Watch All Things To All Men For Free

Excellent but underrated film

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Blistering performances.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

When I came across the DVD for this movie at my local library, I hadn't even heard of it before. Without looking it up at the IMDb, I decided to give it a chance since it promised to be a crime movie filled with twists and turns. Even before getting to the end of the movie, I was regretting that I hadn't looked up the movie at the IMDb before deciding to watch it. I agree with most of the previous posters here that the movie simply isn't very good. It's filled with little action and suspense, and is instead padded with endless talk - and not very engaging talk. The main problem with the movie is that it is VERY confusing - even though I read the plot description off the back of the DVD case before watching the movie, it didn't take me long to get utterly mystified as to who was who and what was exactly going on. I guess the acting is competent, and the British backdrop does give the movie a different look and feel from Hollywood product. And the movie's production values are okay for what had to have been a small budget. But those things don't save the movie from being an utterly confusing bore.

A.K.A. The Deadly Game. Now and then you find a film with a great cast and wonder why you've never heard of it before. Here we have Gabriel Byrne, Julian Sands, Toby Stephens and Rufus Sewell in a London gangster thriller.Oh no, not another one!But wait, this is a well produced, well shot film with a pretty good (if somewhat generic) score. And this is only 81 minutes long, so even if it's bad it'll be mercifully short, right?Wrong.I'd been watching 21 minutes when I checked the time, because I thought I must be half way through by now. Groan. So what's wrong with it? Well, the script. The story is completely unintelligible. Which means you feel like you've missed something all the way through, namely, the story. See, the main problem is that we don't know any of the characters in the film, so we don't care about them. Any of them. And there's no clearly definable hero or villain, so you don't know who to root for. And I like grey characters who aren't really good or bad, but you need a general focus or main character in a film, and this film just doesn't have one.So you keep watching these characters you don't care about in a story you can't really figure out, especially as they keep referring to things you don't see but that appear to be germane to the plot, and pretty soon you are just willing it to all end. Drop a plane on them! Nuke the whole city! Just let it end!And then it does, and you are left completely nonplussed, empty, devoid of any reaction other than relief that it's over. That's not the way thrillers are supposed to make you feel. You're supposed to be thrilled! You're supposed to have gone through some kind of cathartic emotional journey, with added visceral excitement. You're not supposed to be relieved the mental cruelty of a badly laid out jigsaw puzzle is finally in your cultural out-box. Phew!I need to watch a great thriller. I might have to go back to my DVD collection.

I only managed to watch half this film because by that point I had got sick of the inaccuracies. Two examples: 1) British police do not have badges, they have warrant cards (so no-one talks about taking someone's badge*) and 2) no-one 'makes detective'; they join the CID and then go on to further specialised areas of the police force. Also, the police in the UK are not allowed to operate like this. I don't deny that corruption exists but no police officer would be allowed this sort of latitude. I don't know why the director/writer decided to waste the talents of some excellent actors like this when an authentic British take on the storyline would probably have been much more interesting. I can only assume that some idiot in Hollywood holding the cheque book interfered to the extent that this abomination resulted.*I have no idea what that 'badge' was that one of the detectives showed a suspect.

Set in modern day London, UK. The issues are criminal activities versus police responses. Riley moves stolen diamonds. Joseph Corso is a crime boss, the 'Merchant' of London; Cutter is his henchman. Mark Corso (Joseph's son) seems to be running drugs, and doing them as well. Parker, Dixon, and Sands are on the New Scotland Yard/Metropolitan Police side of the issues.By squeezing Mark on cocaine possession, Parker and friends leverage his father Joseph into trapping Riley, who has been skirting Joseph's rules of order. The plans move forward, glacially. Joseph wants his son safe, well-treated, and preferably free; Parker wants Riley in jail and off the streets. At least that is the first story.Joseph sets up Riley to do 'one more job' that is a complicated heist that has to be done lightning fast. Parker gets Mark back to Joseph. Joseph tells Mark that he is retiring as the Merchant, but that succession is unlikely since Mark is a known addict. So, the stage is fully set.Given the complicated arrangements, something is bound to break down. Will the cops keep faith with Joseph on the deal? Will Joseph help Riley just enough to get him caught? Will Mark pull a wild card out? Will Riley diagnose the whole setup and get free of it? Where does the difference start between normal police procedure and straight up corruption? -----Scores-----Cinematography: 8/10 A bit too dark for me, but presumably done for effect. Focus and framing and the like were just fine.Sound: 8/10 The tension building from the background music was good, and the actors seemed to be miked OK.Acting: 6/10 Normally I like Byrne, Sewell, and Sands. They were fairly good here as well, although perhaps the material was not enough of a challenge for them. I like Toby Stephens as a comedian in television (Vexed) and film (Severance), but not so much as a dramatic actor. I kept expecting a flippant remark or seven together with a sneering smile. Terence Maynard was rather good, and I liked Leo Gregory's performance.Screenplay: 5/10 How does Riley get shot in the abdomen then can keep going with high-stress muscular maneuvers for a good continuous 20 minutes afterward? This seems unlikely. The heist succeeding seemed unlikely. The wrong amount of valuables being in the vault open for inspection seemed ridiculous. Normal police discovery seemed to be almost absent. The ending (and much of the plot) reminded me of LA Confidential. This worked in the year in which LA Confidential was set, but not so much in 2013. Perhaps worst of all, the 84 minute play time felt like 130.