|
| . |
|
Sweet Sixteen 2002 |
Review by Jonathan Cornwell |
Directed by Ken Loach
R, 106 min. (pervasive strong language, drug content, violence) |
 |
Starring: Martin Compston, Annmarie Fulton, William Ruane, Michelle Abercromby, Michelle Coulter, Gary McCormack, Tommy McKee, Calum McAllees
Producer: Rebecca O'Brien
Screenplay: Paul Laverty
Cinematography: Barry Ackroyd
Distributor: Lions Gate Films
Released: 5.16.03 (Limited) |
Rating:
 (out of ) |
Director Ken Loach wears his politics on his sleeve in most of his films, and Sweet Sixteen is no exception. He's
left-leaning but provocative in the way he argues his beliefs. In Bread and Roses
he portrays the life of the non-union worker and the burdens they're dealt as a result of their expendability. Now, with
this film, Loach goes for the jugular of the conservative movement by telling a story of a boy's transformation from
innocent youth to hardened criminal because circumstances dictate it. It's true that many of today's youths seem to have
no other answer to escape a life of poverty but to embrace drug dealing or a similar life of crime to be financially
successful (for Loach, education and hard work isn't enough). But even if one doesn't agree with his politics, they can
appreciate what he's constructed here - a film that is unflinching in its presentation of people who try to survive by any
means necessary.
The story takes place in Glasgow, Scotland, where a 15-year old boy, Liam (Martin Compston in a stunning debut performance),
lives with his grandfather (Tommy McKee) and stepfather, Stan (Gary McCormack), who forces him to smuggle drugs to
his imprisoned mother, Jean (Michelle Coulter). When he refuses to cooperate any longer, he's beaten and kicked out of the
apartment and moves in with his single-mother sister, Chantelle (Annmarie Fulton). He dreams of buying his mother, who is
due to be released in a matter of months, a trailer by the seashore to help her escape the abusive Stan, but doesn't have the
necessary funds to make it happen. He turns to selling drugs, because, as evidenced by most successful young people
around him, it's the quickest way to meet his needs. But when he's caught by a major drug dealer infiltrating his territory,
he is recruited into the organization full time. Now that he has acquired a new life and plush apartment, all that is needed
is his mother's presence; but her reliance and addiction to Stan is stronger than he realized.
Of course, Liam's transformation begins the moment he realizes society has no use for him. Turning to drug dealing was an
easy decision, because for him the end (or in this case his goal) justified the means. Unfortunately, however, the life as
a pawn of a druglord required moral sacrifices, not the least of which forced him to make the difficult decision to show the
willingness to eliminate those in his organization's way. To those around him, namely Chantelle and his mother, it seemed
that he had made a life for himself in a more civilized manner. But inwardly, he's suffering greatly, as his conscience begins
to fade and that of a ruthless enforcer rises in its place. The film appropriately takes a decidedly probable destination for his tragic
decision-making. So it's no surprise that he finds himself in a relatively similar position that he began his journey in.
The real strength of Sweet Sixteen resides in its impressive cast, which, as is usual for a Loach-directed film, consists of
relative unknowns. Compston gives a heartbreaking performance of Liam's journey into darkness, which is also one of the
best young actor efforts I've seen in some time. Fulton is also impressive as a first-time actress, portraying Chantelle as
a loving sister who tries to convince Liam that his laudable goal of reuniting mother with family was a doomed enterprise.
Loach uses this raw approach to his characters to make them seem more authentic than usual.
Although Sweet Sixteen certainly contains a political message, it doesn't detract from the fact that the film is well-made and
executed in a gritty, real-world manner that impacts the viewer on several levels. Loach, who continues to prove himself as
one of the best working class filmmakers, has given us yet another gem of a film to contemplate and to provoke discussion.
© 2003 Jonathan Cornwell
|
|
 |
 | Masterpiece - Film perfection |
 | Excellent - A Must See |
| Good - Highly Recommended |
| Fair - Worth seeing |
| Average - Viewable, but not recommended |
| Below average - View at own risk |
| Poor - Avoid at all costs |
| Very poor - An embarassment to the film industry |
| Zero | Awful - One of the worst films ever made |
© 2000 - present ReelCriticReviews
All movie pictures are registered trademarks and/or copyrights of their respective holders
Their use on this site is for informational purposes only and does not imply ownership
|
