Film Review: Dead Man’s Shoes

dead-mans-shoes-01

Richard (Paddy Considine) returns from the army to the village where he grew up to find that his mentally handicapped brother Anthony (Toby Kebbell) had been abused by a gang of local drug dealers. Richard decides to take the law into his own hands to exact revenge on each member of the gang.

You’ve got your Locks Stocks and your Snatches and other similar films that are constantly held up as shining examples of British filmmaking. However, whilst those films often collect all the plaudits, Shane Meadows’ 2004 thriller Dead Man’s Shoes easily stands shoulder to shoulder its peers and very much deserves to do so.

Whilst the revenge-orientated story of Dead Man’s Shoes is a relatively simple one, its narrative is really quite clever, never really letting you settle on your opinion of any of the characters until the very end. We are shown in flashbacks throughout the film what the gang did to Anthony, each helping to paint a picture of what happened. Some of the flashbacks make Richard’s actions seem somewhat extreme, whilst by the end, we’re left in no doubt as to his motivations for revenge.

But therein lies some interesting questions about morality and retribution. Do these people deserve to die? You’ll probably change your mind several times throughout the film and probably still struggle to come to any kind of conclusion. Pretty much everyone in the film (aside from Anthony) is abhorrent and repulsive in their own way; it’s difficult to know which side of the fence to fall on, which makes the film rather unsettling to watch.

6

The narrative is supported by a really strong script, co-written by director Shane Meadows, star Paddy Considine and Paul Fraser. It’s not a glossy script; it’s vicious and biting, but it’s absolutely perfect for the story. It’s also rich with dark humour, which is superbly offset against the violence in the film. The hapless drug dealers have some hilarious dialogue, which gives the film some much needed light relief. However, it’s Paddy Considine as Richard who really shines. We never find out what happened to Richard when he was at war, but this is clearly a damaged man, and Considine delivers every line with conviction, spit and bile. One particular altercation with gang leader Sonny, whilst the rest of the gang huddle inside an old Citroën 2CV is impossible to look away from.

Throw into the mix a fantastic soundtrack and some clever editing, particularly during a scene in which Richard drugs the gang, and you have a film where almost every single element comes together perfectly. It might have been nice to know a little more about Richard, but you could argue his clouded past actually makes the character more mysterious. The film clocks in at just under 90 minutes, but its runtime is absolutely spot on for the story. It’s tight and concise; no shot is wasted nor does it feel like it’s lacking in any particular area.

Some may find the whole experience somewhat shallow, but Dead Man’s Shoes is a prime example of how to tell a story on a relatively low budget. It’s violent without being excessively so, and in such a short space of time effectively creates characters that are funny, hateful, frightening, and those that you sympathise with. Film making in its purest form.

4 and a half pigeons

4.5/5 pigeons

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , ,

20 thoughts on “Film Review: Dead Man’s Shoes

  1. Huh. Sounds interesting… definitely sounds like something I might like. 😉

  2. Tyson Carter says:

    Nice job Chris. I’m a big Shane Meadows fan, and enjoyed this. Wasn’t surprised with the outcome (without trying to give anything away) but it was a very good film.

  3. Film making in it’s perfect form. Awesome. I’m not familiar with Shane Meadows so happy to expand my horizons. Great post!

  4. Mark Walker says:

    Excellent review of an excellent film, Chris. This is most definitely up there with the best of Brit crime-flicks. I’d even go as far to say that it’s my favourite. I really enjoy Meadows’ movies but I’d say that this is the finest he’s done.

  5. claratsi says:

    excellent point about lock stock and snatch being held up higher, great film, very nice review!

  6. Excellent work for giving this under-appreciated film a quality review. If you fancy a read here’s my review from a while back http://threerowsback.com/2012/06/28/three-rows-back-great-films-you-need-to-see-dead-mans-shoes/

  7. Nick Powell says:

    I am so glad to see someone else not only review this, but love this movie. It’s an absolute masterpiece and is so criminally overlooked it hurts. Shane Meadows is a phenomenal director and I watched this after falling in love with This is England. Thank you for talking about how it’s a perfect example of low-budget done right and it has an incredibly tight script that has a lot of surprises. Great, great review.

  8. Thanks Nick, appreciate the kind words! It really is a superb film and I’m so glad I finally got around to seeing it. It’s a real shame that it seems so overlooked, I think it’ll be one of those described as a ‘cult classic’ at some point. I haven’t seen This is England yet although after this it’s pretty high on my watch list.

  9. Nostra says:

    This is one of those movies not a lot of people seem to have heard about. I agree that it is just as good as Lock, Stock and those type of movies. One which you won’t forget anytime soon after you have seen it.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: