User Reviews

In a run-down public toilet in London at 3.07 am, the middle-aged prostitute Kelly takes on the 11-year-old runaway Joanne. Together they take the train from London to Brighton to escape Kelly's hard-edged pimp. The film explores the mother-daughter-like bond that forms between the girls as they are left to fend for themselves in the gritty underworld of South London.

Paul Andrew Williams has done something remarkably cool here that he did not realise until his film started receiving praise and wider distribution (it even made its way to the Stockholm International Film Festival, where I saw it). Nevertheless, we can easily tell that this is a quality film with excellent performances by its two leads Lorraine Stanley and young Georgia Groome. Although the seedy underground and hierarchies of bad guys, johns and pimps channel Guy Ritchie and Matthew Vaughn, director Williamsm stresses that London to Brighton is "not a gangster movie", but an unflinching look at the two aforementioned characters and how they cope under pressure.

The plot is left best unspoiled because it is gradually unfolded through well-positioned flashbacks, arguably the goldmine of the film. The first half of the film has a few pacing problems as nothing truly jumps out and grabs you – but when the unspeakably effective background segments are interjected London to Brighton receives a well-deserved jumpstarting kick up the arse, continuing down a perfectly-paced path. One of the most poignant scenes sees Kelly's pimp ask 11-year-old Joanne if she is a virgin, and subsequently telling her to have sex with an older man. The amount of smoking, cursing, screaming and beating that goes on around her is heartbreaking.

This would not be the case with a lesser actress. The fact is that Georgia Groome inhabits Joanne so effortlessly and deeply that it is a sight to behold. Her crying performances wrenches your heart. Other than the perfectly-cast Groome, the director told us that he applied no seriousness to finding the 'perfect people' for the respective characters: the guy in the green jeep, for example, was cast because "he had a green jeep". In this way a gritty, unpleasant and plain cast presents itself – an ordinary pack of South London criminals. Better yet, they truly emote. When Kelly and Joanne down the sour rum & coke that the older man has given them, you can feel the bitter aftertaste of the drink.

'London to Brighton' has been likened to Mike Leigh's Naked, and perhaps this is an apt comparison. What remains clear, however, is that Williams has served up a deliciously gritty and unflinching drama in the midst of chaos, which he occasionally pauses with wonderful slow-motion captures and dreamy shots of the windy barren boardwalk of Brighton. It's bruised, realistic, harrowing and compelling – a very good watch.

8 out of 10

I can't recall the last time a film had such a visceral impact on me. Coming out of the cinema after watching "London to Brighton" I felt my senses reeling and the adrenalin pumping as if I had just stepped off a particularly fiendish theme park ride.

There's a grim nastiness running throughout this story, interwoven with a thin thread of maternal compassion. Life is hard and hopeless for these people. They have few choices open to them. Their environment is sordid and gloomy. Even the seaside resort of Brighton is cold, windy and desolate.

But what lifts the audience out of what might otherwise be a depressing experience is the storyline which builds excitement and fear to the point where my friend felt he had to get up and actually leave the auditorium! Without revealing the plot, I can say that had he stayed, the final scene – which in no way strays from the noir – would have rewarded his perseverance.

The cast turn in convincing performances and Georgia Groome is excellent as the young runaway.

Being hailed by some as 'the best British film of the century' (Big Issue) and 'British cinema at its best' (The Scotsman) and on the back of several prestigious film award from festivals around the world 'London to Brighton' has a lot to live up to. It doesn't disappoint, dark, violent, gritty and bleak this is what Mike Leigh would be like if he did 18 certificate films with Shane Meadows as his assistant. From the opening sequence of the two main characters bursting battered and bruised into a public toilet it grips like a hand round the throat and only lets up to become uncomfortable, it is certainly an assault on the senses and sensibilities of the cinema audience who take this brutal journey along with the characters on screen. Shot on a relatively low budget but managing to not seem so, the films main tricks are in the editing, jump cuts and flashbacks only adding to the suspense as you begin to piece together the whole sordid story. With some superb acting from the cast, especially Joanne who portrays her vulnerability like Toby Kebbell did in 'Dead Mans Shoes', and a suitably dirty soundtrack the whole thing feels very British. It has the grainy look of 'Get Carter' mixed with the grey of any Ken Loach, the backdrops of dirty streets and dirtier walls only make scenes like the two polystyrene cups blowing in the wind (reminiscent of the carrier bag in 'American Beauty') all the more beautiful. There are of course other nods like a shot that lingers on a doorway for ages instead of showing us what's happening inside which reminded me of a similar shot in Hitchcock's film 'Frenzy'. Although not an easy watch it manages to balance the bloody with the beautiful, the violence with the unlikely friendship between the two main female leads and triumphs just as everyone says as one of the best British thrillers of recent years. London to Brighton deserves to be a huge hit, its bold, its brilliant and its British and it proves once again that we have a thriving film industry packed full of talented people that can still give Hollywood a run for it's money.

The plot of London to Brighton is simple, the budget minimal, the actors and writer/director unknown. But the result is an unexpectedly captivating movie.

London to Brighton follows a prostitute and a young run-away as they flee from their recent past: From London to Brighton, no less. Through a well-balanced series of flashbacks, we gradually learn how they came to be running. The movie's tension slowly builds as those who are chasing them draw closer. The premise isn't revolutionary, but the delivery is robust. Half the characters spend half the time not knowing what is happening around them. Like the best thrillers, there is still enough to keep the audience guessing right to the end.

The movie is underscored by a very British portrayal of urban mob violence - gritty and selectively brutal, with language to match. The characters are explored just enough to give the movie some depth.

The issues contained within the movie are morally challenging. While there is little explicit sexual content, the mere context will be enough to make some viewers uncomfortable. It would be easy to impose "middle-class" morality, but fortunately that doesn't happen. Instead the characters react only at the extremes: The prostitute with misgivings about sex involving very young children; not the prostitute with misgivings about prostitution.

London to Brighton is notable because it places a 13 year old actor in one of the leading roles. The performance is raw and the look of innocence genuine. Yet she portrays events and emotions that she can have no experience of with disturbing competence. To paraphrase the director, "she certainly won't be allowed to see the film when it released in the cinema".

The movie is rough round the edges. It drags in places. Sometimes the acting doesn't quite convey all the emotions it could do. It is easy to find fault in the detail. But overall London to Brighton is an impressive first feature by 'Paul Andrew Williams' and most of the cast.

The quiet in a London toilet is broken at 03:07 when a woman and a girl burst into it beaten and crying. The elder, Kelly, puts young Joanne into one of the cubicles and goes to get train tickets and some food. Not long after they are on a train to Brighton and safety. Meanwhile back in London, the cold criminal Stuart Allen makes it painfully clear to small time pimp Derek that he wants Kelly and Joanne brought to him.

I heard that this film was very grim stuff and as a result I skipped it in the cinemas, although I was "helped" in this decision by how quickly it came and went in the cinema. Watching it now I have to say that it is a shame that the film did not get more viewers because it an incredibly well delivered thriller set in a world of pimps and gangsters. This aspect could represent a turn-off to many viewers who perhaps have had enough of Lock Stock copycats in the British cinema, but rest assured that it is far from being that type of thing. Where some films revel in the gangster cliché, this film presents it unflinchingly as a cruel world of violence, grime and exploitation populated by those with few choices and no hope. This is convincingly delivered and it puts the viewer right into it to the point where I did feel uncomfortable and trapped.

The story is simple and what makes it so impressive is how it is delivered rather than just what happens. The strength of the film is in the edit, which brings out the story in a flashback structure that works very well. It allows for a strong finish and consistent tension that runs across both timelines of the film equally. What is almost as impressive as the edit are the performances that Williams gets from his cast; they are natural and convincing and all the bleaker for it. Stanley is brilliant as someone morally disgusted by her world but equally unable to think of anything else available to her. Groome is just as good and is heartbreaking in the way she moves from a child to an adult between scenes, with a confidence that is only on the surface. Harris is suitably morally bankrupt – a real "bad man", not a criminal with presence and power but the sort of man who would beat you for looking at him. Allen is a harder character because he does have to be a "crime lord" in this story of small fish but Spruell does pretty well to hold back and be a menacing force driving the story.

London to Brighton is not a cheerful film but it is a gripping thriller set in a convincing world of dirt and grubby people. The actors all convince and succeed in making us care for people giving £10 oral sex behind skips in the street but it is the structure and delivery of the story that makes it as good as it is, drawing tension simultaneously from both timelines of the same narrative. Grim but well worth it.

London to Brighton (2006)

A harrowing story, a real descent into a little sliver of the streetwalking underworld of London and the perils of little rich girls who run away from home. I don't mean to make light of any of it--the movie pulls no punches, and adds some that go beyond the usual violence, too--but this is one of those recent stories where a terrible situation is imagined, and then filmed with awful realism. The two tracks, the plot with its significance, and the raw, visceral reaction to seeing anything so horrible, are both played out to the max. And acting is really first rate. The bad guys are really sneeringly awful, and the two key females, a full grown but struggling prostitute and a young girl who gets swept up in it all, are so believable it's scary. And impressive.

And none of this is enough for a great movie. It makes for an intense experience, and there's no rule that says a movie has to be enjoyable (this is totally not enjoyable in the usual sense). But there is little here that reveals or probes, there is little of what you might call art, or nuance, or originality. It's not exactly a formula, yet, this kind of abuse in your living room, but I think it will be. There are several I've seen recently, the one that comes to mind is Julia. In both movies, young children are victims and it's difficult to really watch without detaching and looking around the living room and reminding yourself this is fiction, these are actors, don't worry.

Terrible things happen in the world, of course, and worse things. But I'm not sure we need to see them. It's like becoming an emergency room doctor because you are fascinated with suffering and blood. Movies should be like doctors, then (to stretch the metaphor) and have some purpose to them beyond wallowing.

And beyond representation. I think accurate representation is the simple motive behind the filming. The director (in this case with a short resume--I've never heard of him) makes it vivid, fast, and very real. In that sense he succeeded. But this realism could have been a means to a greater effect, a higher intention, something that takes the viewer somewhere. Anywhere.

The fact that the Edinburgh International Film Festival bestowed their New Director award on Paul Andrew Williams is a solid enough indicator of the strengths and unique qualities of London TO BRIGHTON. Admittedly made on a shoe-string budget, and cast with relative unknowns, the film never once looks cheap or out of its depth. I was amazed when I saw it at Edinburgh by just how tough and unflinching a portrayal of the criminal underworld it is. The leads put in tremendous performances that will surprise many, and William's writing is exceptional. The film really zips along through its 90min length, and pulls the viewer in to a lock-tight embrace. In my opinion this film is one of the highlights of the year so far and a real find for the British film industry. For a first-time director working on a tiny budget, getting five star reviews in the Guarduan and Scotsman, and great praise from the Times is a hell of an achievement. I hope other people who love British cinema see it when it is theatrically released.

I also saw London to Brighton at the Edinburgh film festival, the buzz after the film was all so positive and I think this film will do really well based on this word of mouth. Wining awards at both Edinburgh and rain dance can't be a bad sign. For a first time director Paul Andrew Williams pulls off a very confident film, it can be quite hard hitting, very well written with some really good performances. The two central characters particularly shine in the darker moments in the film, the combination of there acting and the directors ability to create such a tangible atmosphere creates some truly gripping scenes. In short Its the kind of film the British film industry should be making more of, challenging, entertaining and decidedly British and hopefully it will get a large release. Highly Recommend!!

This film had a good start which then unfolded to give the viewer an understanding of what had happened. I thought the sets were really good - showed the squalor in which these people existed. Characters were a bit two-dimensional; nice touch showing the relationship between the young girl and the young gangster at the end. The final scenes were not as surprising as might have been thought. Derek was not only nasty, but was also stupid. At least the 'tart with the heart' didn't settle down in rural domesticity - back on the mean streets of King Cross(?). Not as good as the other recent Britflick I've seen (Red Road) - now there was brilliant film.

'London to Brighton' is a modern film, but has a peculiarly eighties feel to it. In the heyday of Thatcherism, an endless stream of radical film makers wanted to document the plight of the underclass. While Britain has become more affluent in the subsequent years, this does not mean that all social problems have disappeared; but except for films about the plight of immigrants, this sort of movie appears to have vanished as a genre. Perhaps this is one signal of Thatcherism triumph: that (usually middle class) film-makers are no longer interested in the plight of the poor. 'London to Brighton' is not just (or even mainly) a work of social compassion: it's a violent gangster thriller, but it takes place in a Britain best described as squalid. And one is struck at how unfashionable it seems to be to paint the country in such a light; and how commonplace it once was. Aside from these observations, the film is well acted, beautifully shot and and genuinely harrowing. But it takes place in a landscape almost devoid of hope. We don't know what made the characters into the people they are - and I found myself increasingly detached at the end, because of the clear impossibility of a happy ending. Indeed, I didn't know really what I was supposed to make of the fact that the eventual conclusion was not the worst imaginable. It's a short film, but although the initial premise is gripping, it eventually suffers from the absence of wider context - "girl goes home" is a less powerful ending to a story if we have no idea of why she went away. That's not to say it's bad, in many ways it feels more real than Neal Jordan's authentic eighties gangster and prostitutes movie 'Mona Lisa', to which it makes an interesting companion piece. But Jordan's movie had a more involving plot.

This film left me with a bad taste in my mouth. Doubtless the film-makers would justify its relentless grimness by describing it as a comment on the plight of the impoverished underclass in contemporary British society. Yet I suspect this claim would not be entirely sincere.

London to Brighton may be filmed and acted in the same realistic, unpolished style of a Ken Loach film, but for me it lacks the degree of empathy and compassion for its protagonists, which typifies Loach's own work. Instead, I felt there was a strong element of middle-class voyeurism going on. From the comfort of an art-house cinema the film invites its audience to partake of a little gutter porn, down among the pimps, prostitutes and paedophiles of underbelly Britain, where violence and sexual abuse are taken to be ubiquitous.

The film-makers do not even see the need to tack on much of a plot to justify their excursion into the sordid. From early on it is abundantly clear where the story is heading and equally obvious that the denouement will not be pleasant.

Although the acting throughout is exceptional, nothing could change the fact that this was one journey I would rather not have taken, and certainly not one I would recommend to anyone else.

This film is about one woman and a teenage girl on the run from mobsters from London to Brighton.

I did not know anything about the film before I watched it, and I was so pleasantly surprised by the quality of it. The film is sharp, focused and intense. The non linear story telling is a little confusing at first. However, every scene has its significance, and that everything falls into place as the film goes along. I am particularly impressed by the camera work. It is focused, realistic and raw. The story itself is gripping, horrifying and intense. Acting by the cast is excellent, particularly the teenage girl. The trauma and horror she experiences at the end of the film is very well portrayed. This film is powerful and captivating. It is a definitely a gem.

There were some in the audience who couldn't believe that a film like Amos Gitai's Promised Land could be made, given its almost documentary like feel to an aged old problem of human trafficking for prostitution. I suppose those who feel that way would probably not take to London to Brighton, which like films such as Lilya-4-eva take an angle of child prostitution, and spun a different narrative out of it.

Here, it's actually out of desperation - in fact almost all the characters here reek of it, in exploiting children on the streets and enticing them with significant sums of money in order to satisfy the whims of some rich clients. The film takes on a non-linear narrative in having its tale told, which leaves you pretty much engaged in wanting to find out just why two women are on the flight as per its title, leaving behind the city of London in double quick time, where we are introduced at 3:07am to Joanne (Georgia Groome) in thick makeup, being hidden in a stank toilet cubicle by an older lady of the streets, Kelly (Lorraine Stanley), suffering from one badly bruised eye.

I suppose a modest production budget made this film look like a typical gritty English crime thriller, with the hand held camera bringing the audience into the thick of the action, either slowly drawing some sympathies from the lead female characters because of the lack of options made available to them, including being on the run, or presenting a sense of clear and present danger up close, especially when pimps Derek (Johnny Harris) and Chum (Nathan Constance) become inevitably close in catching up with the duo for an event they committed, kept closely under wraps.

The relationship between Kelly and Joanne remain one of the highlights of the film, two women who have nobody else to turn to, trying to determine what their next course of action might be at every turn. We see how Kelly takes it upon herself as the surrogate guardian of Joanne, but I suppose only because of the immense guilt that she brought to the table, for having again out of desperation, introduce a young girl into her dark underworld. Those who have watched Angus, Thongs and Perfect Snogging would see how Georgia Groome makes an about turn from privileged child, to one roaming the streets.

The other highlight which I had enjoyed was how thugs have the capability of systematically breaking down one's defenses, in balancing threats and carrots so as to gain some level of trust and obedience. Johnny Harris plays his role well as the pimp who constantly looks out for himself, of bowing to authority and pressure, while Nathan Constance as his chum actually had a lot more characterization going on for him instead. A pity though that it wasn't explored further, and had to be ended as it did in the film.

London to Brighton has a sense of danger permeating throughout, in a sort of hunter versus prey kind of film, that will leave you on the edge of your seat as it builds up to its last act, in a story succinctly told in under 80 minutes.

London to Brighton' is Paul Andrew William's first feature length film. It's about a prostitute called Kelly (Lorraine Stanley) and a young homeless girl named Joanne (Georgia Groomes) who go on the run from pimp Derek (Johnny Harris) for reasons that I won't reveal because it might spoil you enjoyment of this nasty little film.

There are no heroes to be found here, no beautiful moments (with the exception of the final frame) just a lot of squalid violence and social decay.

There are many things that baffle me about this great country of ours; our obsession with celebrity non-entities, our persistent tea drinking, or constant discourse about the weather, our weak and self serving politicians, and why when a half decent British movie is released, the sycophantic press hype it up so much, and raise expectations so high, that should any one actually bother to watch it, they will leave feeling let down.

Unfortunately, 'London to Brighton' is not, as the critics would have you believe, the best thing since sliced bread. It is not a classic British thriller; it is not by any stretch of the imagination; a 5 Star, Grade A, piece of filmic genius. It is however a solid, if unspectacular, foray into the seedy side of life on the streets of our nations capital, and beyond.

The first thing that hits you about this film is it's gritty style, William's goes for the hand held look, but not in a gimmicky way, the camera shakes and wobbles but no so much that it takes your mind off the film. The camera is up close and personal with the characters, rarely more than a few inches away from the sweaty, putrid monsters; that are barely recognisable as human beings.

It's a style of film-making that some viewers will find off putting, as there is no wall between the film and the viewer. You are sucked into their world, and you are left dirty and downtrodden because of it.

As the story develops, a series of flashbacks occur to flesh out the missing pieces of the fractured plot (although I suspect most people will already have guessed the details of events that lead to the girls fleeing London).

The movie is anchored by the very strong performances from Lorraine Stanley as the duplicitous Kelly, and Johnny Harris as the low grade Pimp with a psychotic limp and an eye for amorality.

Generally the story moves along swiftly, in a predictable but nonetheless gripping and satisfying way. The dialogue is lazily over reliant on profanity, but manages to stay the right side of authentic and interesting.

A suspension of disbelief is recommended for anyone watching this movie. For example; Derek storms into random persons flat, holds them all hostage for a couple of hours with a shotgun, and then lets them go, yet they don't call the police? It's artistic license gone a little too far, and this lack of common sense harms the film throughout.

Another low point of 'London to Brighton' is the mob boss, Stuart Allen, who is so flat, two dimensional and uninspired that all his scenes drag the film down into a pit of spurious nonsense. Sam Spurell, the actor who plays Stuart, was obviously aiming for a menacingly understated performance, unfortunately what we got is just plain dull.

Overall, 'London to Brighton' has its moments. It's gritty, the direction is very good. The performances from most of the cast are excellent and for the large part it manages to avoid all those cockney clichés that have plagued British thrillers since the dawn of Guy Ritchie.

It's a good film, with plenty of flaws but overall an excellent first effort from Williams.

Gritty Dramas are not usually my thing, but I saw this by chance and was very impressed by it. It's nearly impossible to make a first feature film. It's nearly impossible to make it good on as tight a budget as this was obviously shot on. The fact that it was made in such a short time is also another factor to be considered. And my consideration, after taking all these factors in to account is, this is brilliant! It is a strong story with plenty of moral interest, it has strong performances and a nicely done twist. I wish Paul every success with whatever he does next! He is a directing and writing talent to watch out for!

first of this feature deals with mature subject matter that 100% not suitable for any kids( not because violence, that is quiet minimal actually, but because the psychological strain inquired even by an adult).

this is a good production, excellent acting all around in great British manner i am pleasantly getting accustomed too more and more lately( Hollywood just simply can not keep pace with real plot developments lately, other then trying to "shock" the viewer). however i can not call this one "great" simply because the plot, to me, is VERY predictable; the end just simply can not be in any other way; and because the movie is not fast paced , except for emotions inquired on certain scenes, it becomes quiet boring towards end.

this movie gets such great reviews ONLY because is a moralistic tale, with great reason i might add, but still not entertaining enough if that is why you are thinking to pick up this movie. however it will be a definite hit for mothers and towards female solidarity as well.

a good watch, and i also like that it does not play on the "fear" sentiments( targeting adults that is) as the American movies do more and more lately.

This film really took me by surprise. What I was expecting was some amateurish first film effort which I hoped would have enough good ideas to make it worth a full viewing; what I got instead was a minor masterpiece of cinema. I cannot remember the last time I saw a British film with such story-telling verve. It's amazing to think that this is a first feature from writer\director Paul Andrew Williams, made on a nothing budget. I can't wait to see what he produces in the years to come.

The unfolding of the story is masterfully done. The small details of character interaction are incredibly well observed. This is the future of British cinema, not endless rehashes of Jane Austen and insipid rom coms.

Some call it a gem, some call it a masterpiece, I would call it an okay movie to watch once but certainly not a gem nor masterpiece. For that London To Brighton is just not captivating enough. It could have used so more action and hardcore images. To me it looked all a bit too soft, even though the story itself is hard and cruel. The acting was not bad though, especially from the young Georgia Groome, that I thought did a very good job concidering her age. Like the rest of the cast they made this movie worth watching, but I wasn't blown away by the story that had good ideas but to me failed to make it exceptional.

In London, the pimp Derek (Johnny Harris) assigns the prostitute Kelly (Lorraine Stanley) that works for him to find a young girl on the streets to escort the powerful mobster Duncan Allen (Alexander Morton). Kelly finds the twelve year-old runaway Joanne (Georgia Groome) in the train station and Derek proposes one hundred pounds for the service and the girl accepts. Kelly befriends Joanne and takes her to Duncan's mansion. When Joanne cries in the bedroom where she is with Duncan, Kelly runs and defends the girl. At 3:07 AM, the bruised Kelly and the tearful Joanne lock themselves in a public toilet. Kelly asks Joanne to stay there because she will raise some money for them to travel to Brighton. Meanwhile, Duncan's son Stuart Allen (Sam Spruell) calls Derek and asks him to meet him in a night-club. When Derek arrives, Stuart tells that his father is dead and he wants the responsible; further, he cuts his knee sinew to prove that he is not kidding. Derek calls his associate Chum (Nathan Constance) and they begin to chase the girls.

The excellent "London to Brighton" has a magnificent screenplay that discloses a crude and dark tale of friendship and lost of innocence through flashbacks and a surprising conclusion. This low-budget gem has a stunning cast, with top-notch performances, and the debut of director (and writer) Paul Andrew Williams in a feature could not be better. In the DVD, there is an awesome and cruel alternative ending that should not be deleted, as well the sequence in Duncan's bedroom with the two girls. The comradeship of Kelly and Joanne and the final redemption of Kelly protecting the girl are touching and beautiful. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Londres Proibida" ("Forbidden London")

One of the more disturbing British crime flicks, has a haggard prostitute, seeking a young fresh girl to quench a client (an old mobster sicko's thirst) where a bloody incident horribly ensues. Not a badly made film, which too you should watch for some deleted scenes, most of them bloody. Unfortunately the more experienced pro, and the much younger less experienced one have ended up in a frightening pickle of a situation. The client, who obviously was castrated, where he had much more darker sexual intentions for the young lass, happens to have his mobster son (a nasty frightening performance by that actor) wanting revenge, bad. The movie goes back and forth in story, and is quite a disturbing watch, due to it's child prostitution themes. It's not what I call an impressive effort, or something I was bowled over by, but for lovers of British crime flicks, this one may not suit your taste. The film was made on quite a tight budget from what I know, and the young teen girl in it was very good. LTB does have some repellent (sicko territory) moments, and the ending doesn't go down like you think, where someone must pay for the horrific though in my eyes, justful crime.

The DNA of this is traceable to the thirties when middle class, Oxbridge educated film makers set out to document the lower social classes, in the process establishing what came to be known as the British documentary movement.

Depicting people is not the same as enabling them to have a voice, and the British film industry is dominated by the chattering middle classes. What underscores films such as this, or the risible Bullet Boy of 2004, is an appalled fascination the broadsheet reading, wine drinking chattering classes have towards those of the lower social orders. Alternately appalled, fascinated by and terrified of the underclass, watching a film like this and joining in the hype surrounding it allows us to bask in self satisfaction, feeling good about ourselves. We can take a peek into the murky twilight world of street prostitutes, small time criminals, wring our hands, then get back to our dinner parties.

The young girl is never developed. Why did she run away from home? Is it plausible she would not be picked up by the police? London s streets are bristling with CCTV cameras, the last time I checked there are teams of undercover, plain clothes officers devoted to rounding up kids bunking off school. Her personality is entirely unritten, we know, and care, nothing about her. Implausiblities run throughout this film. Like the stoners forced out of a flat at gunpoint...surely one of them might have called the police. A petty criminal would not be yelling his head off in a residential street, waving a shotgun around, bundling two girls into the boot of a car. Unless he wanted to be surrounded by armed police.

Other characters are cardboard clichés of the most tired kind. We have the slapper with the heart of gold...the designer suited gangster in his pole dancing club. Lets have a film about some real prostitutes. The paedophile here is completely unbelievable. He d be far more likely to groom a child in this situation, putting her at ease, not tying her up and terrifying her by cutting her clothes with a knife.

Its the sign of a poor film maker, bereft of any ability to utilise cinematic language, that he layers every scene with ponderous music, instructing us, at key moments, what to feel.

There's no cinema to this, it has the look of an episode of the old soap Brookside, with a lot of close ups and melodramatic, television type acting.

The fawning over this film and its director smacks to me of nepotism and the incestuous nature of film festivals. Just because a British film has appeared doesn't mean its any good. We deserve better than this.