CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Glimmerubro It is not deep, but it is fun to watch. It does have a bit more of an edge to it than other similar films.

Iseerphia All that we are seeing on the screen is happening with real people, real action sequences in the background, forcing the eye to watch as if we were there.

Aubrey Hackett While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Baron Ronan Doyle With his third film as director Neds seeing release just recently, the previous two films of Peter Mullan were given a back-to-back television showing. I managed to catch his first, Orphans, having never before heard anything of it.Meeting to mourn the loss of their mother, four Glaswegian siblings gather in a pub. When an inconsiderate group laugh at the lugubrious singing of the eldest, one of his brothers retorts physically and is stabbed. The remaining brother vows to avenge this whilst the handicapped sister finds herself stuck in a darkened alley, her wheelchair broken.Orphans begins with a solemn scene, the four siblings gathered around their mother's coffin. Some gentle humour is created through the siblings' confusion at their elder's request that they place some hair in the coffin. This introduces us to the film's primary structure: scenes of genuine heartfelt drama lined with a subtle comedy to balance the mood. As things progress, we begin to see in increase in this comic factor, the film's clever blending of its contrasting elements creating a wonderful dichotomy. The true beauty of the film, however, is in its juxtaposition of its constituent elements. Many are the scenes which Mullan allows to play out, drawing us in with a barrage of riotous laughter, before effortlessly turning this on its head with a disarming simplicity and forcing us to comprehend the dramatic implications of the events unfolding before us. In a simple moment, we go from laughing at something to considering its grim seriousness. It is a stunning effect, one often attempted but rarely realised so fantastically as here. Mullan ends his scenes by inviting us to reconsider what we have just seen; we find ourselves looking at events with a melancholy when just moments ago they had us reduced to breathless laughter. He allows us to indulge ourselves in the fantastic comedy his writing engenders before showing us that these scenarios are in fact tremendously dark and dramatic. We may chuckle at Michael's determination to pass off his stab wound as an industrial accident, but we quickly reevaluate the true humour of this when we realise that he is slowly dying, his lightening pallor eventually quite frightening. This is just one example of the many such twists Mullan throws at us, showing himself to be as dramatically dark as he is ingeniously funny.A truly fantastic combination of drama and comedy, done in a subversive way which forces us to reevaluate what we thought of a scene just seconds before, Orphans is a fantastic exploration of the closeness of drama and comedy. Splendidly supported by fantastic, hilarious, and realistically authentic Glaswegian performances, this film has certainly proclaimed Peter Mullan as a masterful director.

iain_miller1 Gripping dark comedy of the highest standard as Peter Mullan takes us on the truly memorable journey of a Glaswegian family coming to terms with their mother's death and the events preceding her funeral. This film reeks of authentic Scottish humour, culture and attitude. Mullan's dialogue and narrative are tremendous and with excellent performances throughout, in particular Stephen McCole (Rushmore(1998), The Acid House(1998)(act 1 'The Granton Star Cause')) as John, Orphans is a must see, especially for fans of Trainspotting(1996). The catholic church takes a fair beating also in keeping with Mullan's views in his most recent triumph The Magdalene Sisters(2002). Wonderful stuff 9/10

dbdumonteil When I checked this film on IMDB, I was surprised. Not by the popular rating, 6.7 out 10 is a good mark but by the number of votes. Only, 368 votes! How can such a good movie by largely ignored by the public?Peter Mullan in the world of British cinema is especially known as an actor. We remember his performance in the trendy "Trainspotting" (1996) where he acted the role of a heroin supplier. With "Orphans", he decided to display his gifts as a director. He chose wisely. His real debut movie is, by any standards a remarkable one. However I am obliged to recognize that for his first direction, the place of the action which the city of Glasgow in Scotland has nothing welcoming. Indeed, most of its inhabitants are narrow-minded or unpleasant. I read a few reviews about Mullan's film and all of them had said that Glasgow's inhabitants are really like this. If it is true, truth is stranger than fiction.But also Mullan for his first directing chose a tough topic: what can be the childrens' reactions following the death of their mother? To answer this question, the filmmaker divided his movie in 4 individual parts. Each one focuses on one of the 4 main characters. Thus, we can say the following answer to the quoted question: either with violence (John, the college boy who tries to prove himself as a hard man) either with obstinacy (Thomas, the holier-than-thou chief mourner who wants everything to be perfect for their mother's funeral). As for the two others, Michael and Sheila, they feel especially lost. What Mullan tries to reveal to the spectator is that these reactions are necessary because this painful hardship represents for them the definitive transition in adulthood and maturity. The very last sequence shows the three brothers and the disabled sister together and they seem more united."Orphans" is a movie that swings between humor and poignancy, violence and calm with ease. Moreover, the moment when the roof of the church is torn off by the wind gives the film a little surrealist air. In short, it easily ranks among the best British movies of the nineties and it deserves to be better known. At last, given the success of "the Magdalene sisters" in 2003, Peter Mullan is well away to become one of the finest British directors of these last years.

nicolnic Accusations that this film fails on account of its shifts between comedy and tragedy highlight a misunderstanding of Mullan's purpose. Accusations that the characters are not likeable should be tempered by the fact that these people, from a close Catholic family, have just been orphaned and are at their wits' end. The performances in this film are stunning, particularly Rosemarie Stevenson's. Why should this film conform to the ever-infuriating set categories of comedy, tragedy, thriller etc.? Its strength is that you don't know where it is going to lead you next, and it consistently challenges your emotions. The film works as an excellent depiction of the various ways in which people deal with grief, and in this respect it is a unique cinematic experience. On occasions it falters into the realms of far-fetched (although the air of gothic fantasy lends something to its atmosphere at times) but it generally stands head and shoulders above other British films of recent years. At the very least, it dares to be different. It is not a mainstream film and it was never supposed to be entirely accessible. Those who are willing to bring both heart and mind to the cinema will appreciate it enormously.