There is this tendency of phony naturalism in the so-called "social realism" sub-genre of British drama, namely based on combining gritty and even disturbing atmospheres and plot devices with feel-good conclusions and happy endings; and in some cases, redemption for characters whose actions would be considered unredeemable in real life. It is as if the screenwriters decided, after 90 minutes of depressing reality, that the subject matter was just too much for them to hold and they decided to open the door to optimism and faith in mankind. Which is obviously respectable in and of itself, but definitely does not belong here -- neither aesthetically, nor thematically.
This incongruous combination of depressing development and uplifting conclusion is not at all a separate incident. I can see this in Jobson's redemption at the end of "Red Riding", in Juliet Aubrey marrying Robert Carlyle at the end of "Go now" (probably the most ridiculously implausible happy ending I have ever seen in a serious film), and even true crime cases painstakingly faithful to documented facts, such as "Appropriate adult", feel the need to give their conclusion some sort of an upbeat tinge.
The man portrayed in this film kick-starts the plot, quite literally, by killing his own dog, admits he battered his wife and he would probably keep on doing it if she still were alive, and takes long -- too long -- to sum up the courage to stand up to the two male characters who do deserve his rage, with quite pathetic results by the way. The film even makes the effort to be realistic in its psychological portrayal of the character as a first-class scumbag: his cowardly methods of physical confrontation at the bar, or the fact that he only approaches the female lead after sniffing her low self-esteem and her vulnerability like a scent dog would. All of this against the backdrop of an ugly, unpleasant, boring and ultimately destructive lumpen suburban setting. So far, so good as far as realism goes.
Then all of a sudden, there seems to be a hint of redemption and hope somewhere in the horizon, and it turns out the guy isn't a bad chap after all (and is even capable of acts of mature dignity), and life isn't all that miserable for these characters. Pardon me, but with all this set of premises, there is something that simply doesn't work in the film. Either the premises built up for over an hour don't work, or the film's character development and resolution do not work.
Maybe it is just me, but if you want to film idyllic scenes of bucolic happiness with a tinge of melancholy, perhaps you'd better stick to Ealing Studios, or perhaps even better, to remaking Bambi.
This incongruous combination of depressing development and uplifting conclusion is not at all a separate incident. I can see this in Jobson's redemption at the end of "Red Riding", in Juliet Aubrey marrying Robert Carlyle at the end of "Go now" (probably the most ridiculously implausible happy ending I have ever seen in a serious film), and even true crime cases painstakingly faithful to documented facts, such as "Appropriate adult", feel the need to give their conclusion some sort of an upbeat tinge.
The man portrayed in this film kick-starts the plot, quite literally, by killing his own dog, admits he battered his wife and he would probably keep on doing it if she still were alive, and takes long -- too long -- to sum up the courage to stand up to the two male characters who do deserve his rage, with quite pathetic results by the way. The film even makes the effort to be realistic in its psychological portrayal of the character as a first-class scumbag: his cowardly methods of physical confrontation at the bar, or the fact that he only approaches the female lead after sniffing her low self-esteem and her vulnerability like a scent dog would. All of this against the backdrop of an ugly, unpleasant, boring and ultimately destructive lumpen suburban setting. So far, so good as far as realism goes.
Then all of a sudden, there seems to be a hint of redemption and hope somewhere in the horizon, and it turns out the guy isn't a bad chap after all (and is even capable of acts of mature dignity), and life isn't all that miserable for these characters. Pardon me, but with all this set of premises, there is something that simply doesn't work in the film. Either the premises built up for over an hour don't work, or the film's character development and resolution do not work.
Maybe it is just me, but if you want to film idyllic scenes of bucolic happiness with a tinge of melancholy, perhaps you'd better stick to Ealing Studios, or perhaps even better, to remaking Bambi.