Filth

[midian]

i was so pumped by the poster of a man riding on a pig - it looked like fun. i had absolutely no idea what the film would be about before i walked in but thought it might be a comedy. 'darkly humerous' for some, with the odd laughs from the crowd. none from me tho. i hated it, thought it was vile and wished i had kept my ticket to see the prisoners and gone to see that instead.

0/10

[rawsalsa]

Gosh, what a completely weird but overall enjoyable film. I hadn't read any reviews or watched any trailers so I didn't know what I was going to watch - otherwise I wouldn't have brought my mother with me! Even at my age I don't relish watching sex, [spoiler]and the line up of men's dicks (technical term - clearly!)[/spoiler] with my mum. Although the film was inconsistent in parts, I thought McAvoy was spectacular, loved the soundtrack and loved the fact that David Soul was featured in the car. I think I'd need to watch this again to ensure that I got the gist of it all. 6.5/10

[McG]

I have waited a day before posting my review as I wasn't absolutely sure what I thought of "Filth" . . .and in some ways I'm still not sure. James McAvoy was excellent although I didn't like the vile, manipulative character he played. The basic story of one man's descent into mental health problems was portrayed well though I didn't like the amount of violence and drug taking.
I certainly can't say I "enjoyed" the film and would have preferred a more sanitised version but I'm glad I've seen it but would not watch it again.
Marks 6.5/10

[yogi]

Early on there was a promising mix of dark humour in amongst the sex and drugs, especially like John Sessions film script title , but as the film plodded on I found the relentless sex, drinking, drug taking and unpleasant lead character quite tiresome.

I remember feeling the same after Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

James McAvoy was very good, but I just didn't care much what happened to him or what had happened in his past.

Disappointing, it actually felt longer than Prisoners earlier in the week. 4/10

[LondonCityNights]

I'm quite a fan of the excellent book this was based on, but this felt like a really, really watered down, tamed version of what Welsh put on the page. McAvoy was totally unsuited to the role, and frankly even though the film changes styles so much it still gets a bit boring. Didn't entirely dislike it though, there were fleeting moments where it all came together but they were few and far between.

Here's my full review: http://www.londoncitynights.com/2013/09 ... baird.html

2/5*

[pimbs]

Really enjoyed this film thought it was brilliant james mcevoy was superb and really held the film together it is a bit raw and graphic which is what u expect from an irvine welsh book but overall its well worth p*ying the entry free for a great ride

[stuartboy]

another question...I read the book over 10 yrs ago, but cannot remember the significance of the dead boy child who keeps popping up....

anyone know ?

I haven't read the book but I think [spoiler]the child was his brother whose untimely death was surely one of the reasons McAvoy's character was so tormented (in addition to his bipolarity and overall nastiness). I can't remember it being explained in black and white but I believe the resuscitation scene suggests that he might have been responsible for the death.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Yes - it was his dead kid brother. The mad doctor Jim Broadbent (boy was he scary!) told us this and the fact that Bruce had been responsible for his death.[/spoiler]

Don't Give Up On Us Baby was my favourite song once upon a time....and I used to play at being Starsky and Hutch with a mate - even though I was never allowed to stay up that late and watch it....so I know only too well about Mr. Soul.


Oh - and there were plenty of references to the tapeworm from the book. You need to read it...

[newdot]

oh i read it & if it had been a book with any quality, I may have remembered more of it OR have the slightest inclination to re-read it...which i don't

my vague recollection of this erm..."book" was that the tapeworm played a major role in it & in fact that the book was structured as a dialogue between bruce & the tapeworm...

could be wrong / don't care / it was sh*t

[The Sparrow]

The Review Show mentioned more about the tapeworm as it is in the book which I'm glad about as I didn't quite understand why it is shown in the film.

[baty]

First, haven't read the book. James McAvoy was ideal for the tormented and manipulative copper trying to oust his rivals. The film had its slow points and some of the Scotish references were lost on me at the time but have been brouht up to speed by comments here.

As an 18 was expecting quite a bit I wouldn't normally be exposed to (pun intened) and it lived up to the 18 rating. [spoiler]OH was explaining the film to someone saying, 'the language was awful, lots of drugs, terribly violent and perverted sex scenes........ didn't mind the sex scenes so much' [/spoiler]
Missed David Soul and might watch again if a free ticket comes my way to pick up on missing him.
8/10

All these films made around Scotland.... is there a tourism drive to visit Scotland?