44 Inch Chest (2009)

10 Comments

1. 

   TDNathan from United Kingdom
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   While agreeing with the first reviewer that the plot could be summarised in the two words "nothing happens", very much the same thing could be said of "Waiting for Godot" and half the plays of Pinter. Indeed the style of dialogue is very reminiscent of Pinter, with the five main characters each portraying an archetypical personality type.
   
   The main point of the film is that the five characters are operating in a moral vacuum, and having to make their own decisions without influence from the law of the land or any other moral compass.
   
   It would seem that the Law is simply non existent in their world – they kidnap into a van in broad daylight in front of many witnesses without disguising the number plate, and they finally let their victim go having inflicted on him an ordeal which would earn them each a long prison sentence with only the slightest word from John Hurt's character that they don't want to hear any more about it.
   
   No, the whole point is that they, like the characters in Lord of the Flies, have to work it out for themselves.
   
   And this freedom allows them the range to each demonstrate their character with the finest of English acting. Some of their characters are rather hackneyed, like Tom Wilkinson's who moves seamlessly from discussing with his mother about her favourite TV show into being a heartless thug, in a manner reminiscent of the second scene of Pulp Fiction, but the John Hurt character is beautifully drawn, by script writer, actor and director alike.
   
   John Hurt plays an elderly man who clearly fancied himself as a ruthless thug in his younger days, and defines himself by his association with a psychopath gang leader. He is now treated with amused but slightly wary contempt by his friends, but is still determined to show his teeth by egging the Ray Winstone character into terrible and sadistic acts of revenge. The irony is that, in one of Winstone's psychotic daydreams, when given the opportunity to offer violence himself, his dentures fall out and he backs off, showing him for the toothless windbag he is.
   
   The other major archetype is a louche gambler and homosexual predator played beautifully by Ian McShane. In a scene reminiscent of "The Dice Man" he agrees that life and death decisions are too hard for an individual to take, and accordingly persuades Ray Winstone that the decision between flaying alive and release should be taken on the toss of a coin.
   
   The two main protagonists of the film are Ray Winstone, whose drink, shock and schizophrenia induced ramblings form the backbone of the script and Melvil Poupaud who never says a word and barely moves a muscle throughout the film. However, among a group of psychopaths, it is he, playing the kidnapped French waiter, who is the only one that the audience can relate to, and it is a tribute to Director Malcolm Venville that we know exactly what is going through his mind, despite his almost complete lack of expression.
   
   This is a film about the struggle between revenge, blood lust and evil on the one hand and justice, decency and humanity on the other. It is about a man working through a psychosis and returning to rational thought. It is about how people can reach their own moral selves without influence from Church, Law or Society.
   
   It is far from an action film, and if you want simple plot this is not the film for you, but it is a beautifully crafted set piece delivered by a very fine set of actors, performing a fine script and under subtle but powerful direction.

   Reply
2. 

   Tom Goodfellow from Sydney, Australia
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   (I saw this at the Sydney Film Festival, but IMDb has it as "in production", so I may have seen an incomplete version.) The pitch would have been something like "Reservoir Dogs meets Last Orders". From Reservoir Dogs we get the basic set-up of a bunch of crooks played by fine actors meeting in a lock-up and debating what to do with their captive, plus an enigmatic title and a flashback structure. From Last Orders comes a group of top-notch actors clearly enjoying themselves in a brown, downbeat London.
   
   Some of the dialogue is fun if you like expletives spat out in poetry-like rhythms. There are good jokes and the acting is, as you'd expect from this lot, pretty fine. I was particularly pleased to see Stephen Dillane get his chance to prove himself cinematically after such an impressive theatrical career.
   
   The downside is the plot, or rather the lack of it. The basic premise is laid out early on in the piece, and there is no real conflict to maintain our interest. Contrast the uniformity of opinion here with the combustible dynamics of Mr Blond, Mr White et al and the problem is clear. Some dream sequences intended to open the tale out feel forced, and a couple of minor twists are inconsequential.
   
   If this script had been produced with a younger group of unknown actors it might get hailed for its promise. With this cast, 44 Inch Chest can only be counted a disappointment.

   Reply
3. 

   C-Younkin from United States
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   British tough guys unite, and for once Guy Ritchie has nothing to do with it. "44 Inch Chest", from "Sexy Beast" writers Louis Mellis and David Scinto, boasts one of the best casts of the new year, with Tom Wilkinson, John Hurt, Ian McShane, and a very impressive Ray Winstone. And for much of it, that's exactly the point.
   
   Winstone plays Colin, a hopeless-romantic plunged into depression once learning that his wife (Joanne Whalley) is having an affair. He rounds up his friends, Archie (Wilkinson), Meredith (McShane), Peanut (Hurt), and Cal (Stephen Dillane) and kidnaps her lover boy.
   
   What follows is talky and stagey, but works if you're into tough guys dealing with sensitive issues of marriage and love to name a few. The dialogue is hilarious, expletive-filled, and at times kinda moving (a long speech about love given by Colin especially). And the real joy is watching these actors work together. John Hurt viciously growls his dialogue as the group's meanest and oldest. McShane is polished and soft-spoken as a single-life-loving homosexual. And Wilkinson, Dillane, and Whalley have less showy roles, but play them well. Unfortunately the second half drifts into a confusing bit of madness from Colin that gives the supporting cast little to do. But Winstone, going mano-e-mano with the mostly-silent lover boy, finds the tortured-soul inside this domineering tough and keeps you guessing how this all will end. Director Malcolm Venville creates suspense but can't overcome the condensed setting, no matter how many flashbacks or clips of old movies ("Samson and Delilah" plays into the film) he uses, and he fumble's the end's emotional climax, but top-notch actors make "Chest" worth seeing.

   Reply
4. 

   nathan_robins from United Kingdom
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   i really love this film and would say its rays best without doubt,this isn't a gangster film ,this isn't an action film,its a story and not just a story ,its a story that seems real.the script is top notch ,the direction is world class, the acting perfect.john hurts character is now one of my fav all time characters in any film and his profomance lives up to the character.
   
   i really hate how movies these days are about non stop action and no story yet people love them,the days of real acting is gone,classic films are not watched anymore,the days of the proformance making a film are over,well this gem has taken me back to the golden age.
   
   this should win awards

   Reply
5. 

   starvin4megravy from Australia
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   Well … I've always joked to friends that I'd happily pay to watch Ray Winstone cooking beans on toast. He's perhaps best known here in Oz for the wonderful Vincent, but has been a real favourite for me since his early work.
   
   However, if he'd got the saucepan and can-opener out at some stage in these proceedings, it could only have improved things.
   
   The opening scene is compelling, with Winstone sprawled semi-conscious on the floor amidst the wreckage of a family living room. As if the poor fellow clearly hadn't suffered enough already (even if we aren't yet privy to the particulars of his situation), the almost-forgotten hideousness of Nilsson's Without You provides perfect background music.
   
   Our hero's friends and family rally round in this time of crisis and there's some diverting argy-bargy (amid fantastic London locations) as our group of protagonists is assembled. This stage-setting phase of the movie concludes with the group's arrival at a grimy terraced house – I use that phrase intentionally because at this point the film effectively becomes a conventional play spread over two locations.
   
   This terrific cast never exceeds or even equals the sum of its parts amid production values that call to mind BBC's Play For Today in the 70s and early 80s. RADA's likely advice from an earlier period for portraying cockneys also seems have been in play – drop yourself about 3 social classes and 50 IQ points and you'll be fine, love.
   
   It's no mean feat to tell a fulfilling story within a bubble such as the one created here, and it doesn't really come off – we never learn enough about the relationships between the players or the context that surrounds some of the remarks that are made.
   
   Yes, Winstone's character is supposed to be confused, I do understand that, but I don't believe the audience should be sharing in that affliction.
   
   Stephen Dillane impresses but John Hurt's wasted here, and with his ill-fitting dentures (at least I ASSUME that's what they are … ) he channels Phil Davis doing his best Albert Steptoe impersonation at one of Mike Leigh's Christmas parties.
   
   The one lasting benefit for me is that I might just tone down my own swearing a little. They just don't stop in this film. Everyone knows that a well-deployed swear word can have massive impact, but this dialogue is peppered with Anglo-Saxon expletives to the point where it rapidly becomes not only meaningless but irritating.
   
   I suspect I sounded a little like this at the footy the night before, and I can only promise my neighbours I'll try to be better in future … and if that works I'll tell my daughter she should seriously think about doing the same!

   Reply
6. 

   (tottenhamtillidie@gmail.com) from sacramento, ca
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   I really didn't think I would be writing a poor review about a movie with Winstone, Hurt, McShane, Wilkinson and the still beautiful Joanne Whalley as central characters.
   
   However, this was just a waste of their talents and a boring film to boot. Its a talkfest so if you don't fancy the idea of almost all of the film consisting of dialogue in one room, this ain't for you. I liked the Before Sunrise and Before sunset movies with Ethan Hawke, these were talkfests too but they had a point and the characters were clearly defined.
   
   In this movie, you don't really know enough about anyone to really care, you don't know if Ray Winstone really is a bad husband and how well his gangster mates know him and why they know him which is important in the whole witch hunt that takes place.
   
   The writers for this wrote the excellent sexy beast and it looks like they didn't have anything left creatively here. Does every UK movie have to have a gangster undercurrent, its so overdone and this didn't help here, neither did the excessive swearing, I'm no prude, but it just wasn't warranted, if that was meant to portray Winstone;s mates as real hard cases, it didn't work.
   
   And the ending was the biggest disappointment of all, I ended up looking around in astonishment, asking "is that it then"? It made all of what we had seen in the previous 85 minutes redundant.

   Reply
7. 

   reni73 from United Kingdom
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   Not knowing much about the film beforehand, I was a little apprehensive about watching this, thinking it was going to be another 'gangster' film (having seen the cast list). I was very wrong, and surprised by the intelligence of the film.
   
   People who largely enjoy "bubblegum movies" (all flavour and no substance) will probably be bored and dislike the movie, but viewers who think between the lines will hopefully see the intelligence of the film and the excellent acting and scenes between the group of characters.
   
   I saw the film as a trip into someones nervous breakdown and inner battle with his conscience.
   
   ***possible spoilers***
   
   The wife of the lead character (Ray Winstone) has cheated on him and the film is centered around his decision to seek revenge or not. It becomes clear that he has a tenuous grip on reality as he explores his conscience and decides the fate of the french lover his wife cheated with.
   
   To summarise, an excellent film, strong performances from the cast, a well written script, and a thought provoking concept.

   Reply
8. 

   gav_mcc from United Kingdom
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   Like a lot of people who were eagerly anticipating this film, I too am a big fan of Sexy Beast. Ian McShane was quoted prior to the release of 44 Inch Chest as saying this new film makes Sexy Beast look like Mary Poppins – well it does – it highlights how great Sexy Beast is and how poor and pointless 44 Inch Chest is. Of course McShane was talking about the strong language used in '44' which grows ever so tiresome after the first five minutes. That's the first problem with the film - too much swearing. I find colourful language funny and entertaining but when every character is spouting it out constantly the words lose their impact and meaning and it feels like the writers just added most of the expletives for the sake of it. The highlight for me was not the actual film but the offended couple who walked out of the cinema only half an hour in! I could've followed them to be fair because at this point the plot had not progressed at all. I knew there was still an hour to go and had confidence something would happen – it doesn't. Sexy Beast went from A(the villa) to B(Logan's arrival) to C/D/E/F/G(Logan's mood swings!) to H(London for the job) to I(back to the villa again). '44' stays at A all the time with the slightest hints we might scrape to B but it doesn't ever happen. I did start thinking a possible twist was coming late on which may have redeemed the film somewhat but the hope came in vain. The acting was faultless as you'd expect from a cast of this calibre – it's the non-existent plot which obviously takes the film nowhere and creates a wasted cinematic experience. I left the cinema so, so, so disappointed.

   Reply
9. 

   Kaz Phillips (kaz@catbirdpictures.com) from United States
   24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

   44 inch chest is basically reservoir dogs meets jacobs ladder. a man's wife confesses that she's met someone else and, in a rage, he calls in his team of thuggish friends to capture the "loverboy," so that he can interrogate, torture and eventually kill him. typical revenge fantasy stuff. except it's all exactly that. a fantasy.
   
   his friends, the "thugs" that populate the whole film, don't exist. rather, they're each a facet of his own personality, the tough bigot, the sensitive flamboyant hedonist, the down to earth pragmatist and the volatile gentleman. they goad, restrain, and goad again, painting an indelible picture of the turmoil Colin is experiencing in the wake of his wife's confession of infidelity. some of the best writing about relationships and marriage that I've ever seen. incredible characterization, of all of them but in particular Colin Diamond (Ray Winstone.) damn, dude. breaking up is hard to do.
   
   kudos to mellis, scinto and venville. great work.

   Reply
10. 

    lupineursus (joethebear@gmail.com) from Maple Ridge, BC, Canada
    24 Nov 2011, 9:30 am

    I don't usually bother to write anything as it is either redundant or pointless, or I think it will impact no-one. I suffice to give points alone. This was a superbly done film. The acting was impeccable and the writing unusually well put together. One reason I think it did not do so well is that people have not had these experiences in their life yet, or if they have it is too painful to face. It hit home at a variety of levels and made my wife and I go over our own lives. I was riveted during the whole film and the ending could have gone any way. It took place basically all in one room. It would have made a great play if it hasn't or hadn't already. I have not checked yet. Yes. there was lots of profanity, but it went with the emotions evoked during the film. Bravo, for a film well done.

    Reply