My Zinc Bed

This film is about a psychological tug of war between a rich guy and two recovering alcoholics.

The first half of the film is just plain dialogs between people who do not even have any body gestures. To make matters worse, the scenes were shot with a statically positioned camera. The dialogs are probably meant to be sharp, crisp and challenging, but they turn out to be dull, repetitive and pretentious. Furthermore, the whole plot is so monotonous, pointless and narrow. It only repetitively talks about Paul's desire to stay abstinent despite Victor's challenges. And why did Victor challenge Paul in the first place? The filmmakers should have at least spend a little effort on character development.

"My Zinc Bed" is a huge waste of time.

Packed in a tight 75 + minutes, 'My Zinc Bed' follows a pretty simple structure. The film is mostly a chambre piece that is told through a series of conversations between three people: a recovering alcoholic poet, a businessman and his trophy wife. The director tackles the themes of alcoholism and desire through complicated relationships between the three characters. The tension is mostly built through dialogue. Paddy Considine, Jonathan Pryce and Uma Thurman deliver excellent performances as they get under the skin of the characters. Had lesser actors been cast, this would have been a borefest. Even though I find 75 minutes to be too short a time for a film's duration, I liked that the writer stays focused on the main story and its principle characters. Due to the complex themes, 'My Zinc Bed' may not be everybody's cup of tea and it has been an interesting and involving watch.

I missed this when it was on BBC2 last year because I forgot to set the video, or rather I messed up setting the video and recorded something else instead. It took till recently to get the chance to see it again and so I did. The film is based on a play about addiction and sees recovering alcoholic and poet Paul Peplow interviewing millionaire businessman Victor Quinn. The interview is a flop but it leads Victor to employ Paul in a job that Paul quickly learns is unimportant and not something he is suited for. As with the interview, Victor continues to needle Paul about his addiction and his supposed cure. Later Paul meets Victor's wife Elsa, herself a former addict, and the two fall for one another behind the back of this powerful man.

Although I have not done a particularly good job of capturing it, this film did sound interesting to me and the cast especially seemed to offer much. At times the film appeared to be hitting this potential, with the tightly scripted and fast-paced dialogue that reminded me of David Mamet. Certainly the subject appeared to be of interest but yet somehow I found myself more interested in the occasionally pattern of speech rather than the characters or what was going on. In essence the subject of addiction and desire appears to be being discussed while also running it through the narrative but in reality it doesn't ever make it work as a discussion or a theme because it never feels real and never convinced me as a viewer to the point where I would have cared. We never really understand the motivations of the characters or the relationships between them – everything happens to fast or without any real reason, whether it is the probing/tempting of Paul by Vince or the sudden love between Paul and Elsa. This sort of atmosphere continues until the film reaches an end, which itself is quit unsatisfactory.

This is not to take anything away from the performances though because they are roundly good and it is only the material that lets them down. Considine, Pryce and even Thurman all play their parts well and they deal well with the pace of the dialogue. In each of them there is enough to suggest to me that they knew their characters and understood what was happening behind and beyond the words – however this is not something that they are able to bring to the screen and, as such, the film still struggles even though it has an impressive trio in what is essentially a three-hander.

It is a shame because the quality appears to be there and the potential is certainly there but the film cannot make it work. Maybe I would feel the same about the play, I'm not sure and may never know but certainly here nothing really ever rang true for me and the "discussion" in and around the nature of addiction wasn't strong or interesting enough to engage me, mainly because of the lack of any sort of clarity or focal point. Interesting for the flow of dialogue but flawed as a film.

I registered on IMDb simply so I could share my appreciation of this marvellous production.

The three main characters were performed to perfection by the brilliant cast. Thank you for bringing this wonderful play to our screens. Good in all things except perhaps the extent to which it felt more like a stage production than a televisual one.

Paddy Considine particularly was spellbinding as his performance ranged from a man teetering on the brink of self annihilation, convinced his slightest misstep would result in his end, to conflicted. Presented with the stark depiction of a safe life without passion or a passionate life doomed to disaster his inner turmoil was made clear to us, and we felt his turmoil, fear and excitement.

A quiet but tense piece, definitely not for those who hope for blatant excitement, being more a study of characters, each in his/her own privately nightmarish situation. Essentially a three-hander between Pryce, Considine and Thurman, all of whom turn in excellent performances of a solid script with many well observed turns of phrase and personality. Main weakness is how it dwells, for around 70 minutes, on alcoholic addiction to the exclusion of most else; but, if you know that going in, maybe you can handle it. Conversion from stage to screen works okay.

FWIW, the end credits show it as co-production of BBC and HBO.