Nina Forever Review

The Plot

After the sudden death of his girlfriend, Nina (Fiona O’Shaughnessy) leads him to attempt suicide, supermarket clerk Rob (Cian Barry) begins to start dating again with co-worker Holly (Abigail Hardingham). But even with Nina dead, she still lives on. And not just through memory…

The Good

For a film which tackles the devastation and despair of grief as one of its main themes, Nina Forever is perfect. With Fiona O’Shaughnessy giving an incredibly realistic and darkly hilarious performance as Nina. To call it realistic is somewhat odd given that she plays a recently deceased corpse throughout, but there’s no denying that her movements feel unnaturally natural as she crawls out through the bed while Rob and Holly try their best on focussing on being intimate while ignoring the blood stained bed sheets and Nina’s sarcastic commentary on the side.

It’s when the three interact that writer-directors Chris and Ben Blaine hit their stride though. the dialogue between the three are so well written that the first feelings of confusion as to whether Nina is actually with them in the room are quickly released and just like Rob and Holly, we’re allowed to simply accept that the bloodied reappearance of an ex girlfriends corpse is just commonplace during sex.

Praise must also go to cinematographer Oliver Russell for the beauty of the films shots and sequences. The pale white look of the film accompanied by the occasional but not overdone blood and gore mixes perfectly together. Obviously making a film which centres around grieving is tricky to do, especially when comical scenes are involved. However the Blaine Brothers manage to pull it off incredibly and more importantly respectably.

The Bad

The only real problem with Nina Forever ends up being its pace. At times, it begins to drag, especially during its opening half. However if you keep with it the reward will be worth it.

The Ugly Truth

Nina Forever is an incredibly acted drama which will undoubtedly burrow into your thoughts for a good while after. Thanks to the incredibly talented writing and directing of the Blaine brothers as well as the brilliant acting of its three main leads, even when it becomes slow moving it still stays intriguing enough.

Review by Johnny Ellis

Legend Review

The Plot

Tom Hardy tackles the role of the infamous Kray twins in this latest biopic which chronicles the rise and fall of East London’s most notorious gangsters.

The Good

Twenty-five years after two fifths of Spandau Ballet attempted it, the story of the Kray twins is brought back to the big screen with the help of writer-director Brian Helgeland (L.A Confidential). For the most part, Helgeland’s script is informative and entertaining enough to keep the pace going steady. With the beautiful backdrop of 1960s London and an exciting host of classic 60s rock anthems to accompany it, Legend looks and feels right.

Then there’s the cast. Most prominent of which is of course Tom Hardy, who as usual brings a phenomenal performance to the screen, especially while playing two characters. At no point do the Kray twins ever get mixed up along the way, due partly to the wonderful makeup used particularly on Ronnie, the self confessed uglier of the two brothers. This convincing distinction is also due to Hardy’s impressive acting skills. Though it’s a feat seen all over his career to date, to see a new role from Hardy is always a treat. To get double is pure bliss.

Legend is hardly a one man success in its acting however. A supporting cast which includes, among others Paul Bettany, Taron Egerton, David Thewlis, and Christopher Ecclestone, is  undeniably an impressive lineup of British talent. Helgeland’s script also manages to give Emily Browning a much meatier role as Reggie Kray’s suffering wife Frances, the film’s narrator. Frances has plenty to do trapped between Ronnie and Reggie’s constant bickering and at times carries the entire focus of the story herself.

On that note, the challenge  of having two Tom Hardy’s on the screen at the same time is barely noticeable even when trying to look out for the camera trickery needed to perform such a task. While they tend to share one half of the screen each when seen on screen together, it doesn’t feel as though it’s forced. In fact, in one particular scene the twins become entangled with each other for quite some time as they try to sort out their differences in the only way a pair of east end gangsters would, and the entire sequence looks flawless.

The Bad

Though the cast list is impressive, one particular member feels outright shunned for the entirety of the film. Christopher Ecclestone, who plays Nipper Read, the man determined to bring down the Krays and end their rule of London, feels like an important yet untold story. The prominence of Browning’s character is interesting but at times it feels like this is at the cost of perhaps better areas of the Kray’s history upon which Helgelands script could have focused. The pace is steady yes, but only just and at the price of obvious missed opportunities.

There is also the troubling issue of the way in which Legend manages to explore such a violent and dark era of East London history and yet remain surprisingly light-hearted. Though in its later stages the film reflects more prominently on the way in which the Kray’s difficult ‘career’ as gangsters affected  those closest to them, this doesn’t feel enough to warrant the previous two hours or so that had been spent almost gleefully tagging along with them.

Legend displays acting skill and technical accomplishment, but lacks true purpose. The film deliberately avoids entirely portraying the Krays as either irredeemably evil monsters or charming robin hood rogues. Unfortunately avoiding these perhaps overly familiar caricatures leaves audiences with only an ambivalent and indifferent account. Taking liberal artistic licence also severely undermines the film’s documentary credentials, doing surprisingly little to distinguish its from countless other accounts that have traded so easily on the Kray’s notoriety.  The film merely perpetuates the Kray ‘Legend’ rather than truly offering anything new on the subject.

The Ugly Truth

Tom Hardy leads the way admirably  in a shamelessly stylish look at a dark period of London’s notoriously violent history. Despite Hardy’s impressive and visceral dual role, overall the film misses considerable opportunities, sacrificing depth to focus on a simplified narrative.

Review by Johnny Ellis

Tom Hardy Legend Interview

Tom Hardy talks about laying gangster twines Reg and Ronnie Kray in the stylish new biopic Legend directed by Brian Helgeland and co-starring Emily Browning and Christopher Eccleston.

Q. When did you first hear about the Krays?

I think as a kid you see the books in the true crime section, at least I did anyway. I had a brief interest in true crime when I was about 15, going on holiday and grab a book or whatever. So that was when they first came across my horizon, they crossed me atmospherics then. But that’s about ti really. They’re about as familiar as a red telephone box in many aspects really. That was then and playing them was a question of going back to look at all the source materials that’s available. There’s a lot of source material on the Krays.

Q. Tom how did you get into the mind-set of Ronnie, particularly when it came to his sexuality?

You know I didn’t even think about it really. It’s just what it is really. I don’t think it needs playing. That’s that. Ronnie was Gay. Does that make sense? If I thought about it that would give me sorta pause to think and I had to do something. I had to get on with doing something which was my job. Ronnie’s gay, it’s all good. Does that make any sense? I think if you start playing anything then you kind of miss the point. I think what was complicated was that Reggie was also potentially.. we don’t know if he’s gay or not. So that’s where I had to look at Legend as its own separate entity. Within this Reggie is heterosexual, Ronnie is gay. Crack on. Does that make sense? Alright, cool.

Q. Does the connection between celebrity and organised crime still exist in that way?

Yeah you can access all areas of society in our job very easily. But the thing is we’re in the entertainment part of it and they’re not necessarily. They’re wired slightly differently.

Q. How did you research the roles?

There’s always a question about research isn’t there. It’s like have you done your homework. It’s like No, I didn’t know what I was doing. To a certain degree that’s true and let it be what it will be. But there is a plethora of research that one could do on the Krays. Right down to the fact I actually had Reggie’s watch which he died in on my wrist. We had various members of the world come out and talk. Private meetings like. There’s only one visual primary source of the Krays which is them speaking on the BBC for like a minute. But you can’t even tell much form that because they were on show, so you can’t tell if that’s their true voice or true mannerisms. There are lots of photos. Mainly it’s all legends and tales which are asinine. Usually told by people who didn’t know them. You get a lot of them come out. It forms patterns of stories and anecdotes that start to appeal a lot. I also had lots of diaries and some footage from a panorama documentary.

There you go I did loads of research. In the end I decide to not pay it any mind anyway, but only to answer that question.

Q. Tom you’ve been quoted as saying you were more drawn to playing to Ron than Reg, is that’s true why was it?

I mean that’s sort of paraphrased down but he truth of the fact is that just from a technical point of view Ron is predictably unpredictable. So just for a performer it’s fun to play because you have everything on the smorgasbord you can use, you have multiple options and you can pull the rug on anyone you want at any given time. So it’s a free ball character even if he wasn’t a Kray, it he was Idie Armine wit would be the same. Whether you’re going to naturalize that or going for a heightened reality of super surrealism. However you wanted to play it, that character is a free ball character. You can roam with him in any scene. Whereas Reggie has boundaries, he has the restrictions, he has to go a,b,c,d,e,f,g. That’s kinda boring for me in some way because I don’t want to go straight down the line. I want to make lateral choices and I want to have fun. I was drawn initially because I have a bit of a disco ball head to Ronnie. There’s some options there, with Reg I know he’s going that way even if I might want to take him another way.

Q. Tom where there any especially tricky shots playing two characters on screen at the same time?

No, not really. It was a question of how we were going to do it and it was pretty basic. There was no CGI or anything like that because there was no budget for it. It was back to old school basic drill. We were finding out how that stuff worked like split screen or talking to a text board. There had to be another actor there and someone who would take notes on what I was doing so that I could replicate it at the end of the day but also leave room so that I could change it. It was a mental puzzle that needed to be unpacked and then I could breathe life into it. At the same time you’ve got the rest of the cast there in real time trying to deal with the fact they’ve got a split dynamic in the room. So it was kinda mathematic in a strange sort of way. It was like stop, start. let the bitch breath. Then turn it all around and let the bitch breath again. It’s a mixture of sums, geometric shapes and maths with sort of a bit of creative stuff. The homework and more drugs for Nipper.

Q. How long was your turn around for changing between the brothers?

It was about an hour. We had wig, teeth, plumper up the nose. Aging stipple. So there was about an hours’ worth of makeup between Reg and Ronnie. But we couldn’t hang about we only had seven weeks to shoot it. So we had to move quickly. There was wedges in the shoes because Ronnie had to be a bit taller, then an extra layer of shirts because his shirt shad to look a bit bigger. Then a waistcoat and glasses. So there was a different silhouette between the two.

Q. Tom some people clearly admire the myth of the Krays or even see them as Robin Hood figures. What’s your view of them now having played them?

I just have a healthy indifference to be fair mate. It was sort of a thesis that I worked on for a little bit. That’s the subject and that’s my show and tell on it under the Legend banner. I spent a bit of time researching and working with them in fantasy and pretending. That’s where we leave ti mate at the end of the day. So I got to do a bit of research and schooling but I sort of have a healthy indifference to anything really so I can just invest in the next thing that comes along. Each experience is something under the belt to move forward with my training.

Emily Browning Legend Interview

Emily Browning talks about playing Frances Kray in gangster biopic Legend starring Tom Hardy. The film charts the rise and fall of notorious London gangster twins Reggie and Ronnie Kray.

Q. When did you first hear about the Krays?

I honestly had never heard of them until I read the script. That’s my whole story.

Q. How did you research the role?

There’s really not as much information available about Frances as they Krays themselves. Which was actually rather nice for me because I didn’t feel like there was as much pressure on me. Because people don’t have as much of a strong idea about who Frances was as about the Krays. I had little bits and pieces. Brian actually managed to get me some of the letters Frances had written to Reggie. That was my lighthouse that was what I held onto and built her around that. I’m not very good at doing my homework either, for me a lot of the research was really about the accent the time ad place. Otherwise I kinda just did it I suppose.

Q. Emily the characters you’ve played including this one have collectively been raped, violently abused, orphaned, institutionalised, lobotomised and killed. What do you think are the dangers and value of evicting the victimisation of women on screen?

Jesus.. um… I think I’ve done seven films where the character I’ve played has been in a mental institution. That’s not intentional; I mean I don’t really know how that happens. I don’t have my career path planned out I just when something comes along and it makes me feel something I go for it. But I don’t see Frances as a victim really. I think she could have easily been written differently. She could have bene a bit wet, sad and pathetic. But I just think the way that Brian wrote her and the way that I wanted to play her was as a human being. She’s complex. I mean obviously her story comes to a tragic end and she’s also quite sad, but I think she’s quite ballsy and she has the guts to stand up to the boys when I don’t know if many people would have had that strength. I don’t see her as a tragic character by any means.

Q. Was it hard for you acting opposite Tom playing two roles?

It wasn’t really an issue for me. I didn’t have to think about the mathematics of it I just got to do everything twice. Tom was there as Reg and then he went away for a bit and he was there as Ron. It was kind of a breeze for me to be honest.

Christopher Eccleston Legend Interview

Doctor Who star Christopher Eccleston talks about playing notorious policeman Nipper Read in the Krays biopic Legend starring Tom Hardy as both gangster twins Ronnie and Reggie. The film directed by Brian Helgeland charts the rise and fall of the  infamous London criminal brothers.

Q. When did you first hear about the Krays?

Who are the Krays? I heard about them when I was a teenage boy like Tom really. There’s a point where teenage boys get very interested in gothic violence and I remember going to the true crime section a lot around 14 I’d think. I have twin brothers so obviously I was particularly interested in it.

Q. How did you research the roles?

To quote David Bowie “ I threw my homework on the fire and took a car downton”. I think there’s a lot of bollocks spoken about research. I think that it’s make believe. I felt what Brian had written sent a very clear message on what he wanted. So I relied entirely on what Brian had written and wat happened on set. Me and Brian did have a number of conversations about what kind of a dog Nipper would have been. I think we decided on a Bloodhound. Because according to Brian, this may be complete fantasy, but he says a Bloodhound will run until it dies. It will chase a criminal or its prey until its heart bursts. I threw in Malvolio from Twelfth Night, because I saw Nipper as a man who was absolutely puritanical, a man of the fifties who did not want the sixties to happen. Did not want the Krays to have sex and fun. Did not want the Rolling Stones to have fun. He was the man form the previous 10-20 years. No homework, just drugs with Brian Helgeland.

Q. Why do you think Nipper became so obsessed with the Krays?

I seized on the class theme that Brian presented, in that he believed that they were from similar backgrounds and he felt a good deal of class shame about what they were doing. I think Nipper was obsessive generally I think you probably have to be. I think what’s interesting about Nipper was surviving as a northern copper in the metropolitan police department. That must have been difficult. I think he was a workaholic, I think he was obsessive. He was also humiliated as we show in the film on numerous occasions by Rona and Reg and he didn’t forget that. He got there in the end.

Q. Was it hard for you acting opposite Tom playing two roles?

It was a deeply humbling experience in stereo. I think I’m not sure I really experienced it, there’s one sequence where Nipper is jammed between Reg and Ronnie. But I don’t think we had time on the day. I didn’t have time for him to change so we did it with the stand in Jacob. I think 99% of my scenes were with Reg. I had one scene with Ron and that was a revelation. That was very interesting because I’d only ever met Tom as Reg then suddenly there was Ron. They were completely different and having twin brothers in real life that was very interesting to see what an actor was doing with both roles. I was very jealous.

Q. Did you enjoy the period costume?

I looked exactly like my paternal grandfather and he was a frightening man. I was struck by that when I put on the gear and looked at myself in the mirror. I actually based it on him. I based it on his effect on me as a child and his basic outlook as I imagined it. So it was helpful.