Why is this rated so poorly? - 44 Inch Chest (2010) Discussion

[–] Edward_de_Vere 13 years ago

Part of the problem was that it was advertised as a British gangster film, which it really wasn't. So audiences who went to it expecting another variation on The Krays were disappointed.

Taken on its own merits (basically a filmed stage play), 44 Inch Chest is a good film with very memorable characters, particularly Hurt and McShane's.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] McEwansExported 13 years ago

Agree.

reply

[–] waz_fukashima 13 years ago

Hadn't people seen Sexy Beast before this? Its the same writers.

Both films are not at all about crime exclusively, but they use criminal actions in order to develop characters in beautiful and unique ways i think.

Personally I don't understand why dialogue isn't enough for some people, its actually quite pathetic really.

The surreal elements weren't my cup of tea though, so its a 7/10 because the acting was pretty amazing.

reply

[–] clint-taylor 13 years ago

People Don't understand this movie, This movie Is like a modern day 12 Angry Men, except each man represents a part of the main characters mind... I think this movie was marketed wrong, But i will say, what would have made the movie awesome, would be if in the last scene when its just him and all the parts of his mind (or his friends if you don't interpret it that way) had left, if he just pulled a gun and shot the hostage in the head, and thats how it ends.

Yeah, maybe that would be too predictable, but the entire movie moves that way and letting him go just falls a little short

reply

[–] MrsAlSwearengen 13 years ago

I suppose he could have killed the hostage at the end, and it may have satisfied people's blood lust (as well as the blood lust of the other characters in the film), but if he had killed the guy the whole idea of the film would have been different. The fact that he let Loverboy go was extremely important to the development of Winstone's character and the message of the film.

As an off-shoot, this disappointment in not getting the revenge that seems imminent reminds me of viewers' unhappiness with the way Deadwood ended in Season 3. A big battle had looked to be brewing between the Deadwood camp and George Hearst's men, but when Swearengen decided the prudent thing to do was to let Hearst have what he wanted so that the camp could continue, showing a huge leap in Swearengen's intelligence and survival technique, viewers were sorely let-down.

Sometimes the adult thing to do is to take responsibility for your own actions, stop blaming others for your misfortune, and find a way to thrive in the real world without hurting others.

Man will never be free until the last king is strangled by the last priest

reply

[–] clint-taylor 13 years ago

Yeah I understand that, He did the "right" thing or at least he best thin after kidnapping the guy. But I think if he killed him after already getting to the conclusion that he shouldn't kill him, almost as if knowing the what he needed to do and then doing the opposite. I think that would have been a riskier thing for the writers to do, because he would have been killing his wifes lover also, which would further put him outside of any redemption...

I wouldn't call it blood lust for me, I just think the movie would have stood out more... if he did, and maybe even if he felt remorse after

reply

[–] MrsAlSwearengen 13 years ago

I wouldn't call it blood lust for me, I just think the movie would have stood out more... if he did, and maybe even if he felt remorse after

I hear ya!

Man will never be free until the last king is strangled by the last priest

reply

[–] torydude 12 years ago

"Why is this rated so poorly?"

Because it's crap.

With the talent, and possibilities, it's been given generous votes... Like politely helping-out a friend. That friendship is now bankrupt. The movie was pointless, and like a short-story painfully dragged-out.

Thankfully, not many people know of this movie.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LTUM 12 years ago

i totally agree.... way overrated

it looked great form the cover, which is why i chose it

also the winstone and mcshane combo appealed to me, i am a huge fan of sexy beast

but it wasn't a gangster film at all, and it bored me terribly

i can't stand a movie which is just a few men sitting in a room and talking for 90 minutes

it was ridiculous

drugs...changed...everything..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8MGBn3KawM&feature=related

reply

[–] herbertanchovy 12 years ago

I was quite disappointed when I saw the film. I think partly the problem was that with such an amazing cast, my expectations were higher. for all that, it was quite entertaining. profanity sounds much better with a cockney accent, and its the first time I have ever heard the term "cun*ing spunker" which cracked me up.
Its quite a lot more thought provoking than the average cockney-barrel-of-monkeys guy richie gangster flick and to an extent plays with your mind. I bet everyone was waiting for loverboy to get wasted?
I'd rank it 7/10, could be better but not awful

reply

[–] ribby45 11 years ago

OP -

Yes indeedy, where's the justice?

But, it's a very English film, as in the bad guys are B-A-D & not even a little funny like Goodfellas-type bad guys.

There's a lot of unreconstructed (and unforgiveable) DV.
Joanne WK's character belongs back at the end of the 80's (maybe even the 70's - unfortunately, I remember both vividly), but still well acted.

Ray Winstone is. . Ray Winstone.

The most unnerving bit of casting is Stephen Dillane - heartbreaking performance in God on Trial and he can do this stuff too?
Woah.

Back to the original point: it appeals to a very small demographic.
And I doubt whether it would stretch across the Atlantic.

Still compelling viewing, though.

reply