You will be redirected back to your article in seconds

Why British Film Is in the Middle of an Indie Renaissance

Why British Film Is in the Middle of an Indie Renaissance

What leaps to mind when you think “British film”? Is it all tea and
crumpets, Jane Austen costume dramas, and genteel swearing by the King?
With maybe some Cockney gangsters thrown in for spice?

Not that
there isn’t some of that, but: look. You’re probably not even aware of
all the British film you’re seeing. “Gravity” had studio backing but is
basically a British production. Ditto “Les Misérables,” “World War Z,”
“Fast & Furious 6,” and the tragically underappreciated Formula 1
action drama “Rush.” On the screen you might be looking at Hollywood
money, but you’re also looking at British talent: “Rush,” for instance,
replicated global settings shooting mostly in the U.K., and it was
British cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle and British production
designer Mark Digby who made the film look like a hundred million bucks
instead of its relatively paltry budget of $38 million. And “Gravity”
would not succeed absent the groundbreaking visual work created
primarily by London FX house Framestore.

We can probably thank
the “Harry Potter” juggernaut for drawing big productions back to the
British Isles after Hollywood had decamped to Australia and New Zealand
for a while. And it’s ongoing: The much-anticipated David Ayer-Brad Pitt
WWII action drama “Fury,” opening later this year, was shot in England.
The new “Star Wars” films will be produced in the U.K. The triumph of
“Gravity” will surely draw other FX-heavy projects to London. Which
means, with U.K. tax incentives giving an extra boost to Hollywood films
shooting in the U.K. that cast European actors (as the L.A. Times discussed recently),
global audiences are suddenly going to find themselves newly exposed to a
lot of fantastic British actors whose homegrown work is worth checking out.

But it’s already
happening: You’ll want to see “Locke,” opening in limited release in the
U.S. on April 25th, because it stars Tom Hardy as a guy who spends the
whole movie in his car rushing someplace important we aren’t immediately
made privy to, and dealing with a whole lot of consequences via
numerous phone conversations. It’s from British writer-director Stephen
Knight (he wrote “Eastern Promises” and “Dirty Pretty Things”), and it
is unexpectedly riveting, thanks to an intense performance from Hardy
that will come as no surprise to those who’ve seen him in far bigger
films. On April 4th, look for “Dom Hemingway,” in which Jude Law busts
some Brit-gangster stereotypes as a guy just out of prison and looking
to reclaim his life. You will want to see “Filth,” a loud, crude,
obnoxious, and very, very politically incorrect followup to
“Trainspotting” (it’s also based on an Irvine Welsh novel). From
Scottish writer-director Jon S. Baird and starring James McAvoy, “Filth
hits VOD services on April 24th, and theaters on May 30th.

will also want to check out “A Fantastic Fear of Everything” (available
now on VOD and in limited theatrical release), in which
Simon Pegg stars as a not-at-all-mentally-well writer; the project also
represents his first foray into producing. The film is wildly daring in a
way that no Hollywood production employing Pegg could ever be (and also
likely helped inform his second production job, “The World’s End,”
another studio-backed but essentially British film).

And speaking
of VOD: With the rapid expansion of on-demand as a viable platform for
bringing small films to wide audiences, British films that otherwise
wouldn’t find much of a foothold in North America suddenly have a way
in. That’s already happening, too: “The Selfish Giant,” a fable about
poor kids selling scrap metal, is now available on demand after a tiny
U.S. theatrical release late last year. The film received numerous
nominations at this year’s British Independent Film Awards and several
at the London Critics Circle Film Awards, and has garnered lots of love
at festivals and from British critics, especially for writer-director
Clio Barnard. Ben Wheatley — who gave us last year’s wickedly funny
black comedy “Sightseers” (now on VOD) — is back with he trippy
historical mind-frak “A Field in England” (which came out in limited release and VOD on
February 7th).

If you’ve got a region-free DVD player (and all
movie lovers in the U.S. should), you’ll find that transatlantic
shipping from is surprisingly reasonable. (You also won’t
pay the U.K.’s national 20 percent sales tax, the VAT, when you ship
something outside the U.K., and since the VAT is included in the prices
you see listed at the site, your final tally will be gratifyingly
smaller than you’re expecting.) It’s a great way to catch up on some
extraordinary films that you’d otherwise not be able to access. These
include the fantastic genre-busting drama-thriller “Metro Manila,” from
writer-director Sean Ellis; the film debuted at Sundance in 2013 but is
unlikely to ever get a U.S. release, especially now that it’s been
picked up by Fox for a studio remake. (Perhaps with its Filipino setting
and Tagalog dialog, it’s simply too un-British for American perceptions
of a British film! I predict the remake will be set in Los Angeles.)

so much exciting work being done in British film that I’ve barely
scratched the surface. Movies such as “Philomena” and “The Invisible
are turning upside down twee notions of modern British attitudes
and beloved historical figures (“Woman” is about Charles Dickens’
mistress, after all). British films are giving American actors room to
grow and breathe in ways that Hollywood isn’t: the Scottish “Under the
and “The Double,” from actor-writer-director Richard Ayoade,
allow, respectively, Scarlett Johansson, as an alien serial killer, and
Jesse Eisenberg, as a man tormented by his doppelganger, fantasy realms
in which to stretch their talents. (Both films arrive in the U.S. in
April.) As a whole, these movies speak to one indisputable conclusion: If
you’re not paying attention to British indies, you’re missing out on
some of the most exhilarating work being done in contemporary cinema.

This Article is related to: Reviews and tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,


Douglas Alford

To preface – I love Richard Ayoade, he is an amazing artist so this is not a knock to him. There is nothing indie film about these flicks (that are all great films by the way) because there is no way none of these films was made for under even a cool half million(if you have the fact on that than please correct me) but as a filmmaker trying to makes films with no budget (real indie work). Yeah, your going to throw the budget does not determine indie status back at me but you are wrong budget does determine indie status. These maybe art house films but they are definitely not indie films. Sorry, there if some big rich guys getting even richer off these films (Alcove Entertainment, Film4, British Film Institute, StudioCanal UK (UK), Magnolia Pictures (USA) and that is just studios involved on the film "The Double") there ain't jack and shit that is indie about these films. Film critics and lovers need to go back to the drawing board with what is indie and what is not.

MaryAnn Johanson

A note on the films I mentioned: I have wildly varying responses to them, but I'm not reviewing them here. I included them because they're representative of what's happening in British indies. They're not all great films; some of them are quite flawed. But they're still noteworthy. Which is why I noted them. :->


Filth is very average. A Field in England is great! Under the Skin is basically a masterpiece. The Double is also totally brilliant.


LOL, only Filth is good from that bunch. The rest is crap. Nice try though, mate.


Watch Selfish Giant, Filth and Philomena

Don't watch A Field in England, A Fantastic Fear of Everything and Dom Hemingway, they are dogshite

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *