Ill Manor's is a hard hitting, gritty multi stranded tale
that follows the lives of a range of youths and inhabitants of the unforgiving
streets of urban London .
The debut feature film from Ben Drew, otherwise known as singer-song
writer Plan B. Developed from his widely acclaimed song of the same name
inspired by the 2011 London riots, Drew uses a plethora of unknown actors
such as Ed Skrein as Ed, Anouska Mond as Michelle, Keith Coggins
as Kirby, Lee Allen as Chris and Natalie Press as Katya.
The paths of these various characters are followed
individually and eventually cross in an explosive finale. Stolen objects change
hands between them, including drugs, money, a gun, a mobile phone containing
incriminating numbers, and even a baby! Everything leads up to a wild, hard
hitting, dramatic climax to what must be labelled a success as Ben Drew's first
delve into cinematography. Ill Manors also capitalises on Drew's musical
talents as he seamlessly embeds his powerful and emotional raps into the film
as a unique narration for the viewer; effectively capturing the emotion of the
rough, brutal scenes taking place on screen.
His success is not necessarily in the brilliance of the
storyline or the conviction of the actors, which are both accomplished; however
had I been watching the latest Hollywood
blockbuster I would have been slightly disappointed. That comment is in
relation to the fact that the film was produced on a budget of £100,000, which
is absolutely remarkable. The editing and cinematography of the film is
reminiscent of a Hollywood film with fantastic camera work and visuals that
seem incompatible with such a budget, taking into consideration that Hollywood cameras cost millions alone.
Oscar winning performances are not to be expected from
debutant actors. However as a whole the acting was a success with
some sparkling individual performances. Riz Ahmed may not be unknown but he
certainly isn't a household name. He effectively portrays the character of Aaron,
adding a clear sense of morality and emotional awareness that the other
spineless characters do not possess. Unknown Ed Skrein plays ruthless hard man
Ed with aplomb, effectively building a favourable relationship with the viewer
despite his antics that makes the ending so much more powerful. Playing such a
character whilst being able to gain sympathy and a fondness from the audience
deserves merit for such an inexperienced actor. Ryan de la Cruz, is also a
successful debutant made by the film. The 15 year old, who is in fact too young
to watch the film, is a brilliant embodiment of being succumb to his
surroundings and the motto of the film, "a product of your
environment". Brought up on a grim, unforgiving urban estate he is forced
to join a gang to gain a sense of authority and survive in such a hostile
environment for an impressionable child. An actor so young, able to illustrate
such a strong message while also adding a powerful sense of sympathy from the
audience has excelled his tender years.
Other performances include Lee Allen as Chris. While I feel
that he effectively portrays the authoritve character of Chris, I think that he
often exaggerates certain emotions in various scenes whilst also putting too
much emphasis on slang in his dialogue, making it often difficult to interpret
what he's saying if you're not familiar with London's urban slang, though this
was his acting debut and therefore can be handed some leeway. Natalie Press
however must also come under some scrutiny. Unable to rely on the excuse of
being a debutant to film, Press is an experienced actor who has appeared in
many productions such as; The Jury, Island and
The Pit to name a few. Considering this, her portrayal of Russian sex
trafficked Katya is very tame. In her defence the character speaks no English
and has very little dialogue, but her body language could have brought far more
dynamism and emotion to the character, instead of looking like a mere crying
Russian woman for the entirety of the film.
Plan B justified his choice of unknown actors by claiming they have experienced the grim realities seen in Ill Manors and they would capture the urban feel of the film; I believe he has for the most part achieved this. However, his other aim of this complex film was to shed light on the London Riots of 2011. He has tried to give an insight into why youths of today are so negatively stereotyped and make the choices they make, the slogan "you are a product of your environment" is certainly portrayed through characters such as Jake and Michelle.
Though, while he has embedded the motto into his film I
don't see Ill Manors in anyway enlightening David Cameron about the hardship of
life in urban Britain
any time soon. However, it effectively places the Olympic stadium in the
background of scenes constantly to represent the irony of government spending
on lavish architecture, yet down the road the gritty estates of the real Britain lurk, not the multi cultural,
opportunistic and hospitable London
the Olympics tried to elude.
In spite of this the film fails to do the
impossible task of justifying the dark actions and events that take place
on the estate. The character of Jake may gain some sense of sympathy, but surely
viewers must ask why young boys, barely even teenagers are asking for drugs and
out alone in the first place? Surely there is then the question of poor
parenting, schools and a whole range of other issues are brought up
without effectively portraying the characters as having no choice but to
succumb to the criminality surrounding them. Despite watching the film I still
feel that it is the characters choice to join a gang, to take drugs, to involve
your self in criminal activity in any way.
Perhaps because I have had the privilege of growing up in an
area not plagued by drug dealers and gangs I can't possibly understand the
position these characters are in, but the fact that I still share this view
suggests that the film has ultimately failed in its moral objective. However
Ill Manor's is an enticing and gripping film that effectively shocks and hits
the audience hard with its dramatic scenes and mainly convincing actors. I
would certainly advise anyone fancying a hard hitting urban thriller to watch.
My rating: 8/10
WWW: This is a brilliant review, showing a genuine critical perspective on the film and exploring it from a variety of different viewpoints. You've raised some valid criticisms while also acknowledging the film's relative success - this is precisely what we want to see in Media.
ReplyDeleteEBI: You raise many excellent issues but don't really address target audience or representation in this review. I don't think that's a major issue for a review but it is probably the most interesting aspect of our debates surrounding the film and I look forward to reading your thoughts on this elsewhere.