|
|
Post by jill on Dec 9, 2006 12:10:19 GMT
I have to admit that when I watched Once Upon a Time for the first time a couple of years back, I didn't much like it. But I watched it again this morning in the light of Shane's comments about it (on this site).
For me, the whole success of the film hinges on the dynamics of the love triangle and, for me, the film doesn't work for that reason. It was interesting to read Shane's comments about not having complete control over certain aspects of the film. I remember watching the interview with Robert Carlyle on the extras disc and him saying something about how he changed the character of Jimmy from being an evil character to one who is more sympathetic. This seemed to have more to do with Carlyle's desire to avoid being type cast than what the plot demanded? If Jimmy had been played as more of a shit, it would have completely altered the dynamic of those relationships. First, because it would have made the audience much more sceptical about his motives for coming back. Second, it would have made Shirley into a less likable, but more interesting character, who is torn between a man she loves (in a fair world, she wouldn't) and a man she doesn't, but who represents security. That in turn, would have increased the sympathy that the audience has for Dek? As it is, faced with a choice between between a bloke who's a waster, but genuinely loves her and a dork like Dek, Shirley's choice is understandable and so her 'dilemma' less interesting, because it's less of a dilemma. Also, I thought softening up Jimmy shifted the balance of the film too much. Shane's films always have a lot of humour in them, but the films deal with some pretty dark themes. This could have been the case in Once Upon a Time too? As it is, that change maybe turns it into more of a comedy than a tragic-comedy??? So, maybe having Paddy play that role as it was originally intended would have made a big difference? (should say, I'm a big fan of Carlyle, but not in this film).
If memory serves, I think Ricky Tomlinson wrote some of the songs too, which made me wonder about the sound track- a Clayhill soundtrack would have given it a more serious feel maybe and contributed to getting the comedy/drama balance right?? Anyway, just some thoughts and maybe I'm way off the mark, but seemed to me on a second watching that the concept of the film is good and the plot, dialogue etc is also sound-just let down by the way the way the relationships play out.
I understand what Shane says about wanting to do things his way, but personally I really hope that Shane gets a chance to work with a big budget and 'star' cast again in the not too distant future, under circumstances where he has creative control, because I think he could make something pretty special. Hope TIE provides the catylst for that.
Btw, I bought the DVD specifically for the Pacino/Sommerville tryst-think I might sue :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by jill on Dec 9, 2006 14:01:26 GMT
A question for Shane: on the subject of dark themes, did you originally intend for the abusive nature of the relationship between Jimmy and Shirley to be a more central part of the story?
Maybe I am reading way too much into this, but the more I think about it, the more I think that the decision to 'soften up' Jimmy's character spoilt the film. Dek tells us that Jimmy used to knock Shirley about, but beyond that, that aspect of Jimmy-Shirley's former relationship seems to be lost-mainly because of the way Carlyle plays Jimmy. If that's the case, the audience would read the whole story differently? If Jimmy had been played as an abuser (as opposed to just an unreliable/waster type), it would have added so much more dramatic effect to so many scenes-e.g Shirley telling us she 'scared' when Jimmy comes back; Marlene's reaction when she discovers that he's back and his displaced Dek; Jimmy's behaviour on Marlene's birthday-'I could get used to this.' And it would have greatly added to the way the audience related to Shirley and reacted to Shirley's initial choice of Jimmy. Also, it would have made Dek more of the 'hero' and added to the feel good factor at the end of the film (Dek is never going to be Shirley's great love, but at least we know her and Marlene's story is going to have a much happier ending than if she'd stayed with Jimmy)? Anyway, maybe I am reading too much into this, but the more I think about it, seems that Once Upon a Time could have been a really great film, but for that change.
|
|
shaun
Junior Member
Posts: 19
|
Post by shaun on Dec 9, 2006 17:31:17 GMT
24/7. So, it's true then? Always wondered. Welcome Shaun. Yes it's true. I also remember the boxing club at the school that inspired 24/7 - I didn't go to the boxing club (I think my brother went a couple of times), but I attended the school where it was based. It had lots of cavernous rooms in the basement if I remember right (it taxes the grey matter to think back that far  ). |
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Mar 19, 2010 14:14:24 GMT
Love this film. I'm from Mansfield myself and i think it was about 5 years ago that i first saw this film. It was around about the time that i seriously started thinking about acting as a career and this film changed a lot of things for me. My accent was one of the things i always had an issue with, our accent is not something that's heard often in films or television. So it was nice to see this film. I think Shirley Henderson got it spot on. I'd obviously seen films such as Kes, but this really opened my eyes, as has a lot of Shane's other work. I don't even know myself what it is but i think there's something about good British films that you just can't beat.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gareth on Mar 24, 2010 6:47:40 GMT
There's a line out of a little book that comes with the Mark Romanek work of the director DVD where he's talking about a quote he read one day;
"And that phrase 'more daring and more sincere,' hit me like a ton of bricks. It really struck me as the best definition of what makes something good that I've ever heard."
that description really sums up what I value most in the best of shanes work (DMS), the best of mark romanek (johnny cash - hurt) my favorite comedy (the office) anything for that matter, suppose the quote says it all.
|
|
|
|
Post by GR on Jan 2, 2012 4:37:02 GMT
I finally got a chance to see this! ;D It was on one of the Starz channels this morning, so I recorded it and then watched it earlier this evening. When it first came out, I (being from the "Midlands" of the US) was intrigued by the title; but lukewarm reviews and some of the comments about it here kept putting me off wanting to see it. Ultimately, I agree with those here who have said it's not that bad, though I also agree it could have been better. For instance, I liked the idea of it being a sort of modern-day western, and I think it would have been interesting to see more follow-through with that. As for the players, I thought they did all right for the most part. I like Shirley Henderson (I thought she was great in Topsy-Turvy and did a lot with relatively little screen time in 24 Hour Party People), but I found her character too passive (at least until the end) -- Jimmy and Dek might as well have been feuding over territory or a piece of property. (Then again, maybe that was the point, given the western motif...) There were some funny moments, though -- for me, the biggest laughs were when Dek is wielding the electric screwdriver and Jimmy suddenly appears behind him, and when Dek whimpers "Don't do anything sexual" when confronted by Jimmy's former partners.  |
|
|
|
Post by jill on Jan 2, 2012 20:50:28 GMT
I agree. There's almost a sort of mythology grown up around OUTIM being the 'disappointing' or 'bad' film. While it is my least favourite-along with most other people on the forum- it's not a 'bad film' and there's a lot of things I like about it (not least of which is Carol/Kathy Burke and Finn Atkins). I also love the Western idea behind it. It's just a shame that the original vision of the film wasn't realised (for various reasons). Shane has talked about a re-edit/maybe re-issue with a different soundtrack. That would be interesting to see. I think the project is probably on the back-burner now though and will be for a good while-too much new stuff in the pipeline.
|
|
|
|
Post by GR on Jan 2, 2012 23:20:22 GMT
Yeah, the biggest thing that hampered my enjoyment was just knowing that what I was seeing wasn't exactly what Shane had originally had in mind. :-\ Speaking of soundtrack, it knocked me for a loop to hear Norah Jones' "Shoot the Moon" (from her first album, Come Away With Me) as well as Sarah McLachlan's "Adia" so prominently featured!  |
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Jan 7, 2012 15:01:11 GMT
Hey GR, You inspired me to dig out my DVD and give it another watch.
Still enjoyable with some great moments (the stand-off between Robert Carlysle and Kathy Burke).
I wonder how different the film could be with a different edit.
Favourite comedy moment is still Dek's bizarre panic-stricken bluff when he's asked by the three thugs where he saw Jimmy in the town.... "by a river." haha
Followed of course by the amazing plead of "I'm a civilian!" ;D
Finn Atkins was another of Shane's amazing casting finds too. I wonder how the film would have played with a totally unknown cast. Hmm an interesting thought!
|
|
|
|
Post by GR on Jan 7, 2012 23:01:46 GMT
Still enjoyable with some great moments (the stand-off between Robert Carlysle and Kathy Burke). I wonder how different the film could be with a different edit. Favourite comedy moment is still Dek's bizarre panic-stricken bluff when he's asked by the three thugs where he saw Jimmy in the town.... "by a river." haha Followed of course by the amazing plead of "I'm a civilian!" ;D Finn Atkins was another of Shane's amazing casting finds too. I wonder how the film would have played with a totally unknown cast. Hmm an interesting thought! That "I'm a civilian" line cracked me up too. I'm not that familiar with Kathy Burke (although I know she was in Elizabeth with Cate Blanchett, I haven't seen that in a looong time), but she was really good in this. Even so, I agree that it would be interesting to see how this story would've fared with a less well-known cast... |
|
|
|
Post by jill on Jan 8, 2012 0:13:19 GMT
I'm not that familiar with Kathy Burke (although I know she was in Elizabeth with Cate Blanchett, I haven't seen that in a looong time), but she was really good in this. . Love Kathy Burke. Here's why: ;D She's not to bad playing it straight either: |
|
|
|
Post by GR on Jan 8, 2012 23:42:48 GMT
Thanks for posting those! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by cliftonestate on Jan 10, 2012 17:28:42 GMT
Hey GR, You inspired me to dig out my DVD and give it another watch. Still enjoyable with some great moments (the stand-off between Robert Carlysle and Kathy Burke). I wonder how different the film could be with a different edit. Favourite comedy moment is still Dek's bizarre panic-stricken bluff when he's asked by the three thugs where he saw Jimmy in the town.... "by a river." haha Followed of course by the amazing plead of "I'm a civilian!" ;D Finn Atkins was another of Shane's amazing casting finds too. I wonder how the film would have played with a totally unknown cast. Hmm an interesting thought! Finn will be back on our screen later this month or early Feb in a Comedy Drama called Starling it will be shown on Sky One |
|
|
|
Post by Dazza on Feb 5, 2012 11:35:08 GMT
The two disc DVD also has Shanes World on as an extra which is one of the best extras I've had the pleasure of seeing on a DVD.
|
|
|
|
Post by scheevers on Feb 27, 2014 11:14:57 GMT
The two disc DVD also has Shanes World on as an extra which is one of the best extras I've had the pleasure of seeing on a DVD. The two disc must have been deleted cause re-releases through Film Four is bare bones. I've seen Shanes World on FilmFour During Shane Meadow's season, it's top stuff especially Three Tears for Jimmy Prophet (still Shane's best Short film imo) and The Poppa Squeeze Affair for Paddy Considine's De Niro impression. It's what Shane does best low budget films with heart and really just to make movies with his mates. |
|
).
