web
counter
 

The Yorkshire Ripper Gets His Zodiac

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (30)



redridingtrilogy-USposter-official-tsr.jpg

Fans of David Fincher’s phenomenal Zodiac are likely to be drawn to the Red Riding trilogy of movies, which will soon be distributed in the United States by IFC. The trilogy of films premiered at the Telluride Film Festival and generated enough buzz that Columbia purchased the remake rights and put Steve Zaillian (A Civil Action, Schindler’s List) to work adapting them, possibly for Ridley Scott.

The three movies — written by Tony Grisoni, adapted from novels from David Peace — were directed by Julian Jarrold (Brideshead Revisited), James Marsh (Man on Wire), and Anand Tucker (Shopgirl), and I only have reservations about the last, because Tucker also directed Leap Year (something I couldn’t bring myself to mention in the review). Better yet, the trilogy stars David Morrissey, Sean Bean, and one of the most underappreciated actors around, Paddy Considine.

The neo-noir trilogy, based on true events, explores the investigation into the Yorkshire Ripper killings in England in the seventies and eighties. It’s a hefty time commitment (and one that you’ll probably only get a chance to commit to in LA and NY theaters, though it will unspool on IFC On Demand simultaneously) but — even downplaying the trailer blurbs — it looks captivating, and is even filmed in a style associated with ’70s flicks like Serpico and All the King’s Men.

For a short trailer that’s supposed to brief you on three movies, this one is surprisingly effective, even if the movie poster is not.

Here’s the poster, followed by the trailer. Look for the movie on February 5th.

20100108_ridingtrilogy.jpg

Has anyone over in the UK seen the trilogy? Thoughts?

(Hat Tip: Tris)









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



The A-Team Movie Trailer | Blake Lively Cast as the Female Lead in "Green Lantern"









Comments

Just try and keep me away (from IFC Same Day as Theaters).

Has anyone read the novels?

Posted by: Cindy at January 11, 2010 11:09 AM

I watched this when it played on channel 4 the first time 'round a few months back, it's fucking brilliant. I spent weeks salivating over the teasers and was not dissapointed by the final result, Andrew Garfield is a total legend, anyone seen him in Boy A, another fantastic one-off drama? It's worth watching purely for him.

Posted by: Freckles at January 11, 2010 11:17 AM

The Shropshire Slasher never gets his due.

Posted by: , at January 11, 2010 11:17 AM

Shropshire Slasher

Say that three times fast.

Posted by: FabMax at January 11, 2010 11:31 AM

I missed it myself(though it's downloading as we speak)but this was a mega hit over here,it aired on CH4,who back in the day where almost our HBO and to this day are one of the only channel to still air the hbo shows at decent times an not the vague post 12am slot.
All I heard where good things and i can wait to sit watch it in my own time.
And for the record,Paddy Considine, or, The Robert De Niro of the North,is only underappreciated in the US. We know what we've got. You Yankee doodles or something

Posted by: Nadine at January 11, 2010 11:41 AM

Freckles, I saw Boy A, it was brilliant but made me unfathomably angry. I know the writer of the book said th story wasn't based on Jamie Bulger and hisbkillers, but clearly it was, and I'm from Liverpool, Jamie is buried a few graves down from my great aunt as good as ch4 can sometimes be, it has a habit of pissig me off with some of it's content where it gives the Criminals side of the story.
No one in Liverpool wanted those boys released.rant over.
Tha wasn't aimed at you eithe Freckles, Boy A just gets my hackles up.
I'm on my phone so usual apologies for spelling and grammar

Posted by: Nadine at January 11, 2010 11:47 AM

Yeah, I saw Red Riding. It was pretty solid, however, each part (even with its own visual style and narrative) stayed firmly in the realms of "good, but not great." Whereas Zodiac was great (in my opinion).

The only problem I had with Zodiac was I found Jake Gyllenhaal a bit off-putting (i.e. miscast) but that's probably again down to personal opinion.

PS: while I'm slinging my (often unreliable) opinion around, Paddy = one of the best actors we'll ever see on screen and if you haven't seen Dead Man's Shoes, you're missing out on not just one of the greatest movies of the last decade, but ever.

Posted by: emotionalpedant at January 11, 2010 12:04 PM

Nadine, Yeah Boy A was definately based off of the bulger murders, it's one of the only high profile cases of it's kind [the only other one I can think of is Mary Bell] in England plus the ages work out almost the same. Obviously it's a fucked up state of affairs when kids are killing kids, it's such a heavy subject but it's something that I think needs to be spoken about, they were only ten years old so that puts a different perspective on it, can we be held accountable until we're 90 for something we did at the age of ten when most of us are shoving marbles up our bums and making our barbies shag each other? I personally believe in rehabilitation but on a purely case by case basis, some people are just fuck-ups.

Posted by: Freckles at January 11, 2010 12:10 PM

emotionalpedant - I had the same problem with Jake he bought the tone of the whole thing down, not enough that I'd turn off mind you but enough for me to be dissapointed.

Posted by: freckles at January 11, 2010 12:12 PM

Fascinated as I am by true crime stories and encouraged by the connection to Boy A (which I loved), I'll definitely be checking these films out - despite my irrational loathing of Sean Bean.

Posted by: Dill The Devil at January 11, 2010 12:15 PM

Nadine:
I understand your anger having been so close to the situation, but why shouldn't criminals have their side of the story told? That is the entire basis of an ethical justice system isn't it? While there are evil bastards out there, most people don't just go out and kill without something in their background having forced them to the act outside the extremes of what society deems acceptable. That's not to say they should get a slap and be released, but surely the only way we can stop these horrific things happening is to stop the behaviours that churn out children who become evil? And to do that we have to acknowledge that there are backstories to criminals.

Posted by: PaddyDog at January 11, 2010 12:25 PM

As much as it chagrins me to admit this, about halfway through the trailer, something in my American brain clicked and I thought, "It's one of the Andies! Holy crap, it's one of the Hot Fuzz Andies!"

He looks absolutely brilliant in this, and I agree, it looks incredibly compelling. I'm not usually one for true crime stuff (makes my wilting orchid of a brain prone to paranoia and nightmares), but I will steel myself for the sake of watching these.

Posted by: ShinyKate at January 11, 2010 12:59 PM

My only question is, what happened to Andy's mustache?

Posted by: AM at January 11, 2010 1:36 PM

You know, i can almost tolerate the practice of remaking my favorite asian and foreign language films. (at least... i can understand it - Americans hate reading their movies)
But remaking an english language film? Damn it!!

Posted by: Scott at January 11, 2010 1:38 PM

Paddydog, great point, but the issue is how ch4 goes about it, they're somewhat smug and about how they present the shows and stories and opinions and it often feels like a bit of an FU to the victims. There was on they did where a father sexually abuses hi daughter several times, was arrested, served time, then was sent to a rehabilitation clinic similar to the one you have in the states, clinics which noblongerbeziat in the uk. At the end of the film he was reunited with his family, including the daughter he molested. It ended with a narration about the clinics bein closed as if it was so sad. See I'm very of the opinion that if you touch a kid sexually, you have your hands, dick, vag, what ever, removed or rendered useless, and i would straight up murder anyone who touhed a child,sibling cousin or young friend of mine. But that's just me :)
I don't min hearing the criminals side of things but it's how it's done that gets me, ch4 are very liberal and forward thinking and that's great, but whe it comes to child killers and baby rapers,fuck them right in their fucking mouth. They had another one recently where in an alternate realisty the death penalty was brought back in the uk and gary glitter was
to be the first man executed. Like in the one with the dad and his daughter, they went to great lengths to make a paedophilr a sympathetic character and I can't swallow that medicine.
Freckles...marbles up the bum eh? Would know hat I meant by radiator pants .....?

Posted by: Nadine at January 11, 2010 1:45 PM

Shit, *clinics that no longer exist in the uk.

Once again, I'm on my piece of shit iphone and the touch pad key board is fucking terrible for some one who can type as fast as me.
Not to mention rereading and correcting is all but impossible

Posted by: Nadine at January 11, 2010 1:50 PM

Saw them over the weekend on 4OD. Absolutely brilliant. The first one being the weakest of the 3 and the 2nd one close to perfection. Wouldn't have minded to see them in the cinema at all.

Posted by: jd at January 11, 2010 2:14 PM

Dustin your perpetual love for In America is one of the many causes of my perpetual love for you.

Sat goodbye to Frankie. (WAIL).

Posted by: coveredinbees at January 11, 2010 2:42 PM

See, this is what pisses me off. It looks amazing and is (by reader accounts) an incredible series of films. Why the hell remake them? It's unlikely the new versions can pack the same punch as the original, and anyone who knows about the originals will surely watch those instead. Ugh. Hollywood, you can suck it.

Posted by: Daniel Carlson at January 11, 2010 2:48 PM

Shropshire Slasher

Say that three times fast.

Posted by: FabMax at January 11, 2010 11:31 AM
---
This guy has trouble just saying it once:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYFTT5kvgAQ

Posted by: , at January 11, 2010 3:25 PM

They're not remaking them!! Redistributing. Read the article.

Posted by: AM at January 11, 2010 3:35 PM

Oh god, I watched this recently and it made me rock in the corner like a mumbling loon afterwards - it is pretty damn dark.
However, it is worth it for a fat Sean Bean (hey, fat Sean Bean is still hot...)

Posted by: orangina at January 11, 2010 3:59 PM

Nadine: Okay, your comment makes a lot more sense now (more like the Nadine I'm used to). Apart from those shows though, I can never stop loving the channel that gave us Letter to Breshnev and My Beautiful Laundrette.

Posted by: PaddyDog at January 11, 2010 4:24 PM

"The trilogy of films premiered at the Telluride Film Festival and generated enough buzz that Columbia purchased the remake rights and put Steve Zaillian (A Civil Action, Schindler’s List) to work adapting them, possibly for Ridley Scott."

@AM: I did read the article. Maybe double-check stuff before unleashing the exclamation points.

Posted by: Daniel Carlson at January 11, 2010 4:31 PM

i'm cautiously optimistic about these. the books are utterly phenomenal, though the lack of '1977' is really confusing to me. the books are heavily connected, but it more or less works like this:

1974 and its direct sequel 1983
1977 and its direct sequel 1980

like i said, they're all heavily interconnected, but that's pretty much how it works. i can't recommend the books enough, though. i've read the whole of the series three times now and am still cracking the true mystery of the it. i'm curious to see how they'll manage to preserve the density and ambiguity of the story.

Posted by: dan at January 11, 2010 4:46 PM

The third film is definitely the worst, but it should be seen following the other two for the conclusion, at least.

Also, Dustin, I think you meant "All the President's Men." I accidentally say one for the other all the time, too.

Posted by: Christopher Campbell at January 11, 2010 4:54 PM

See I am a weeee bit leary to watch this if only because Sean Bean is a wife beating douchbag.
The again, I'm pirating the shit out of this so while kick ass legends like Paddy suffer...Sean Bean makes no money from me...yesss

Posted by: Nadine at January 11, 2010 6:16 PM

I watched all three in a row in Telluride and it was fantastic. I highly recommend it, especially if you can see them all at once. Dark, disturbing, and very complex.

Posted by: slb at January 11, 2010 11:28 PM

I watched the first ep and got bored. Just didn't click for me. Not sure why. I'm sure everyone in it is great and everything (especially Andrew Garfield and yes Boy A was fantastic). I think maybe I was expecting something different.

Posted by: Carrie (aka Teabelly) at January 12, 2010 5:19 AM

Paddy Considine is THE best British actor of this generation and Dead Man's Shoes is one of the most powerful, and horrific, films of the last 20 years.
The film may not translate very well to the American audience, due to it's English Midlands setting and accents, but every one of you should give it a viewing.
Likewise, Red Riding is a British mini-series that you should watch (not read the books yet, but they will be good), an example of the best contemporary British actors, portraying an excellently written story. No flash-bang special effects. No CGI. No Tom Cruise 'doing an accent'. No Michael Bay.

Posted by: frank (aka frank_247 aka the lone Scotsman) at January 12, 2010 10:05 PM