Cherry Tree Lane

Another hoody film.

A boring couple have their home invaded by some scumbags looking to exact revenge on their son. The usual tying up and degradation of the main characters takes place. The problem is I didn't care about them. The characters were so clichéd and one dimensional that I felt nothing for them.

The lead thug is just a ridiculous ball of unthinking testosterone that he's unbelievable. Couple this with his sidekick thug with a heart and it just gets stupider. I spent the whole film just hating the main thug, which I suppose was the intent. But I was just waiting to see him die and had no interest with anything else. Then just when you think the limits of believability can't be stretched any further, the thug's girlfriend shows up with her little brother in tow to watch. I think even an idiot would doubt a school child's ability to keep his mouth shut about witnessing the events which take place, but they let him stay all the same.

I'm not really a fan of the this kind of film but I had enjoyed the directors other films so I thought I'd check it out. Now I've seen it I never want to see it again.

Over nearly a decade of seeing films at the EIFF you naturally come across some bad films. Cherry Tree Lane falls into the category below that, the one were referring to it as "film" is an insult to other films. In short the whole "film" is a padding out of a 5 minute scene from a drama club or the like that doesn't even manage to make a full 90 minutes (estimated 75 minutes). The dialogue could easily have been improvised by the very young cast and the only directing tricks Paul seems so posses is ultra close-ups or foreground-object whilst we watch the scene in the background.

Leaving the second screening the audience were shocked at how bad the film was and for the second half, people were laughing at moments of apparent tension due to the complete lack of any substance or idea. The most laughable thing of all is this was actually up for the Audience Award! With one exception this is quite possibly the worst British film ever made (the worst being The Great Ecstasy of Robert Carmichael).

Cherry Tree Lane is an urban thriller about a couple whose home is invaded one night by a gang of youths who wish to harm their absent son. While they wait for the boy, they mete out some physical and psychological torture. Like all house-invasion movies this is a very disturbing film. It's not entirely dissimilar to notorious exploitation films such as House on the Edge of the Park (1980). Although, admittedly, the sexual violence in this thriller is committed off-screen unlike that earlier film's non-stop barrage of sexual assault. Nevertheless, Cherry Tree Lane is certainly in the same general ball-park, just toned down and with better acting performances.

All of the action is restricted to the interior of the house at the fateful address, generating considerable claustrophobia. The villains are typical London gansta youths - this is a house invasion movie for the hoody generation. It plays on middle-class fears of gangs of violent working-class youths. The young hoodlums seem to have come from a different world from their victims. They have no use for the contents that make up the unfortunate couple's home such as bottles of red wine or their DVD collection. This uneasy chemistry adds to the tension and adds a different undercurrent to proceedings. The film does stretch believability a little with the introduction of two teenage girls and a young schoolboy into the fray; they act as if this is a normal night out but it just seems inconceivable that they could be so blasé in this extreme situation. Nevertheless, the introduction of these characters does allow for the set-up in the final scene in the movie, in which things are left hanging on an unanswered question that leaves the viewer wondering if the horror of the night has in fact ended at all.

Overall this is not an easy film. It's intense and sometimes difficult to watch, and it truly offers no respite by the end. So Cherry Tree Lane is certainly not a film for everyone. But for those with a mind for something dark and troubling, it's a journey worth taking.

This is a typical home invasion type movie but the screenplay stuff was not so strong enough to hold the story.

The whole story happens inside a house. So the main revenge reference was just missing.

Acting was just OK.

The whole film seems like one scene just developed in a not so interesting manner.

I would say last house on the left and the strangers were good compared to this.

Just don't watch this with some expectations .

I would give 4 on 10

Writer and director Paul Andrew Williams surely knew his stuff with The Children (2008) and The Cottage (2008). Cherry Tree lane tries to make a horror about strangers invading a house but this time it's more about some hoodlums who are after the son of the house who has been clicking to the police. I can understand that for some it all looks like it could happen with themselves or their neighbours but it is a bit low on brutality or red stuff. So I won't say it was bad but it was more a flick with a message if you just watch the end. I would rather say it's a kind of thriller, drama.

What makes it more a thing that could happen to yourself is the fact that they spoke in their dialect. It surely shows how society is today but if you leave the message out of this flick then there isn't that much happening. The rape is done off-camera only to make the viewer think what will happen or what is going on upstairs. Maybe the last 10 minutes are a bit shocking for the easily offended but don't think that you will see Straw Dogs (1971) or The Last House On The Left (1972), therefore it doesn't have enough brutality or shocking moments. I can also understand why horror buffs don't like it. Just watch Inside (À l'intérieur (2007) instead if you want a gory disturbing house-invasion movie.

Mixed feelings about Cherry Tree Lane and I can understand why. Acting was rather okay but surely not an exploitation as those 70's revenge flicks.