We'll Take Manhattan

I love photography, and whilst I knew I wasn't going to be watching a masterpiece, I did hope for something at least interesting and re waking about the legend and his muse. Instead I was offered what I assume we're anecdotes from Bailey's memoir that barely get fleshed out and then moved on to the next obvious bit of storytelling. The acting was pretty average and overall I felt somewhat cheated. Bailey being one of the best fashion photographers in British history, I had hoped for a deeper look at this man. Instead I watched the end credits and wondered if the swinging 60's was actually all hype.

This dramatisation of the epochal David Bailey / Jean Shrimpton photo-shoot in New York, January 1962 made for an entertaining if occasionally shallow viewing. Presented very much as a confrontation between rebellious youth and fusty conservatism (in the person of their accompanying chaperon, the tyrannical, but brittle and of course much older Lady Rendlesham), Bailey and Shrimpton are portrayed as the advance guard of the whole Swinging 60's movement, a point rather unsubtly made with its references to the Beatles and Mary Quant just before the end.

Whether Bailey's contribution to photography was quite as seismic as the Beatles on music or Quant on fashion is open to debate but as a light, amusing and easy on the eye entertainment, it worked well I thought. Bailey's famous pictures are well recreated, much to the righteous indignation of behind-the-times Rendlesham, and while there's not much more to the piece than their various contretemps, interspersed with Shrimpton's occasional vulnerability, precocity and gaucheness, one has to respect the difficulty in making the fashion world a gripping dramatic undertaking.

The acting of the three leads was very good, Aneurin Bernard especially good as the saturnine, Cockney-on-the-make, "don't call me David" Bailey, Helen McCrory equally so as the ever-so posh Lady Rendlesham and if Karen Gillan sometimes seems too old for the 18 that the real Shrimpton was at the time, she comes through in the end as her character develops some maturity and wisdom. I don't have much of an opinion of the fashion world but saw from this how the whole "supermodel" phenomenon of recent times got its start. Whether that was something I desperately needed to know, I'm not sure but the production did satisfy my curiosity in British popular culture in the 60's and was also one of the rare programmes my wife and I could sit and watch together with equal interest and yes, enjoyment

never heard of these people! so i decided to watch and find out.

first i could not understand some of the dialog due to that inner city British accent - sorry. then the editing jumped around so. the story line is disjointed early on so you cannot get to know these characters. it was as if the director was in a fuss to get to the NYC scenes.

the NYC part of the film is much more interesting and in that the characters shine. unfortunately they must have hired a 10 year old to do the 'tourist' snap shots of the city as those photos were just awful an added nothing to the story. we know they are in 'the big city'.

the two strong willed leads and the insecure model slowly become a bit unbelievable and then the shows over!

will not watch again.

I enjoyed the movie despite it's foibles hence the rating, but apart from Karen Gillan as Jean Shrimpton who was fabulous, the acting was pretty poor. Bailey's over the top Cockney accent was excruciating and Francis Barber seemed to keep forgetting her posh accent. Putting that aside the story (true in part), scenery and costumes were lovely. The best bit was seeing shots of the original photographs at the end. Although it didn't exactly pay homage to him, David Bailey certainly was an amazing talent.

Terribly childish script, superficial with very one dimensional characterisations; makes the acting look very hammy. Such a shame - they had all that style and locations to play with - such a waste.