Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Neds (2010)

Director: Peter Mullan

Time Out rating

Average user rating

20 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out London

The Scottish actor and director Peter Mullan is a man intrigued and terrified by the ties that bind us – the links to our families, class and backgrounds that drag us to our destinies, sometimes kicking and screaming like the doomed women in his last film, 2002’s ‘The Magdalene Sisters’. His new film, ‘Neds’, is a no-nonsense, often brutal and violent film with the odd hint of dreamy, comic fantasy. It’s set in Glasgow in 1972, where it always looks like dusk in winter, and Mullan gives us a young teen, John (first played by Gregg Forrest, then Conor McCarron, in an assured debut), who makes a swift, downwards journey from gongs to gangs: we first meet him winning an award at his junior school – but before long, he’s wielding a knife as the most reckless member of a local mob of hard nuts.

Mullan points the finger at both school and home: John’s teachers are brutish, ineffective or mad; his father, played by Mullan, floats through the house like an alcoholic ghost and terrorises his mother with his tongue and fists; and his older brother Benny (Joe Szula) is a bully boy with a reputation that protects and defines his younger sibling.

The tale and its themes are familiar, and the most obvious recent comparison is Shane Meadows’s ‘This Is England’ – but Mullan and Meadows are miles apart in tone. Mullan rejects all cosy period tics and music choices and aims for a stark look and feel and a discomfiting clash of styles. Mostly, he goes for straight-down-the-line realism, but he also calls on heightened acting from some actors, such as from himself as John’s father and Gary Lewis as a teacher who gives John a piggy-back, and inserts some sequences of pure, expressive fantasy – one even involving lions. It’s a personal, affecting and pleasingly unusual film, a little too long perhaps and unwieldy in its final stages, but never less than shocking, powerful and utterly relevant.

Author: Dave Calhoun

Time Out London Issue 2109: 20 – 26 January, 2011

Email Tweet Share

User reviews of this film

Fintan Murphy said...

Posted on May 20 2012 03:50 I spent my teens and early 20s living in Glasgow so I was always going to love this film, which I did. The adolescent social heirarchy and class divisions were well-portrayed. The prevalence of alcohol, blades, machismo and meaningless territorialism that still characterizes much of Glasgow was humorously but accurately represesnted. The period was nicely recreated visually, but the one thing that occasionally broke the illusion was the use of modern Glaswegian vernacular instead of words that fitted the 70s setting. I suspect Mullen had to allow this to ensure that his largely inexperienced cast could exchange their dialogue with enough fluidity to sound convincing, but it did cause me to wince more than a few times; "amazing" has only relatively recently been commonly used to express approval. Glaswegian youths in the 70s and 80s were not so frequently amazed. Similarly, the term of endearment "mate" didn't used to be stuck on the end of every sentence between young men in Glasgow the way it is nowadays.
A minor issue though in what was a very enjoyable film.

Report as inappropriate
Hammy said...

Posted on Jan 07 2012 14:34 A brilliant film, yet, I don't get the part with the lions. What does it mean, anyway?

Report as inappropriate
George said...

Posted on Aug 30 2011 00:47 Okay but lots of things I didn't get, like WTF was with him duct tapping knives to his hands and did he kill his dad and did the lions eat him? Or just the person he made retarded and why did that guy give him a piggy-back at the start, he was like 15. Also I had to put subtitles on lol.

Report as inappropriate
Thomas Noctor said...

Posted on Jun 25 2011 17:00 Awfully, boring non sense! Waste of time and a contender for worst film of all time, dreadful, random and meaninless scenes. Weird movie!

Report as inappropriate
pedro de la fiesta said...

Posted on Apr 04 2011 09:46 I enjoyed this film. I am the same age as the main characters and was at school in the late 60s and early 70s. Thank god I wasnt living in Glasgow but I did recognise most aspects of the film and it felt very real to me. I didnt understand half of what was said but never felt that it ruined the film. I didnt need "SINGPOSTS" to explain the actions of the main character. I accepted that this was the truth as it felt like watching a documentary. I guess his big problem was he was bright but from the wrong part of town.
My only problem with the film was I felt I had seen whole chunks of it before. It was almost de ja vue at times. This didnt reduce my enjoyment of the film but a avoiding some visual and script cliches would have made for something exceptional as opposed to something very good.
If you've bever seen a film about growing up in a hard place, being in gangs and coping with violent peer pressure this film would be a brilliant brilliant film.

Report as inappropriate
Guns and biws NY said...

Posted on Mar 12 2011 04:57 kind of winsrtone-esque but is it a great film, no. Is it entertaining, yes. Its it violent, yes but not gratuitously. Its a shame because its disjointed, i feel it lacked a couple of scenes that would have made it a true masterpiece.

Report as inappropriate
Marsellus said...

Posted on Mar 11 2011 10:00 I finally got round to watching this the other day and while I am a massive fan of Peter Mullan and Glasgow based films, I was a little disappointed with this. The story is basically Football Factory without the football. I feel bad saying that because I wanted this film to be so much more. It certainly has a much better sense of realism than Football Factory but the mindless violence and thug characters are not as fleshed out as you might expect from someone like Mullan. Clearly he has an affection for the protagonist and Mullan quite rightly does not glorify the violence like Nick Love or Guy Ritchie would - but there should have been more time spent on character development. The main character goes from good to bad without much reason at all. One day he cares about his grades, the next day he mouths off to his teacher, the next day he's carrying a knife, the next day he uses it and so on. Why he does this is never addressed. Don't get me wrong, the film is still good - but it could have been so much better with a few tweaks to the script.

Report as inappropriate
David Campbell said...

Posted on Feb 18 2011 06:14 For a film which looks so good this is an ultimately disappointing ride and suggests a director without a whole lot to say. A 'wafer thin' plot ruins the enterprise and the story has already been told more eloquently in Small Faces.
The overall feeling I am left with is one of missed opportunities. The cast and crew deserved better from their writer/director.

Report as inappropriate
ARCHGATE said...

Posted on Feb 09 2011 08:24 To Peter Mullan: Congratulations on winning your award. Richly deserved. Your film is fantastic and bold. More please.

Report as inappropriate
Mike said...

Posted on Feb 08 2011 18:09 To those who gave this film an enthusiastic and accurate review, give yourself a pat on the back for spotting a winner - NEDS won the Evening Standard's "Best Film" award (7 Feb 2011).

Report as inappropriate
roger rabbit said...

Posted on Feb 07 2011 19:09 N E D S...Not Even Decent Shit !!!!

Report as inappropriate
Deec said...

Posted on Feb 03 2011 19:59 This is a great film with strong messages, well worth watching.

Report as inappropriate
garyehm said...

Posted on Jan 30 2011 00:40 saw it, loved it :) highly recommend it to anyone brilliantly acted and is as real as it gets

Report as inappropriate
critique said...

Posted on Jan 27 2011 17:30 Watchable albeit over-rated drama. Too much violence for my own taste. The swaggering, slightly chubby Conor McCarron reminded me of the young Ray Winstone in `Scum`.

Report as inappropriate
colin mac said...

Posted on Jan 27 2011 12:15 NEDS was very disappointing. There have been better movies about the same era including Peter McDougall's Sense of Freedom. Mullan had a chance to do well with this movie but it is far too long and the central character is one dimensional. Thre is also a lack of real Glasgow patter. As a result a we bit of a damp squib unfortunately.

Report as inappropriate