Film Review: Shiner (2000)

almost 2 years ago

(source: tmdb.org)

There are countless reasons why a film might fail, but some are more obvious than others. Lack of general idea of what the film should be is one of them. Shiner, 2000 British crime drama directed by John Irvin, provides one of such examples.

Protagonist of the film, played by Michael Caine, is Billy “Shiner” Simpson, minor boxing promoter from London. Because of shady connections to organised crime he used to be banned or shunned from serious boxing competitions. However, after years of grinding it appears that Shiner will make his big break and achieve what could become personal triumph on more than one level. His son Eddie “Golden Boy” Simpson (played by Matthew Marsden) has also dedicated his life to boxing, but in the ring. Billy is convinced that Eddie has what it takes to become a champion and he should prove it in a match against prize fighter managed by American promoter Frank Spedding (played by Martin Landau). But match doesn’t go as Billy has hoped for and, later, a tragic event makes Billy go on a personal crusade to find people responsible and exact revenge.

Title role appears tailor-made for Michael Caine, British actor who had grown up on the mean streets of London’s East End and used those experiences as inspiration for some of his most iconic roles, like in gangster classic Get Carter. Caine, a year after winning Oscar for The Cider House Rules, is in top form and portrays character of over-ambitious figure from Cockney demi-monde with ease, making his transformation from self-assured street hustler into pathetic wreck quite believable and delivering one of the most moving performances of his career. His work is supported by strong supporting cast, among which Andy Serkis stands out as one of his henchmen. John Irvin, director known for versatile filmography, is mostly solid in his job, especially during the interrogation scene.

But all this fine effort is ruined by conceptual flaw which becomes apparent after roughly thirty minutes. Shiner starts as gritty but effective urban thriller, that tries to give somewhat more realistic portrayal of milieu used in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. However, it soon loses a focus and transforms into more straightforward psychological drama about an old man having to deal dysfunctional family and other seemingly more mundane issues, and does so in a manner used in an Oscar-baiting films. Later it becomes apparent that scriptwriter Scott Cherry had some vague idea of making some sort of adaptation of Shakespeare’s King Lear set in contemporary times. But the idea wasn’t developed enough and it Shiner actually looks like two very different films poorly stitched together. Miramax, which was film’s international distributor and whose executives probably hoped that such approach might yield prestigious award or two, later apparently became aware of such issues and decided to put the film into less risky direct-to-video distribution on most markets. Those who watch this ambitious, watchable but very flawed film are likely to find that decision justified.

RATING: 4/10 (+)