Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

New Danny Dyer Movie - Vendetta

13»

Comments

  • #62
    Jumboman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭Jumboman


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Lennie James's may as well have been called Token given that he's in the film simply so people can't accuse Love's film of being racist.
    The film is not racist where are all the black gangs in it ? In that regard its actually PC. Its ok to show white people as criminals but not black people.


    Sean Harris's character seems to join the group because he's a racist who takes everything he reads in the Daily Mail as fact.
    Apart from that character there is nothing racist in the film.





    Are you saying that you think Outlaw is somewhat representative of modern day Britain?
    You only have to look at the recent london riots to see that Britain is lawless the police just stood by as people rioted.
    And does it matter if he says dealers or junkies,
    Yeah junkies are victims while dealers pray on the vulnerable. Its great to see someone taking on the drug pushers even if its only in a film.
    they also talk about taking out "cunts" which could mean everything from some guy who skipped ahead of you in the line at Tesco to rapists.
    Its a film what do you expect them to say ? By "*****" he means serious criminals.

    Britain is not lawless.
    During the london riots it was.


    The ideology is that there it's just not very well implemented. It's a film for people who see stories in the Daily Mail about emigrants destroying the country and march on the house of pediatricians baying for blood.
    Would you say the same thing about Harry Brown ?


  • #63
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Jumboman wrote: »
    The film is not racist where are all the black gangs in it ? In that regard its actually PC. Its ok to show white people as criminals but not black people.

    Apart from that character there is nothing racist in the film.

    The fact that there is but a single black character in the film kind hints at a reluctance to examine the questions posed in any depth. You kinda contradict yourself by sayign there is nothing racist in the film and then acknowledge that one of the main characters whom we are supposed ot root for is incredibly racist.
    Jumboman wrote: »
    You only have to look at the recent london riots to see that Britain is lawless the police just stood by as people rioted.

    So one incident of rioting is proof that a country is lawless. Bollocks, and police didn't just stand by. They tried to keep situations contained and the fact that there have been multiple people convicted of crimes during the riots kinda shows that the police didn't just sit by and watch.
    Jumboman wrote: »
    Yeah junkies are victims while dealers pray on the vulnerable. Its great to see someone taking on the drug pushers even if its only in a film.

    Taking on the drug pushers, Jesus but Love does no such thing. He throws in a few lines of dialogue and doesn't do anything but try to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Shifty is a film that looks at drug dealers and users in an honest, adult manner. Ill Manors does something similar and manages to say more about Britain in it's opening credits than Outlaw menages in its 100 minutes.
    Jumboman wrote: »
    Its a film what do you expect them to say ? By "*****" he means serious criminals.

    Why didn't he say that? The language is deliberately vague so as to allow people read into it.
    Jumboman wrote: »
    During the london riots it was.

    No it wasn't. A few isolated incidents which were contained do not prove anything. London is a safer city than Dublin and has an obvious police presence.
    Jumboman wrote: »
    Would you say the same thing about Harry Brown ?

    You cannot really compare the two. Granted it's been years since I saw Harry Brown but I remember it being a more intelligent Death Wish that posed some interesting questions and attempted to answer them. Surely the fact that Harry Brown's problem is with his own country men kinda means that there is no anti-emigrantion ideology there. To me Harry Brown is a film about a man facing his own mortality and in a moment of rage defends himself and realises how easy it is to take justice into his own hands. It's a film about a man with nothing to lose bar the respect of a handful of people who tries to make a difference and the most important aspect of the film is that were not baying for blood every time Harry kills unlike Outlaw which presents violence as something to take pride in. Honestly cannot believe that someone would defend Outlaw and not recognise what a horrible, mean spirited film it is. Of all Nick Love's films it's the only one I cannot defend or find anything to like in it. The fact that of all his films it's the one he seems least interest in discussing would hint that even he isn't all that proud of it.


  • #64
    Jumboman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭Jumboman


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The fact that there is but a single black character in the film kind hints at a reluctance to examine the questions posed in any depth.
    Do you want the whole cast to be black ?

    You will find that black people are a minority in most British films nothing unusual about that.




    You kinda contradict yourself by sayign there is nothing racist in the film and then acknowledge that one of the main characters whom we are supposed ot root for is incredibly racist.
    Your not meant to root for that character thats why sean bean shoots him.


    So one incident of rioting is proof that a country is lawless. Bollocks, and police didn't just stand by. They tried to keep situations contained and the fact that there have been multiple people convicted of crimes during the riots kinda shows that the police didn't just sit by and watch.
    Only small % of people involved in the riots were bought to court. The police were criticized at the time for not doing enough. There was reports that the police "were ordered to stand and observe". If the police had of got their act together the riots would of been over much sooner.
    It lasted for days it wasnt until the police bought in enough resources that they got it under control.

    Taking on the drug pushers, Jesus but Love does no such thing. He throws in a few lines of dialogue and doesn't do anything
    In the film they beat up street drug dealers then at the end danny dyer kills the main drug dealer whos head of the gang.
    opening credits than Outlaw menages in its 100 minutes.
    I think Outlaw did make good points about police corruption. We see that bob hoskins character is not promoted after 30 years because he "plays it by the book" In order words you need to be corrupt to get ahead.

    Why didn't he say that? The language is deliberately vague so as to allow people read into it.
    I got what he was saying. He was an old man who was pissed off at corruption and wanted to make a difference for once.


    No it wasn't. A few isolated incidents which were contained do not prove anything. London is a safer city than Dublin and has an obvious police presence.
    Knife crime is out of control in London. Knife crime in dublin is no were near the same level as london.

    You cannot really compare the two. Granted it's been years since I saw Harry Brown but I remember it being a more intelligent Death Wish that posed some interesting questions and attempted to answer them
    .

    Harry Brown was also accused of been a "daily mail" type film.
    Harry kills unlike Outlaw which presents violence as something to take pride in.
    The football factory promotes voilence alot more. In outlaw the gang only use voilence to "fight back".
    Honestly cannot believe that someone would defend Outlaw and not recognise what a horrible, mean spirited film it is.
    Granted its a flawed film that could of been much better but it alteast its not as generic as Vendetta.


    Of all Nick Love's films it's the only one I cannot defend or find anything to like in it. The fact that of all his films it's the one he seems least interest in discussing would hint that even he isn't all that proud of it.
    He said on the dvd commentary that people "wont get" Outlaw like people didnt get taxi driver when it came out.

    I believe the concept behind Outlaw were people feel they were "let down" by the justice system and decide to take matters into their own hands is a good one its just poorly implemented.


  • #65
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    There is no point arguing back and forth as you really seem to think that Outlaw is a film with something to say. It really isn't but I don't think anyone will convince you otherwise. Outlaw is a repugnant film that isn't intelligent enough to say anything. It's a film for people who read the Daily Mail and believe that asylum seekers are living in the lap of luxury.

    That anyone thinks Outlaw is comparable to Taxi Driver is farcical. One is an intelligent, adult drama which examines society and it's ills and how far one man can be pushed. The other is a dumb action film aimed at people who can't think for themselves.


  • #66
    Jumboman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭Jumboman


    Deleted User wrote: »
    "junkies, scum, *****, bullies, scum, the dogs".


    Your right he does say "junkie scum" in the PG trailer.





    But not in the uncensored trailer.



    As far as I remember in doesnt say "junkie scum" in the actual film.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Jumboman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭Jumboman


    Deleted User wrote: »
    There is no point arguing back and forth as you really seem to think that Outlaw is a film with something to say. It really isn't but I don't think anyone will convince you otherwise. Outlaw is a repugnant film that isn't intelligent enough to say anything. It's a film for people who read the Daily Mail and believe that asylum seekers are living in the lap of luxury.

    That anyone thinks Outlaw is comparable to Taxi Driver is farcical. One is an intelligent, adult drama which examines society and it's ills and how far one man can be pushed. The other is a dumb action film aimed at people who can't think for themselves.

    In fairness none of Nick Loves films make you think they are just entertainment.


  • #68
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Jumboman wrote: »
    In fairness none of Nick Loves films make you think they are just entertainment.

    That's not necessarily true, Goodbye Charlie Bright, The Firm and The Football Factory actually have a few interesting ideas in play and leave a lot to think about.


  • #69
    Jumboman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭Jumboman


    Deleted User wrote: »
    That's not necessarily true, Goodbye Charlie Bright, The Firm and The Football Factory actually have a few interesting ideas in play and leave a lot to think about.

    Such as ?

    The firm was one of most boring films I've ever seen that film was totally pointless.

    FF was mindless entertainment.

    I have not seen Charlie Bright so I cant comment on that film.


Advertisement