Dead Man's Shoes

On paper I can see the argument that there is little morally redemptive quality to a film like Dead Man's Shoes, no diamond polished by the end credits to reward an audience going through the trauma. But to actually sit through the film, and most importantly, to be subjected to another of Paddy Consadines' electric performances, is an extra-ordinarily vital, if viceral experience.

In 'A Room for Romeo Brass' Considines character shifted from comical to threatening in a truly unsettling way, although in the end his promise 'to go dark on you' is easily thwarted by the decisive action and confidence of a father-figure. In this film, again, there is some uncertainty on the audience's part as to how far the character will go, as until the end, we are uncertain of exactly what he is revenging.

Rest-assured, Considine delivers an absolutely convincing depiction of a man struggling to balance his desire for revenge and redemption, he invokes sympathy and fear from the audience in a performance to rival DeNiro in 'Taxi Driver'.

I judge a film on the value of the experience it gives you, and 'Dead Man's Shoes is more than worthy of your time.

It doesn't rely on CGI or explosions, small town, small budget but an epic film. The acting is superb, the plot is fantastic. I've rewatched several times now and it never gets old. A must watch. 10/10

'Dead Man's Shoes (2004)' might just be one of the bleakest films I've ever seen, a near-nihilistic revenge story in which there are no real heroes and violence begets no satisfaction. It really is grim, putting Paddy Considine's angry ex-army-man on a path of no return and painting him as just as much a monster as the thugs he's after. A large part of this is due to the fact that lots of screen-time is given to the no-good, small-time gangsters who find themselves hunted by the protagonist. Even though they're nowhere near likeable - or, even, empathetic - you can't help but identify with their sheer terror as they're picked off one by one in an unrelenting, merciless fashion. The violence of the movie truly is shocking, yet never overly gratuitous. It's frank, ferocious and, sometimes, difficult to stomach. It's also never glamorised, even if it is focused on somewhat. The effect of the picture is palpable. It isn't enjoyable, per se, but it's compelling and challenging. Without offering so much as a sliver of hope, the piece pulls you into its seedy world of wrongdoing and revenge and doesn't let you out until it's well and truly finished with you. 7/10

Having left the army, Richard returns to the rural Midlands where he grew up. His brother Anthony is mentally a bit slow but has suffered at the hands of a group of small time pushers and dealers. Calming sleeping rough with his brother in a ruined farm just outside the sleepy little town, Richard makes first contact with one of the men before making his intentions clear. As the warning shots end, Richard begins to cut through the group that harmed his family.

There are plot holes here; there are gaps in "real world" logic that, if you want to, you can pick at and annoy yourself before dismissing the whole film as nonsense and going back to the telly to watch action movies. Several reviewers on this site have done that and I'm not entirely sure why. I didn't feel I was allowed out of the grip of the film for long enough at any point to start to think about these things because to me it was dark, gripping, very well written and complex enough to keep me gripped throughout. The story appears to be about revenge, but it is as much about an avenging force as it is about revenge – the latter sounds harsh and emotional, Richard is cold and cleansing. This aspect of the story is interesting mainly because it is tense and quite gripping, but the film works so well because it is only one of the aspects that works. The flashback scenes are gripping in the way that we don't know where they are leading but we know how very serious it must be because the actions led us to this place. Meanwhile the film's main triumph is that we spend most of our time with the dealers and users – the "baddies". Doing this stops us just rooting for Richard and seeing them as "bad men" who we just want to see dead; by getting to see their characters, we may not care for them but we certainly don't see them as fodder.

The cast are roundly good and play it very naturally and convincing as real people. The script helps them a lot of course but I got the impression that a lot of it came from them. Considine has a complex character and I won't pretend to totally understand who he was but I thought he great a great job leading the film – I suppose writing it must have helped a little bit! Kebbell is also strong, not allowing Anthony to just be a character of pity but one that we do feel for. Support from Stretch, Bell, O'Neal, Sadot and the others may seem basic but their "chav" clichés are actually convincing characters (sadly) and their emotions, fears and pain is convincingly real. The main star for me though was Meadows, who has done a great job structuring the film and also delivering it with a great deal of style – but not to the point where it gets in the way of the film.

Overall this is a dark, compelling film that has great writing, acting and directing. It has plot holes if that is what you want, but I was so gripped by the film that I didn't mind. An impacting film that is like a breath of disturbing fresh air compared to what is usually in the multiplexes.

Dead Man's Shoes has been compared to Get Carter by critics, which while a good comparison, Dead Man's Shoes is a different breed of revenge film.

Naturlism is the order of the day, a common feature in Shane Meadows' films (A Room For Romeo Brass, 24/7) where Richard, an ex-marine, returns to his home town to exact revenge on the petty drug dealers that abused his retarded brother. Far more than your average revenge movie, Considine elevates it into a terrifying area, electrifying every frame he is in. You will laugh at the drug dealer's talk of porn and "al fresco" - but the minute Considine enters, the laughter stops. Totally believable, and the drug dealers (Gary Stretch and others) are fantastic support too.

The story is not as developed as I hoped it would've been, sometimes creating frustrating anti-climaxes here and there, but this is only a minor problem. The killings are well thought out, scary and well paced throughout. The plot, although simple (initially) does become a more twisted prospect towards the end - so it is a highly rewarding movie. Being only 86 minutes long helps a lot too, as the movie runs at a brisk pace, just right for it's genre.

Along with Get Carter, this is one of the best revenge films, and one of the best thrillers to come out of the U.K. The cinematography is bluntly physical and realistic, the music well implemented and the acting spot on. To add variety, the movie adds dark humour to create a great film. People who are expecting a blood-fuelled rampage of retribution ala Kill Bill will be disappointed. Dead Man's Shoes is an expertly delivered thriller, with subtle tension and great performances.

Well worth a watch.

8/10