IslandGuru Who payed the critics

Nonureva Really Surprised!

Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

Robert J. Maxwell It's not a typical serial murderer story with slick knives and bath tubs of gore. It's dark and moody. It rains a lot and much of the story takes place at night. Typical scene: the chief investigator and the colleague he once was hooked up with sit in his car. The car's headlights are on, illuminating a blank wall where one of the murders took place. It's drizzling and the windshield wipers arc back and forth. The two people speak quietly to one another and the conversation is elliptic. Only gradually is it revealed that the two have had an affair.I'm giving this six stars because I think it was intelligent, deliberate, and thoughtful. But I didn't make it to the end, and what I did hear was sometimes unintelligible. I don't know whether it was the sound on my system or the acting or the Yorkshire accents. I weren't at all sure.I was confused too because this is evidently part two of a miniseries and I hadn't seen part one. I don't know whether that made a difference or not.Good luck with it.

Rodrigo Amaro A few things have changed between the first "Red Riding" and this one and I'm not talking about the years in between both stories. On the similarities, yes, both films are completely overestimated by their audiences, both are good films not great ones and they are trapped on similar suffocating presentations that almost makes them weak films.Instead of the masochist investigative journalist with an quite exciting life here we have an detective (Paddy Considine) following the steps of a new Jack the Ripper killing women out there, in the England of the 1980's (although this man started the killing back in the 1970's). The movie brings back some characters of the previous movie like the ones played by David Morrissey (again, reduced to a few lines, his part gets bigger in the third film) and Robert Sheehan (BJ) and gives us some flashbacks with the journalist Eddie (Andrew Garfield) repeated here from a different perspective. Lies, corruption, dirty schemes are also part of the intriguing but confusing plot.I gotta recognize that this was a little bit more effective than the first film since in that I couldn't get what the writer and director were trying to do. The semi-originality of this flick is being a movie about catching a killer without displaying gallons of blood and fake make-up, "Red Riding: In the Year of Our Lord 1980" instead prefers to be more about the hunt for the killer than to show what he does and how he does. Just by hearing his methods of killing you get terrified, disgusted. It's the kind of film you can easily suggest to people who are afraid of seeing horrible things on the screen. However, this originality pays some high cost with more demanding viewers because it's presentation is painfully slow, more tedious than the first film (there's no sex scenes with Andy so, there's no lift up's and probably you'll sleep easier here), very talky for a film of its kind, it takes a ridiculous time to really something new happen during the course of investigations. The surprise at the conclusion worth all the while, it's really good. Fincher's "Zodiac" is hundred times better if we have to draw some comparisons.I can't complain about the acting, all actors are great. Fans of this series of films will enjoy it without complications. It's good, not very good but good. 6/10

sergepesic The second installment in the Red Riding Trilogy set in 1980, is even better than the excellent first part. The putrid corruption of the West Yorkshire police is , if possible, more pronounced three years later. Their sheer incompetence is easily revealed during the desperate search for the Yorkshire Ripper,diabolical serial killer praying on prostitutes. The atmosphere of the second part of the trilogy is as a gloomy and depressing as ever,not unlike the lives of the unfortunate souls unlucky enough to end up in this hellhole of a place. I am eagerly awaiting the ending of this harrowing story in one of the best TV project I've seen after the legendary " Prime Suspect".

lost-in-limbo After the events that occurred in the first chapter, the second entry sees things take place six years later, but what happened then still seems to be creating a ripple effect now. Detective Peter Hunt is assigned to take charge of a covert investigation inspecting the West Yorkshire police's handling of the Yorkshire ripper case (this is where the writers excellently let the fiction get caught amongst the true facts of this infamous case). However what he uncovers is something much more damaging about one of the Ripper's supposed victims, which leads him down the path of inside corruption and cover-ups. Chapter 1980 is even better and a little more straight-forward and steady in its story-telling, despite some fragmented ages (re-examining past dealings) in a narrative that mainly focuses on the police/and their questionable actions than say the victims/outsiders like in the first film. This gives an angle that those people investigating a truly swimming with sharks, as if their interference is nothing more than a hindrance that they will only find themselves in over their heads amongst unwanted turmoil and their own personal problems will get in their way. Although the victims are still just as important in the scheme of things and uncovering what's really going on. The murky story manages to hold you, as when you think it's going to plan as you go on to connect the dots it piles on the biting twists leading to betrayal and murder. You feel like your peering in, as its serious and blunt trappings just evoke such an authentic feel that this could happen which makes it even more unsettling, although it doesn't quite match the punch of the first film. Still it ends on quite a stomach turning note (not visually speaking, but how it pans out) and final image with the flighty score leaves a haunting mark. In all it's the conniving nature that shocks, even if the violence has a sledgehammer intensity and exposition. However it tends to describe the horrific violence, than let the viewer actually glimpse it. Director James Marsh's streamlined handling is glum and leisured, but slickly sterile as it hypnotically takes you along with its methodical camera-work and expressively tantalizing music score. He paints a shady air, where the strong script delves within the weight-filled characters and interlocking revelations. The performances might come across typically sullen, but still superbly genuine. Paddy Considine's commendably dedicated performance is mesmerizing as he harbours good and bad elements to his weary character Peter Hunt. Everyone seems to be forsaken is some shape. The cast again put in another sensational effort. Maxine Peak stands out and so does the likes of Sean Harris, Tony Pitts, David Morrissey and Warren Clarke.