MovieChat Forums > The Street (2006) Discussion > My thoughts on The Street (which may not...

My thoughts on The Street (which may not be popular)

posted 16 years ago by ianster00
16 replies | jump to latest

I think The Street is a programme which completely misses it's intended target, and yet somehow is still given much praise and lauded as 'Quality drama'

My main problem with The Street is the fact that it strives for gritty realism and achieves anything but - It delivers nothing but absolutely unrelenting grimness, apart from the odd happy moment, generally at the conclusion and when they come they are infuriatingly cheesy and far-fetched.
The dialogue is terrible as well - in the most recent episode when the gran killer is discussing his childhood he says 'I lived through the cracks in the ceiling' - why on Earth is he speaking this way? It's like he's reciting song lyrics rather than having a conversation. The Street is trying far too hard to be profound, touching and gritty that it achieves none of the above, instead stretching our suspension of disbelief even further.

The cinematography only serves to make matters worse. Every shot is taken from behind a door, or behind a lamp, or if not that then the camera shakes uncontrollably. I suppose it is meant to create a fly-on the wall feel, or a documentary style but it is as subtle as a sledgehammer to the face, only making you feel the hand of an over-eager director and reminding us further that we are watching a made up story.

As for the ending - 'Ok, you rejected me in the worst possible way, but you killed a baby and it's gran so all is forgiven then' - WTF? Every episode I've seen tends to involve misery, hard luck, laying working class struggle on thick, some more misery and then topped off by a nice, ludicrous cheesy ending but this particular ending took the biscuit.

Ken Loach it ain't.

PS - This rant is basically provoked by reading in the papers about how great this is and being told 'You'd love The Street' by friends, and I'd rather get it off my chest on the internet rather than ranting at the friends who persuaded me to watch this.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ianster00 16 years ago

I suppose what I meant by comparing this with Loach was that he knows how to get the balance right, by always keeping the misery plausible rather than just heaping it up in a constant, near-unrelenting stream in order to show how damned tough life can be. Just thinking of 'Sweet Sixteen' or 'My Name is Joe' one thing that Loach never loses is realism, and a lot of that realism comes through moments of relief or humour - even when things are going bad there are the odd high points and our protagonists often manage to keep their chin-up instead of having things spiral out of control near-constantly as in the The Street, it lays the misery on far too thick to be plausible. In The Street you become resigned to the fact that absolutely nothing is going to go right ever, so you fail to care what happens to the people involved, until all of a sudden things transform and you are left wondering what the hell happened.

The characters are poorly drawn compared with Loach too - they have no human quality, instead they feel like cliches, mere tools used to whack the viewer in the face with a point rather than human beings. They don't speak in character, they speak in order to make the writer's point. That in my opinion is not what good drama is all about. I see what you are saying about prompting the viewer to seelife from the other side and not getting caught up in the mob mentality (as in the child killer story), but I suppose I already was on board with that idea and felt that this programme sacrificed entertainment, believability and good drama in order to achieve this, and it made the point in a (far) less than subtle fashion.

I'm not looking for constant happy moments, I would just like drama such as this to resemble something recognisable as real-life. I think what I said was that when the misery finally ends (always at the end of an episode) it is in a completely implausible and cheesy way - generally the main character's life just does a crazily complete 180 and we are given scant reason for it.

As for the cinematography, I don't think I asked for swooping crane shots, what I actually said was that the hand-held camera style was so conspicuous and over-used that it completely removed any suspension of disbelief and for me it had an effect opposite to the one intended.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] opusv5 15 years ago

As good as Loach is (though I thought that film dealing with the Irish troubles was a letdown,)he is also fairly political (an avowed left-winger), which "The Street" wasn't.

[–] brokenjukebox 16 years ago

I don't neccessarily disagree with some of the criticisms there- the ending was odd, as was the fact the girl forgave him everything after he told her- above all, the ending felt rushed, as often happens with The Street. As it's only 60 minutes long they often feel like they have run out of time and have to cram everything in at the end.

This particular episode wasn't perfect, but I thought the acting by Toby Kebble and Jodhi May was very good, especially the scenes when both were at the locked door- and frankly I think they dealt with the issue of rehabilitated child killers a lot better than Boy A did- that irritated me a bit, because everything there was contrived to make the audience feel sorry for him- they made him far too "nice" and not at all like someone who'd been incarcerated for most of his life, they made the victim an unpleasent character, they didn't give the victim's family any voice and ended with a cop-out suicide. The way it was done on The Street, despite some odd moments, was a lot better than that.

[–] Nriks 16 years ago

I agree completely. The Street is basically great acting coupled with weak scripts and second rate direction. It's enjoyable on a purely superficial level but doesn't come close to how great McGovern's earlier stuff was (particularly Cracker and The Lakes).

[–] Slippin24 16 years ago

And one can only hope that that great acting is recognized with BAFTA awards, especially for Jodhi May. Scripts often have weak points, but the actors who're still able to breathe life and energy into the characters deserve special consideration, imo.

[–] wielderofspoons 16 years ago

I agree entirely. This show was just so depressing. No-one ever laughs or smiles; it's just one layer of misery and bleakness after another. Wouldn't it be great if they all got up and starting singing, 'Always look on the bright side of life...'

[–] spambutty 16 years ago

Totally agree Slippin24

[–] author_scholar_gentleman 16 years ago

I'm not sure your points about the ending are entirely justified. While we know that she went back to him you don't know how long it took for them to completely get back together. What he said to her on the voicemail message, while it didn't completely redeem him for how he treated her, explained why he'd wanted to push her away. She would have started talking to him again at that point and then they could have moved on from there.

I think gritty realism is a word that gets banded about by reviewers more than creators. The Street sets out to be bleak. It doesn't set out to be realistic. No show does. If TV shows were a realistic portrayal of life then they would be boring as hell to watch. It'd take years and years for anything to happen.

I enjoy the Street a lot. I know the plots are often contrived and it is a bleak series but it does bleak well and if that's what you're in the mood to watch there's no doubt that it delivers. The acting never fails to impress either.

[–] gillianzz-1 16 years ago

I agree entirely. This show was just so depressing. No-one ever laughs or smiles; it's just one layer of misery and bleakness after another. Wouldn't it be great if they all got up and starting singing, 'Always look on the bright side of life...'

Can't believe you missed the humour!

...well written stories of people who endure, retain their dignity AND their sense of humour when all around them is 'bleak' are inspirational. Why do you think Dickens has endured all these years? They're stories of hope and optimism...the human condition...fantastic stuff Mr McGovern, you've done it again...

[–] bella_furie 15 years ago

It's FUNNY as well. That's a key element. And if someone doesn't see that, then they're not going to admire or enjoy it.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] minifie-1 15 years ago

The acting is excellent - Jonas Armstrong especially was a revelation after his crummy Robin Hood guff - but the stories are generally SO formulaic. Decent person gets in a rut, has bad time, pulls through, cue happy ending. Let's all have a drink and go to bed. The exception was the last episode, with Timothy Spall, but the atrocious writing made it very hard to care - he'd already stayed true to Ger in a previous episode, so change was needed for change sake. Ruth Jones was but a plot device to see off the wife and Tim's over-long closing oration embarrassing in the extreme.

[–] bancrows 12 years ago

Thank you for the frank and illuminating review. I won't bother with "The Street".