible…
The Downside:
What could have been a potent moral thriller fell very, very short.
On the Side:
When Richard breaks into the flat he spray paints “Cheyne Stoking” on the wall. In very sick patients, this is the name of the breathing pattern that is a sign of impending death.

Film Stats:
Starring: Paddy Considine, Gary Stretch, Toby Kebbell
Directed by: Shane Meadows
Writing Credits: Paddy Considine, Paul Fraser, Shane Meadows
Country: UK
MPAA: N/R
Run Time: 90 min.
Studio: Magnolia Pictures (official site)
Trailer

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,


Read more articles by Jarvis Mishler

Related Reading:

Discover More:
DVD Reviews,


7 Comments

richie roo says:

The plot centres on the misuse of recreational drug use and the way in which the effects can be felt in vulnerable people. It wasn’t only weed - LSD, alcohol and ecstasy were all forced upon Richard’s brother. The overall humiliation of his vulnerable relative is the driving force, but the twist revolves around the guilt Richard has for leaving him in the first place. Richard leaves to join the army, in the full knowledge that he is in effect deserting him, his brother with learning difficulties and inability to form solid social relationships.

He takes revenge on all participants, including himself in the final scene.

Couldn’t disagree with the review more. Ann absolute gem of a movie. Paddy Considane is fantastic, and incidently wrote the script in memory of a relative. A proper Britsh film.


Tara Tainton says:

Wow. Makes me wonder where those quotes/review comments on the cover of the DVD come from… The lying bastards.


aidan knight says:

dead mans shoes is 1 of the best revenge films ever(along with old boy & for a few dollars more). V for Vendetta, Lucky Number Slevin, and Hard Candy don’t come close. the twist is in the fact he’s dead. you say you’ve seen your fair share of movies from the uk, i’m sorry but james bond’s don’t count. what else can we expect from a narrow minded yank like yourself. for anyone that hasn’t seen dead mans shoes, watch it, its a must see


james robinson says:

no wonder you are a film school REJECT you obviously know nothing about film. if it slightly confused you by no being in the right order and therefore you didnt totally know why things were happening, well sorry pal, you obviously havent seen pulp fiction and the like. this is a BRITISH film with a moral core as shown by the ending which is a touch of class. its a film full of depression and anguish with an uneasy atmosphere throughout its an amazing film and it should be illegal to mention lucky number fucking slevin alongside this. its a brilliant gritty and moral tale with great performances, paddy considine is just terrifying and believable and i dont know about you but that was my brother they did all that too i might feel like exacting some revenge too.


Loukas says:

It’s a great movie. And i feel it has the moral complexity an american director would avoid like the devil. Especially crappy manipulating scripts like “hard candy”.


Stevie Bigalls says:

Awful review… You can’t even spell the lead actor’s name…


Matt Hingley says:

Bad review, one of the best revenge films of all time. I take it the reviewer has never seen Once Upon a Time in the West which uses the same format of watching the lead extract revenge for an unknown crime only glimpsed at the end.

It also makes you feel sorry for the victims… right until you see the full crime and then you feel justice. I found this was the strength of the film and did pose a moral question regarding deciding on punishment of crimes when the true horror of a crime is unknown.

As for the constant abuse (down played) of a mentaly disabled teenager it was horrific.

Great film, well put together story with a good emotional punch at the end, obviously not for those who need to be spoon fed.


Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!