source: One for the Road

there is a definite 'mike leigh' overtone here both in terms of the realism and the male female relationships, particularly between the main character and the barmaid, and thats a good thing. the 'comedy' derives from the relationship between the characters. you are meant to think these guys met on a booze rehabilitation course and don't give much of a monkeys about it apart from getting they're licsense back and thats exactly what you will think because of the excellent casting and acting. one thing i really like in films is when you go 'cool, i never would have thought of doing that' anyone else that shares that view should see this. remember when channel four films were making great stuff? this would have been up there with comic strip.

I love comedy so much I'm willing to travel across London at 10:30 am to see this one. I did laugh - not as much as I should've but that's the producer's mistake for putting on a screening at this unfunny hour. Really great premise of pulling together a group of comedy losers at an 'alcohol re-education seminar for convicted drunk drivers' and some wonderful characterization, especially the stoned slacker 'Mark' played brilliantly by Mark Devenport. The reason I made the extra effort to see this movie was that it said it was improvised, it wasn't. Had the team realized sooner, that you can't easily use the power of impro in this medium, they'd've written a better script that the initial idea suggested. Shot on DV for reasons which even after the Q&A with the writer/director/producer/editor et all were never explained, the film suffers for it. The DP didn't pull his weight, pity, he gave us TV not cinema. This is a promising writer/director and although he says he has no ideas himself, he obviously knows where to get them. He'll have learnt a great deal making this film and his next film will benefit from it. Bring on the next one.

Somewhere inside this film is a half decent idea - that idea is in seeing how normal people cope with their mistakes, attitudes, frailties and personalities - this idea is a comedy. For the two minutes this idea is given an airing the film is entertaining. Unfortunately the other 90 minutes are abysmal. The plot is truly appalling. Confusing, irrelevant and most importantly deafeningly boring. The acting is likewise pitiful, although the characters are so badly conceived, two dimensional and irritating that it's possible (although unlikely) that the cast has some talent. Not surprisingly therefore given the quality of the script it won't be a shock to learn the overly artsy directing is of equally low standard. I've seen this film and its director compared to other British directors, notably Shane Meadows and Ken Loach. Those are two talented directors who have interesting stories to tell, unlike Cooke in every sense. Britain's have produced enough films of note that we don't have to accept rubbish like this. Dead Mans Shoes and Dog Soldiers have proved we have true class in the film making stakes - not to mention a certain C. Nolan. You would need to drink as much as the characters to believe that this is anything other than a shallow, worthless film.

Humorous yet a bit depressing? Basic Premise: Group of alcoholics with drink driving charges have to go to a meeting, among them is a rich guy, who can give them a possibility of a future. I saw the trailer, and originally kept away from it as it looked like a kind of full monty film. However I have been scraping the bottom of the barrel recently for films and there was a scene in the trailer that I thought it may have a few funny moments. This film was a lot darker than I anticipated, I imagined it to start with typical English blokey jokes, but it seemed to start with a gloomier feel. It had quite catchy filming to begin with where they used character overviews where each character in the film speaks to the camera as if narrating there current situation, I like this in films, they usually use this method in a lot of gangster films Lock Stock\Snatch\Layer Cake. I enjoyed segments of the film, there were some funny scenes especially in there AA course where the trainer was a typical trainer you could meet on any office training course using Ice Breakers and being a basic nonce. I did enjoy the film but there were a few character developments that were left untied, one especially seemed very sad. The last 20 minutes just seemed to meander for me as if maybe the film was trying to finish in a clever way but wasn't too sure how to. Some films have based there entire story line on the last 20 minutes of this one, so the ending seemed very hurried. A lot of British comedies say they are comedies but this is because no one categorises them correctly, usually as long as there is one joke it's a comedy no matter how dark or depressing the film gets, I can never work out how Billy Elliot, Educating Rita, The Full Monty are classed as comedies, these to me are dramas with a few jokes thrown in. This was exactly the same for this film, the script was sharp and it did make me laugh, but it also made me depressed and the characters all looked like they had no futures, I don't believe films always need to answer themselves and sometimes films that make you think more (see Donnie Darko) are great to watch and discuss, however if a film sets up some scenes that need answers and don't you just feel a little bit empty from it. Conclusion: Worth a watch but a strange feeling to the whole film. It's a Comedy in areas, but Drama definitely up there too.

If you're familiar with the films of Shane Meadows then give this a try. Located in the same region (Notts) as SM bases his films this has the same dry, deadpan humour with dark undertones and real settings. I don't like making direct comparisons and although I've used Shane Meadows as a reference I think this stands on its own as a quality piece of work. The principal characters are pathetic to a man, drink drivers compulsorily attending a course to try to get their sentences reduced. Delusion plays a big part in their make up, almost endearing in their hopeless optimism. A British film that doesn't depend on cockney chancers and tasty geezers. Thank f........... See it/rent it/buy it. Simple as that.

One For The Road is a dark, daring and painfully funny exploration of men, drink and friendship. Never patronising the audience or offering easy justifications for its characters often repellent behaviour, the film nonetheless builds up an intoxicating mood that echoes the characters own descent into booze and violence. With great natural performances all round -especially from Greg Chisholm as the nominal 'hero' Jimmy, and from Mark Devenport as a carless taxi driver - and looking like little else being produced for the big screen in Britain today, One For the Road feels like a breath of fresh air, albeit tinged with the stink of booze and puke.

A black comedy about alcohol addiction. If that makes you think twice about watching it then don't. As you can imagine, a film dealing with such a subject will be pretty dark and this definitely is. Disjointed at times with a plot that doesn't really cover the relationships that the characters are ruining through their own addiction lets this film down. The acting performances are competent and there is some empathy that you develop occasionally. At times it is very, very funny and the film is done in a mix of The Office style documentary and fly-on-the-wall film which works very well. Not the greatest but again significantly better than most of the guff that Hollywood turfs out. 7.5/10.

It amazes me how this film could get any funding (from Film Four and The Film Council) and distribution (I thought the people from Tartan were looking for 'talent'). It has no story, the photography of an amateur, the worst acting ever seen, overuse of voice over (are this people going to learn some day to write a script with no voice over, excuse me, this is movie image, what you can't tell with images, it's simply bad script, it's a complete cliché and passé. I bet there is a lot of more talent in the UK with better ideas (and more originals) than this one, that actually looks more like a student film. Who decided to give some money to make this thing (impossible to call it film/movie, etc) possible? This is not a Guy Ritchie's film, this is simple rubbish. Are they actors? If they are, please, quit, all of you are very bad. Gentlemen of the Film Council give money to good projects and forget about bad written stories packed of unnecessary voice over.

Nothing like the boozy, comedy fusion of The Office and The Full Monty some half-cut lads mag reviews would have you believe. Instead, once you get past the choppy attention-seeking visuals and lapses into a sixth former's idea of what constitutes street cred dialogue, Chris Cooke's debut is more akin to a seedy Glengarry Glen Ross. An unlikely group comprising wannabe businessman Jimmy (Greg Chisholm), retired property dealer Richard (a portly and excellent Hywell Bennett), slacker cabbie Mark (Mark Davenport) and bitter alcoholic salesman Paul (Rupert Proctor) forms during a rehab course for drink drivers and frequently adjourns to the nicotine-stained bonhomie of a local pub. It's mostly Jimmy's story and he's desperate to prove himself, egged on by cynical Paul to tap their rich new pal Richard for help. Pub life here looks far grubbier than it did in the superior Last Orders and these characters are neither quirky nor likable; they're largely irredeemable pub bores, bigging themselves up to offset their shortcomings. Yet while this capsizes any chance of a chuckle-fest, it does nevertheless serve to imbue events with a bleak, queasy humour.