Red Riding: 1974 & Red Riding: 1980
The Red Riding Trilogy is a three part crime drama that was shown in the UK last year. It is highly acclaimed and very gritty. The films are based on a quartet of books written by David Peace. All of the scripts were written by Tony Grisoni. They combined 1977 with the other years to make it into three films (that was due to budget constraints. All three films are being shown at the IFC theater in NYC as one long film with intermissions. They are also being shown on IFC on Demand on Cable. After seeing the first two films I can say that they work very well on television.
The first film, 1974, is directed by Julian Jarrold. Young Eddie Dunford (Andrew Garfield) is a young reporter for a local paper in Yorkshire which is in the North of England. He was down south for a while but came back home. He is working on a story about the Yorkshire Ripper who has killed several little girls during the past few years. He tries to work with the police but they are so corrupt that things just don't get done. When the body of the last murdered girl is found all hell breaks lose. Dunford talks to the parents of the boy who the girl's body. There is something very strange about the boy's father Martin Laws (Peter Mullan) but I can't say what it is since he only has one scene in the film. Not about to give up on things Dunford tries to talk to the mother of a girl who disappeared a few years ago. But things do not go smoothly when he tries to interview Paula Garland (Rebecca Hall). And things go from bad to worse when one of his colleagues mysteriously dies in a car crash. And that is all I will say about the plot. The story is quite absorbing and you must pay attention throughout. Garfield is very good and Hall is terrific. I always like seeing Mullan and Eddie Marsan has a small role as another reporter working for the same paper as Dunford. Oh, and Sean Bean is also very good as an unsavory character named John Dawson.
Now fast forward to 1980 to the same place. The Yorkshire Police have not gotten any less corrupt. Through the last several years there has been a number of killings of women - some who appear to be prostitutes. Is this still the same murderer as in the first film? The local police department decides to call on a detective from another part of the country. They feel that Peter Hunter (Paddy Considine) is the right man for the job. He takes two of his best police people Helen Marshall (Maxine Peake) and John Nolan (Tony Pitts) to help him out. Hunter is determined to find the murderer. But can he really accomplish this with all the resentment of the local police people bubbling around him? It seems that Hunter has demons of his own that he can't deal with. And while he is investigating an unexpected character from the first film reappears. And there is a surprise twist at the end that I didn't see coming. And, yes, I will not say more about the plot. Considine is very good as is Peake. In fact, all of the acting in both films are on target.
After seeing both films I can say that things are slowly starting to fit together. But I am sure that you have to see 1983 to really know what is going on. As of now, 1983 is not listed on the IFC on Demand channel. I hope that they put it on soon so I can find out the end result. All in all, the two films that I saw are well directed and well acted but a bit convoluted. You really have to pay attention and keep with the story. Yes, in the end it is worth it. And I certainly hope that the rumors that there will be a US remake are just that - rumors. I highly doubt that the studios will be able to make a better version of these stories.
The first film, 1974, is directed by Julian Jarrold. Young Eddie Dunford (Andrew Garfield) is a young reporter for a local paper in Yorkshire which is in the North of England. He was down south for a while but came back home. He is working on a story about the Yorkshire Ripper who has killed several little girls during the past few years. He tries to work with the police but they are so corrupt that things just don't get done. When the body of the last murdered girl is found all hell breaks lose. Dunford talks to the parents of the boy who the girl's body. There is something very strange about the boy's father Martin Laws (Peter Mullan) but I can't say what it is since he only has one scene in the film. Not about to give up on things Dunford tries to talk to the mother of a girl who disappeared a few years ago. But things do not go smoothly when he tries to interview Paula Garland (Rebecca Hall). And things go from bad to worse when one of his colleagues mysteriously dies in a car crash. And that is all I will say about the plot. The story is quite absorbing and you must pay attention throughout. Garfield is very good and Hall is terrific. I always like seeing Mullan and Eddie Marsan has a small role as another reporter working for the same paper as Dunford. Oh, and Sean Bean is also very good as an unsavory character named John Dawson.
Now fast forward to 1980 to the same place. The Yorkshire Police have not gotten any less corrupt. Through the last several years there has been a number of killings of women - some who appear to be prostitutes. Is this still the same murderer as in the first film? The local police department decides to call on a detective from another part of the country. They feel that Peter Hunter (Paddy Considine) is the right man for the job. He takes two of his best police people Helen Marshall (Maxine Peake) and John Nolan (Tony Pitts) to help him out. Hunter is determined to find the murderer. But can he really accomplish this with all the resentment of the local police people bubbling around him? It seems that Hunter has demons of his own that he can't deal with. And while he is investigating an unexpected character from the first film reappears. And there is a surprise twist at the end that I didn't see coming. And, yes, I will not say more about the plot. Considine is very good as is Peake. In fact, all of the acting in both films are on target.
After seeing both films I can say that things are slowly starting to fit together. But I am sure that you have to see 1983 to really know what is going on. As of now, 1983 is not listed on the IFC on Demand channel. I hope that they put it on soon so I can find out the end result. All in all, the two films that I saw are well directed and well acted but a bit convoluted. You really have to pay attention and keep with the story. Yes, in the end it is worth it. And I certainly hope that the rumors that there will be a US remake are just that - rumors. I highly doubt that the studios will be able to make a better version of these stories.
posted by Film Fanatic | 9:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home