The Low Down

The Low Down can be rated as an undeveloped good idea, not more not less.

The good side of this movie is the effort to capture an transmit the confusion of those years, but it falls hard on that, sometimes the movie captures the esense of that behavior, but those not transmit anything at all. After watching the 96 minutes I was like `so what?', not a single feeling about the film or the characters, characters that just wander, one does not know where they come, where they go, what moves them, you can not make any contact with them just watch the as watching a pst in the street.

I am waiting for the next movie to see where the director goes; it can be a very good thing or jus another empty presumptuous thing.

This movie was horrible. It was not interesting at all. They should have paid me to see it -- it was otherwise a waste of my time. There were a few funny bits in the movie, but that is all. The highlight is one of the main characters exploding in a fit of rage, and even that is grabbing for a high point.

The lives of a group of lonely London losers comes under the spotlight in Jamie Thraves' film 'The Low Down'. As a director, Thraves is very keen on breaking up the flow of images, and disconnecting them from the dialogue, a trick annoying enough when Soderbergh does it, but frankly plain odd in this film, which is otherwise unassuming and generally low-key. The script is good at the sort of dialogue spoken by people who don't really know each other very well, or like each other very much, but who pass the time in each other's company for the want of anything better to do, and there are some funny moments. But there's little real warmth on show, and little explanation provided for the characters's disaffection: pointless moody shots of overflying aircraft aren't really adequate for this purpose. Overall, it's a bit of a waste of the beauty of Kate Ashfield, and a forgettable movie.

This has a fresh "new wave" feel to it. It's filmed in an inventive and original style that makes it very watchable for most of its duration,

though there are influences, most notably Ken Loach with a hint of Mike Leigh on the acting side and Nicolas Roeg on the experimental way it's directed. It's not a total success it does seem to run out of steam towards the end, but it's still a very impressive first feature and hopefully the start of a long and interesting film career for the director. (7/10)

This is a suprisingly affecting, and understatedly powerful portrayal of growing up. Its a about the need for answers, finding our way and some role in life, as we begin to explore ourselves making the transition from young adulthood to the next unknown. Personally, to me, its about finding our place in the world and being contented with that. The film doesn't provide any answers though, just a breathtakingly poignant, some might say pointless examination into that stage in our lives. The film is stylistically directed. Certainly there are similarities to the work of the 50-60s by the french new wave of Truffaut, Godard and co, in its simple yet effective (and seemingly) improvised use of creative camera technique i.e. freeze frame, slo mo etc. The performances (apparently improvised - well some of it) are absolutley astonishing in their realism. All the characters have an amazing rapport and chemistry with each other - you really do believe they have been friends for a lifetime. Thraves is marvellous but no more so than the other cast. So realistic are they, that no doubt you will have met similar individuals at some point in your life.

A mini masterpiece of a debut from a promising director. 9/10