The Big I Am

source: The Big I Am

It's funny, sarcastic even, a parody of gangster movies. And as such it works for me. I loved the cast, the music, had a good laugh.

Highly talented actors give this production their tough guy act best performances, and together make for a high energy romp. It doesn't quite have the hidden menace or black humour of Tarantino, or the surprise-in-your-face ultra violence of Guy Richie, but is certainly landing squarely within the genre. There's a good soundtrack, effectively used to back the action, of mostly rugged hip-hop or working class ballads, that also set it apart from my earlier comparisons. This is a good London criminal thriller, full of executions, intrigue and potty-mouth threats. Definitely not suitable for children.

Review: This is another one of this British gangster movies about a guy who is down on his luck and finds himself in a impossible situation after stealing the wrong car. As usual, there's sex and violence throughout with your everyday cockney bad language. As this film came out at 2010, there was quite an audience for this type of movie in the UK, but there's just way too many of these films in this genre nowadays. Michael Madsen made the movie a slight more interesting, but the film wasn't anything out of the norm. On the plus side, the storyline isn't that bad and there is enough material to keep,you interested. Average! Round-Up: Leo Gregory is his usual cockney self in this movie and the switch from owing people money to becoming a crime boss, was played quite well. I would like to see him play another type of role because he seems to act the same in all of his movies. The same goes for Vincent Regan who plays a crime boss, like he does in many of his movies. Basically, the film is what it says OK the tin so don't expect anything that amazing. Budget: $5million Worldwide Gross: N/A I recommend this movie to people who are into there British Gangster movies about a guy whose down on his luck until he helps a crime boss. 3/10

A truly awful film this. I was lured in by the excellent Vincent Regan (who as usual is great), and Michael Madsen, who is on autopilot and presumably was brought in to make the film more marketable to the US market. There are some good performances from Phil Davis and Leo Gregory even if they are very typecast actors, but these are offset by dire showings by Paul Kaye and a ludicrous cameo from Stephen Berkoff at the most ridiculous auction of trafficked sex slaves ever. The assorted gangsters are stereotyped and badly acted. It is probably worth noting that the movie is essentially a vanity project for Robert Fucilla, who is absolutely dire throughout, and probably wouldn't have got made without his personal funding. I never normally write reviews, but was so disappointed by the film that I felt compelled to do so. It may be worth noting that the movie also has a very strange washed out look to the colours which I also felt detracted from what should be a dark gritty tale. Badly directed and filmed throughout - do not waste your time.

I have seen many UK gangster films and many from the states etc and have to say it seems that the film makers have too. I found this film to be very poor. The story was predictable, the characters had no depth and the whole thing felt like it had not been thought out. The main character could not carry this film and his story was so weak that the audience could not sympathize with him. This reminded me of a poor man's Layer Cake (minus the acting skills of David Craig) and I would go as far as to say that a Danny Dyer film would look Oscar worthy in comparison. It was a shame as the main actor has played a few decent side characters in other Brit films but films such as this and his performance in Goal 3 should lead him to ask if his agents are doing the right thing for him. Work is work in the world of actors but I would rather be stacking shelves than making this rubbish. Avoid at all costs.

It was OK. I mean, I get it, the plot, and the characters, but what I didn't understand was the chemistry that the film tried to create between Skinner and Vincent Regan's girl. Although she was apart of the human trafficking. I still didn't see the relevance in making her character fall for this guy. And what was deal with Madsen? Good actor and all, but it seems like the story was trying to take you some place, but it never quite actually got there. Skinner's character should have been more aggressive, especially when it to the got the part his sister. There could have been more to that. Over all the movie was watchable to the end.

Convinced; that is. This should have been a watchable film and many of the less discerning or less mature in years will probably find it so but there are a lot of features to this movie you wouldn't want, and a lot you would, fail to materialise. The basic premise of the film; that a major gangster who finds himself saved from execution by a million to one coincidence at the hands of a minor small-time loser, would within days, put his whole operation under the command of said loser, is "unlikely". That said small time loser would prove to be, within days, able to outsmart big time crime figures with supposedly years of experience in the field, is "unlikely". That very rich blokes wife, plotting with other rich bloke would finally fall for very poor bloke, is perhaps the least likely of the lot. But I'll live with that as it's a nice thought for we band of "less than" rich brothers. Along the way we are treated to the genre required plethora of four letterisms but combined with no intelligent dialogue at all. The person who conceived this less than adequate action, heist, thriller seems to have set out create a combination of "lock stock" coincidence plotting with "pulp fiction" humanisation of virtue free characters, witness the body removal scene, and failed abysmally on both counts. probably the best scenes were Steven Berkoffs auction of eastern European ( soon to be ) whores with,in one case at least, very English accents and for sheer excitement the first appearance of Beatty Rosen which ranks alongside that of Vanessa Angel in Kingpin as my favourite"woah! maybe this isn't so bad after all" babe moment. However it proceeded to be that bad after all; right up to the predictable, if you've seen "Lock stock and two smoking barrels" ( or even if you haven't really ) ending. The fairly talented cast, were either just going through the motions or let down by script and direction with the notable exceptions of Steven Berkoff who put up a very spirited fight, and sometimes Leo Gregory on the odd occasion his part made sense . Michael Madson I will come to later. Vince Regan and Phil Davis are both talented actors but should have read the script before agreeing, as it was they were both handicapped by it, specifically the lazily written gangster speak and swearing requirement. Phil Davis also seemed to be shot to make him look as small as possible with trousers that appeared two inches too long ( five by US standards ) the result being faintly comical but I couldn't tell if this was deliberate or not. Frankly Noel Coward had way more authority in "The Italian Job". I remain overall a British gangster film fan, but they in turn remain best when well produced, written and directed, without pandering to the preconceived tastes of an American audience and the inclusion of less than interested American "stars". Michael Madson did neither us, nor himself any favours in his lacklustre battle with what was a very poor and token part to start with. I'm gonna classify Beatrice as European due to her upbringing and the fact that she is becoming the female answer to Anthony Quinn as first choice American for playing foreigners. This is no "LSaTSB" and that was in turn no "Get Carter"

opinion about plot: A bit from Scarface, a bit from Lock & stock, short time line and some creativity to mix it all up to make mediocre Brit-gang movie. The rise of skinner seemed to happen too fast, some of characters seemed to be unnecessary and of course the happy ending is some of the things which made this movie too predictable and too naive for its genre. ---//---- actors: Skinner (Gregory) - overall good work although in some places it seemed that he is overacting the big boss role, but he somehow managed to pull it together Martell (Madsen) - if you haven't seen Hell Ride, than his job in this piece looks very impressive - cool gangster type and so on, but if you seen it than it looks like The Gent is somehow traveled to UK - same style, same manners, well it looked like copy/paste work for him Barber (Regan) - one moment he is English, next moment he is Russian in the end he is dead. Nice work for depicting mentally unbalanced mob-boss Liza (Rosen) - you could put any model type girl in this role, give her stupid accent, sad history,and you got Liza. another boss-girl type performance Conclusion: If you have 2 hours of your time and there is nothing to do really, than go ahead, good way to spend time, but if you are a fan of this kind of movies, than better look something from the genre classics

This movie is about a low rent hustler, who while fleeing the police after a botched job hooks up with a mid-level gangster and finds out what its like to be an enforcer instead of the enforcee. The problem is with all his connections success and powers the gangsters not doing much better, than the hustler. Then you add in the moral dilemma of the gangsters specific trade and the love story, in short it plays more like "Carlitos way" than "Gangster No. #1". The opening scene the hustlers on the phone with an over the top angry gang-banger. They forecast that they're going to jump him just like they forecast when they throw him over the side of the building he'll and on a railing and not fall to his death. C'mon for god sakes the movie just started. We then see a group of suited gangsters with another over the top angry one who's pointing his gun at his fellow goons head. They raid a drug deal. So that's like 5 sets of gangsters and none of them interesting. That's the problem too many characters and not enough characters. No one a different or unique personality or stands out. They're either angry or subdued. The gang-bangers are not the interesting ones in "bullet boy", or "B.U.S.T.E.D." Same with the scenes plenty of scenes all boring and they don't push the story along. There are no scenes like in "8 dead men" where the tormentors brag to their victim about finding and torturing his hidden gay lover. And don't expect it the scenes to tie together like in "Layer Cake", the film just peters out, with a fizzle.