Watch Last Orders For Free

So much average

I'll tell you why so serious

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

How very strange to have a film such as Last Orders, a film that has its themes and its content revolve around death, loss and nostalgia and yet still manage to remain uplifting; positive, even. Last Orders is one of those films that covers a lot of ground in a two hour timeframe; it's sort of what Forrest Gump would have been like if Forrest Gump had had masses of friends and buddies to hang around with as his own life unfolded. But don't think I'm comparing films here because whilst Last Orders is great in its own retrospect, Forrest Gump remains the pinnacle of this sort of genre.I suppose Last Orders is to 'death' as Reservoir Dogs is to 'heist'. The idea that you get a load of male characters (although Helen Mirren's Amy plays a sort of important role); have them situated close to all but one place for the past tense scenes but now and again, showing the repercussions of said death/heist event in the present tense. While Reservoir Dogs' flashback scenes covered a whole range of locations, Last Orders fixes on a public house for the scenes in which all the characters are together but in order to understand more and more about them the film delves deeper into the past; much like Reservoir Dogs did with the Mr. Orange character – showing us how the development of friendship and trust became apparent. Added to this, Last Orders in the present tense beds down in one locale; a moving vehicle as they travel to a pier in order to carry out the dead man's final wish – parallels to Reservoir Dogs and the warehouse can be made here where, arguably, the most intense moments of clashing egos and best examples of dialogue float to the surface.But Last Orders isn't trying to be Forrest Gump or Reservoir Dogs, in my opinion two of the 1990s greatest films. No, Last Orders is a different beast; a tale of friendship and life that is pushed to an apparent breaking point even when the man has gone. It seems funny how with a cast like Hoskins, Caine, Mirren, Hemmings and Winstone one can be so easily attracted to the actors and actresses who play the characters in decades gone by. JJ Field does a superb job as a young Jack (Caine) as does Kelly Reilly with Amy (Mirren); what's more, there is an added sense of nostalgia when Anatol Yusef portrays a young Ray (Hoskins) when really it seems like he is playing Hoskins himself from times gone by – you cannot help but smirk in appreciation. Even though the film plays out with one of its main characters actually dead throughout the entire piece, what makes Last Orders so successful? Well, it gets across a feeling of nostalgia; a feeling of time gone by. Secondly, it gives us these characters who we have seen many times before in films of a different genre; maybe even on a television drama if you're from Britain but it injects heart and soul into any usual stereotypes you might have expected.In order to break away from tired clichés or familiar archetypes, Last Orders develops almost all of its characters through out their respective lives. There are instances when Ray is tempted to engage in an affair with Jack's wife Amy; there are other instances that seem almost irrelevant: Ray's daughter marrying an Australian and moving away and Jack's son Vince wanting to follow a path in the mechanical trade rather than the butcher trade. Although these seem like mere formalities, they are actually extremely important plot points in these respective people's lives with the genius of it to follow: they all deal with loss of some sort. If Ray and Amy have an affair, Jack looses out; if Vince wants to become a mechanic against his fathers wishes then the '& sons' tag to the business is rendered false; if Ray's daughter wants to marry and move to the other side of the world, Ray and his wife loose their daughter on a certain level. But one persons loss is another persons gain: Ray's daughter has found love; Vince has found a career he loves and Ray has found love to a certain degree with Amy, even if it is at a friend's expense. This is where the film's main level of loss is challenged: When it is made apparent after five minutes it is the character of Jack that is dead, nobody wins but everybody looses. Thus, the ensuing road trip is everybody banded together to deal with the event.With the film's theme and consensus loss, it is no surprise tiny references are made apparent all the way through the journey. The lads visit a war memorial in a park to celebrate the 'loss' of life in the war; when walking through the cathedral, Vince talks about how interesting it is to have all the 'dead' kings and queens 'buried' in amongst the walls; there is even mention of the ancient Egyptian pharaohs – harking back to times of old and great people who are now dead, echoing Jack and his life. Even stranger, what do we learn ourselves about Jack during the film? He is a womaniser who seemed carefree and outlandish; a man who wanted his son to do what he did and got angry when he didn't but despite Jack seeming like the least likable person of the group of lads, it is his death that has brought everyone together in a celebration of life above all other things. Last Orders is clever and engaging with a narrative that will entertain and may well have even pulled at some emotional strings by the time the obligatory scene arrives – that itself is an achievement.

Friends. Not just ones that we occasionally see on the weekends, but those that buy you a round when they know you are blue, those that have lived their life right next to yours, those that will not quit even when you want them to forget about you – those are the friends that remain constantly in your mind. In "Last Orders" we have a unique opportunity to see a group of four friends escape their lives to take one of their greatest friends (and family) to his final resting place. Using a flashback technique that teeters on confusing at times, we witness six of our greatest actors dive deep into the hearts and souls of the characters they are portraying. For once, in cinematic history, we see a story unfold that each and every one of the actors support, as well as contributes more than 100% to their respected roles. This isn't a perfect film, but the flaws are overshadowed by the actors. Each and every one of the actors in this film carried their weight (and then some) as we felt our heartstrings pulled and friendship refreshed.As already mentioned, the acting in this film is superb. It reminds me of discovering that perfect bottle of wine – all the characteristics of the blend are working in unison, creating a masterpiece out of what would be nothing more than than just your standard bottle of grapes. The core of this film is bland. "Last Orders" will not impress you with phenomenal storytelling or scenes that will demand your full attention – in fact – if it weren't for the actors who took their subsequent roles in this film – I probably would have fallen asleep shortly after the credits. "Last Orders" is a dry film. There is no denying that, but what sets the bar are the actors. Michael Caine and Bob Hoskins give the performances of their careers in this little independent film that should have seen more attention.. Helen Mirren continues to prove that she is one of those diamonds in the rough when it comes to small roles. She can handle either the big stuff or the small stuff, she continues to give her full ability each time. The rest of the cast, Tom Courtenay and David Hemmings, make this group of friends even more thoughtful. Then, there is Ray Winstone. I have always appreciated his work since seeing him in "Sexy Beast", and this film just brought him to a whole new appreciative level. He works, along with the rest of the players in this film, to ensure that their heart and minds are diving their characters into our hearts. It is amazing that even with a weak script, this film was made better by those involved both behind the camera and in front of it.With this applause for the actors, of which I can continue, but would sound like a repetitive critic, I must say that I wasn't impressed with the story. I thought that director Fred Schepisi did a decent job with the imagery, long viewing landscapes accompanying our lush actors, but this story was a challenge to create as a screen writer. Throughout his commentary, he talks about how he felt he had to guide the audience better through the flashbacks – there were quite a bit of them – but without giving us the proper guidance, we just jumped. That was tough because we weren't fully introduced to the "younger" version of the characters with the respect that we were with the older generation. At times we jumped with no reason, coupling our minds to be both confused as well as needing immediate readjustment to the situation. One moment we were in a Mercedes driving, the next we were in a doctor's bed, the following we were in a war scene. For the casual viewer, this would have been a difficult transition to follow. For me, the jumps seemed too sporadic, too forced to push the story. Unlike the book, each chapter isn't dedicated to each character, we must juggle the time, and I think Schepisi could have accomplished this task better. He picked the right actors to play younger versions of their subsequent actors, but it took some time to make sure that we, the audience, knew who we were working with. It was a struggle for this film, and it nearly – for me – took away from the phenomenal-ness of the actors.There were other issues with this film with continuity and placement, some of which are typical in any budget of a film, but others occurred due in part to the constant change of time. It is hard to change time as often as Schepisi does without missing some details, and again, it distracted in this film. The pacing seemed lacking, I don't remember the book being as dull in some points, but I think it was because Schepisi didn't want to overload us with so much information. The scene with the actors in the Mercedes as they drive to their friend's final destination was beautifully framed, amazingly acted, but seemed extended, dull, and a bit drawn out. That, for me, best summarizes this film. Acting and vision were impressively intense, but the film seemed to slip because of structural issues.Overall, I liked this film, but could not say that I loved it. I will stand behind "Last Orders" as a film that boasts the best acting from some of our most unique actors, but Schepisi could have done a better job behind the camera. If it weren't for the actors, this film would have drastically fallen. I am glad that our director pushed for great actors, but I think it is in part because he knew the story wasn't as strong as he wanted. This was no "Six Degrees of Separation" or "Roxanne", it stands on its own – it just isn't sturdy enough.Grade: *** out of *****

From Fred Schepisi, director of Roxanne and Fierce Creatures, this is quite a good drama. Basically it is all about the friends of Jack Dodds who have been given the difficult "last orders" of scattering his ashes to the sea. These friends, Vic Tucker (Tom Courtenay), Lenny 'Len' (David Hemmings), Ray 'Raysie' Johnson (Bob Hoskins) and (I think) Vince 'Vincey' Dodds (Ray Winstone) on the journey remember the good times with their friend as butcher and pub mate. Sir Michael Caine as Jack in the flashbacks is the nice guy with a good personality. I cannot remember much of what happens, besides the scattering, and the fact that Caine and Hoskins are in it, but it is definitely worth seeing. Also starring Dame Helen Mirren as Amy Dodds. Good!

I just watched this movie for the first time recently and I was incredibly touched by it. It is about four friends going to Margate to scatter the ashes of their late friend, Jack (and father to one of them), intertwined with a subplot of Jack's widow, Amy, reminiscing with one of the four remaining friends, Ray, about her late husband. There is great potential for an over-sentimentalization of Jack, but luckily, the movie remembers the character in a touching, humorous, and heart-warming way that is anything but sappy. The actors have a wonderful camaraderie, making you believe that these characters really are the best of friends, as opposed to actors trying to pretend at friendship. I especially enjoyed the scenes between Amy and Ray, played by Helen Mirren and Bob Hoskins, who I think both did some of the best acting I have ever seen, in this film. They were so incredibly natural at portraying their characters that I completely forgot that I was watching two actors act. They also had such wonderful chemistry on screen, appearing so at ease with each other, as only people who've known each other for years can, that it makes me wonder if the actors are friends in real life as well.This is a poignant movie about friendship that portrays this human relationship remarkably realistically on screen. Highly recommended!