Hard Men

"Hard men" never really made it and it's one of the greatest crimes in cinema as this movie made by Amalou (he only made 3 movies since now) is one of the rare pearls in today's British cinema. The violence of course refers to Tarantino, but so what?, hundreds of other movies did and it's absolutely funny. We follow the adventures of three maffiosi (their boss is the legendary Mad Frankie Fraser, played by himself) who earn "their" money. They do have their own techniques and as you can guess it's not exactly the most customer-friendly one. But once you're in the mob, there's no escape and one day one of the three becomes a father and want to become a family man he already wrote his testament. "Hard men" is a typical British movie that only will be understand by those who hate Mel Gibson-movies (the dialogue about whether Abba are good or not, is hilarious. Superb and one of the greatest I saw, plus tons better than overrated Tarantino-copies.

I watched this film expecting it to be bad. The title was off putting and I reluctantly let my friend hire it from the video shop.

I have to say, I loved it. For me, Hard Men isn't trying to be like a Tarantino film. It has a dreamlike quality and has the feel of a Sci Fi black comedy rather than a gangster film. The world in this film is definitely not this world.

If you liked Clockwork Orange, Gangster number one, Fight club, Resurrection man, or Twin town, then watch this because you'll either love it or hate it

A firecracker of a film, except that it was exposed to dampness for too long and fails to ignite. The premise is appealing enough: a 3-man gang of East London thugs do the business for the guvnor, one "sees the light" and wants out, the others get the order to eradicate him for whatever reasons. Tension, action, exploration of a conscience-troubled character would all seem to be laid out against the backbone of the plot to make for riveting viewing. However, what we get is a clumsy, crude, badly reworked mish-mash of other films, mainly plagiarising the Quentin chap. The jokes are frankly not funny and the dialogue so depressingly unimaginative. Bad language may add to authenticity, but (unless you write like Roddy Doyle) is not the key to belly laughs. "Hard Men" wavers between wanting to be uncompromising in its violence and wanting to please all by brightening things with colourful characters. Violent it certainly is, but the attempts at humour derail the carriage, leaving the viewer with a feeling of disappointment at what could have been, given tighter scripting, better actors, an engaging score and greater focus. "Lock, Stock ..." is a long way ahead of this in all stakes.

Kristian's comparison to A Clockwork Orange is spot on. This film has far more in common with that than anything Tarantino has done. I'm guessing J K Amalou worships that film because Hard Men (without stealing ideas as some have suggested) is like an impish little brother for the original. Like A Clockwork Orange, it portrays another, detached reality, far away from the bubble world of middleclass complacency and boredom. In this world everyone is messed-up, hostile, alone and paranoic. Like Alex and his droogs, Tone and co wreak havoc on the seedy, corrupt, rotting world around them with sadistic glee. The cartoon style of the violence puts us surely in the realm of the surreal, and the bizarre and colourful costumes fuse retro influences with 90s night life in London. This lends the whole thing a feeling of timelessness. Like A Clockwork Orange, it will probably age well.

The characterisation is good and the acting is great. Vincent Regan portrays Tone with a sensitivity to the paradox of a man who squashes the city lowlife as if they were flies about to defecate on his dinner, but loves his little daughter so much that in one scene he actually glows. I challenge you to decide whether you like or despise this man. Lee Ross is wonderful as Speed, a coke-fuelled, buzzin, cotton-wool-for-brains, obnoxious teenager. He is amazingly irritating, and is clearly about to burn-out or explode with self-loathing. Ross Boatman puts in a solid performance as Bear. He is not as compelling as Regan or Ross, but his character does not have the emotional depth of Regan's, or the high caricature of Ross's.

The dreamlike quality of the film is also supported by some gorgeous cinematography. The bright cartoon colours of cheap clothes, city lights, and mugs in numerous cloned cafes are shocking against the drab, dirty buildings. There is a scene at a deserted docks; it is mesmerisingly beautiful...a perfect setting for the final resolution of events.

Admittedly, I do have the feeling this film has imbedded itself like a hatchet in my psyche, a not entirely pleasant sensation. But, if you're not into facile, candyfloss cinema, and you enjoyed the battering A Clockwork Orange and Fight Club gave you, then you're gonna love this!

Tone, Bear and John are three hard men in the employee of London underworld boss Pops Den. They are collectors of money, threateners of people and removers of competition. However, with the birth of his first child, Tone decides that he has had enough and that he needs to turn his life around, starting with getting out of the life. When Bear tells Pops this, he orders them to kill Tone and bring him his severed hand by nine o'clock the next morning.

It is to be expected that, when one genre suddenly spawns a bit film, that many others will jump on the bandwagon - some being good and some being rubbish. We saw it with Scream when it relaunched the teen horror genre and spawned a tonne of copies. So it was no surprise to anyone (even if it was still depressing) that the success of a few British cockney gangster films with dark comedy spawned a raft of copies - most of which were average at best and ended up flopping.

Hard Men is one of these films and it deserved every penny it failed to get at the box office. The plot is almost none existent and centres on one night in the lives of these three. It would better if the events in the lives of the characters had mattered or been engaging but, because they aren't, then the plot just falls to pieces (not that it was ever really together). Instead it seems to revel in the grim of it's characters - but doesn't have the decency to make them people. One scene sees a prostitute talk about her years of abuse, but even that is just a scene to add shock value rather than depth. The film even has the nerve to look back fondly to the days of `civilised' gangsters (giving a cameo to Frankie Fraser for that reason) as if all the violence on display here is in some way admirable or a curiosity.

The cast are roundly bad but it is not really their fault - they simply have no material to work with. The cameo for a violent criminal is just pure bad taste and adds nothing to the film. As director and writer Amalou seems to have just fluked his way into the job on the basis of seeing better films and ripping them off. Certainly he brings no wit or style to his script even if his direction is actually quite good considering the budget he had to work with.

Overall this is a very poor film that will only appeal to fans of the genre - all others need to avoid it. I was surprised by just how rough I found the whole thing was - it lacked originality, revelled in uninvolving and seemed under the impression that the word `f*ck' is the height of clever writing.