84.000

andrew garfield looks surprisingly at home in the 70s. the story is nothing new, very much of the chinatown school of noir, but it's interesting to see a very british take on an american genre. good enough to make me want to see the rest of the trilogy.

At first I was bothered by Garfield because his age - he looks a bit too immature for his character (awesome sideburns though), but he pulls it through. Story is inriguing and dark. I love how the film gets heavier and heavier and towards the end enters the nightmare mode. I kind of expected to see 'David Lynch was here' written somewhere on the wall. Open ends are killing me. But hey, it's just a first part of a trilogy, and it's a great set-up. I rush to watch part 2. Little did I know...

I love a good serial killer movie. This isn't one. It starts off promising but devolves into a predictable story of exposing government corruption. Headstrong young journalist is warned off the story, gets handed mysterious envelopes, up against forces he doesn't understand, beaten up by police, blah blah blah. Almost every scene felt familiar. This really could have used some more compelling forensic work and investigative intuition. Terrible sound mixing as well, and uninspiring performances.

Solid, but unremarkable. The claustrophobic close-up camera work helps foster a sense of paranoia and conspiracy, but ultimately the plot ends up being contrived and predictable. The characters are one-dimensional and lack any kind of internal conflict, and many of them act irrationally for no apparent reason. It also became fairly far-fetched towards the end.

What I like about the movie is the great style of photographing - although, sometimes, it seems a bit too much textbook-style, if you know what i mean... still, a bit too confusing. but way above average and made by someone, who really knows his craft.

Pretty decent movie, but nothing groundbreaking. Performances were good, I liked the style, but the story was just kinda bland. I would've killed for some subtitles (I was watching it on television) as there were more than a few instances where I was having a hard time following the dialogue through the thick accents. Worth a viewing, but it might leave you wanting.

There's something to be said for a story this archetypal when its presentation is this solid, especially for a TV movie. Warning to North American viewers: this is set in Yorkshire, so the characters aren't exactly speaking the Queen's English here; without subtitles, you'll be lucky to catch one line in three.

The Red Riding Trilogy mixes cynicism and sarcasm, pandering to the naiveté market no differently than Brick and Zodiac...

i figured this movie would be horrible, and was proven wrong. i was pleasently surprised with the quality of this movie, i cant exactly say why, but just see it, it's good.

"Proves that HBO has no monopoly on quality small-screen drama." - Nick Schager

There's probably little in here you haven't seen before, but the mix of a wonderful cast, moody cinematography and some pretty dark turns had me interested throughout. A slow burner.

It's a long setup to a dramatic end game, but bring your lunch. It's a slow and sometimes boring ride.

I enjoyed the style and acting, storywise I felt this wasn't all that well-executed. Plus the repetitive cycle of getting tiny bit of information and/or getting beat by the cops and then fucking Rebecca Hall (and Downton Abbey chick) and same again got, well, repetitive.

A proficiently visual yet disappointingly mundane British Noir, that also happens to be a dynamite recruitment vehicle for the Yorkshire police department.

Great acting, the full effect of which is elicited by Jarrold's "let's keep the 16mm camera ultra close"-style. Best of the three.

Gripping crime mystery. One of t' best dramas 'bout t'north I've seen in a while, lad -- it wo champion.

Bleh. I know what it wants to be. I can see it not being it.

Gripping, harsh, cleverly photographed and extremely well-acted

Interesting plot, fairly annoying photography. Hand-held, close-up photography can be done well, but here it lacks the quality of mystery in the characters that makes good close-ups really work. Instead, the close-up camera always seems to be underlining the action and story, which talks down to the audience rather than engages. The performances are good (Marsan is great whatever he's in). And the plot does just enough to keep things interesting throughout.

I think this would be too dull for fans of Hollywood thrillers. I thought it took a while to get going, and, ultimately, the plot is not great from an entertainment stand-point. The film is better at capturing a particular time in the UK and the frustrations with corruption; parts of the film feel like *Taxi Driver*.

I was waiting for something awesome to take me off my feet in this thriller, but was disappointed.

Moody but rather contrived and unexciting TV thriller with somewhat sketchily drawn characters. Note that the DVDs of this trilogy inexplicably and unforgivably fail to offer an option for subtitles.

Above average drama. Lead performance is very good, but the film doesn't break any molds. I think this film sets the record for most cigarettes smoked in one movie. Over 9000 by my count.

Acting is solid in what isn't the most exhilarating watch. Still not convinced to watch the next two installments.

Setting off the Red Riding trilogy with a kashmir bang, Jarrolds first installment for me is the pick of the trio setting up the plot with brawler verging on art-house film making.