not as good as all the hype

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

SHINER is one of those movies which seems to have been rushed into production in the wake of the success of the Guy Ritchie hits LOCK, STOCK, AND TWO SMOKING BARRELS and SNATCH. It stars Michael Caine as a down-on-his-luck boxing promoter desperate for one last win, a man who finds himself on a wrong side of a number of enemies he's ended up crossing during the course of the movie.For a British film, the cast is second to none. Caine gives a faultless and sympathetic performance in the leading role, despite the deficits of his character. Kenneth Cranham shows up in a rather shrill role, and there's a meaty party for a youthful, pre-fame Andy Serkis. Martin Landau is the barely-glimpsed American import, Matthew Marsden (RAMBO) plays Caine's son, and the reliable Danny Webb (ALIEN 3) is on hand as a slimy lawyer.The narrative is fast-paced, certainly, but also loaded with many, many plot holes. It's one of those films that makes sense on the surface but which makes no sense if you actually stop to think about it. Characters do things just to service the plot and none of it is even remotely realistic. It's a pity, because with better writing and direction, this could and should have been up there with the best this genre has to offer; as it stands, it's a bit of a mess.

Aaaaargh! Why do scriptwriters continue to believe that they can have characters do ridiculous things without us noticing?Why did Simpson not set off for the fight until after the bill had started? He was the promoter, he'd want to be there to meet and greet his guests, and for the publicity, not sitting in a packed stretch limo picking up assorted "Gor Blimey" relatives and singing "My Old Man". Him being there early would have made no difference to the plot other than making it plausible, him arriving late made absolutely no sense at all.Why did he take his son to deserted wasteland? Why did his minders wander out of sight? It may have made the plot work, but it made absolutely no sense. He could have had the conversation with his son in one of the many rooms at the venue, with the minders outside. That's what ANY sensible person would have done, even an angry Cockney gangster. After all, he wasn't going to murder his son, so didn't need to be in a deserted goods yard.Why did he want to get rid of the limo? The Police knew his son had been shot, and that Simpson had taken him to the hospital in the limo. He was happy to wander round wearing the blood-soaked shirt, but in any event the limo was irrelevant. Why get rid of it? Another pointless piece of "this is what gangsters do and say" stock script recycling.Why couldn't Simpson get to the hotel for the confrontation with Spedding before Spedding and his team left? A boxer wouldn't plan on an early morning departure the day after a fight, in case he was injured. Why did Simpson have to walk? The only reason was so that they could have the showdown in the car.Why did the woman in the tunnel keep ranting after the men with guns had squared off? Why did she not get straight back into her car when told to by Spedding wielding a gun, as any sensible person would have done? Why did she have to be told twice? Simple - so Spedding would get to shoot his gun into the ceiling to demonstrate his credibility as a hard man, regardless of how ridiculous and contrived the set-up was.Why was the house emptied the day after the fight? Who emptied it? Even the most diligent debt collector couldn't get there that quickly - after all, Simpson hadn't even got round to starting to settle his debts, and the fight could have gone the other way, leaving him a wealthy man. He could also have laid side bets to spread his risk, again obviating the need to liquidate his assets.And then, why was the final scene, where a deserted goods yard would have been far more appropriate, set on the roof of the venue - a Civic Hall with only two exits? Hardly the sort of place a rational person would choose for a showdown, and not relevant to the plot at all. Perhaps it was just cheap to shoot it in the same place as the earlier rooftop scene, even if it meant sacrificing all logic.In the midst of all of this rampant stupidity was a script with no style apart from generic third rate Cockney Gangster, and no discernible characterisation, even at the most trivial level. A pity, because in general the cast are all very good, and capable of far more.Not recommended unless you have no other options on a rainy afternoon.

While at the video store today, I took the time to read the back of "Shiner" and was intrigued.The front of the DVD box was a picture of Caine, on the ground, gun in hand, with a look of anger and resentment on his face, seemingly getting ready to shoot an unnamed enemy. The back of the box described the movie as an action-thriller, saying "But on the greatest, proudest day of his life, all that Shiner has worked for begins to unravel, sending him running from the police... and seeking revenge!" Needless to say, as an avid Michael Caine fan, I was enthusiastic about watching this movie.I was disappointed. For a movie allegedly about boxing and revenge, there was a surprising lack of boxing and revenge. It seemed to be more of a psychological movie, showing the degradation of Michael Caine's character and his willingness to do atrocious things in order to satisfy his own inflated ego (i.e threatening to kill an unborn child). Sure, Caine was certainly angry and looking for revenge, but the box promised action! Unless I'm mistaken, that means more than a 2 minute boxing scene, one minor fender bender and one minute at the END OF THE MOVIE when people actually attack each other.Not counting my original bias, I didn't find this movie to be very entertaining, either. While Caine was, of course, masterful in playing this role, the story itself simply was not interesting and had many unnecessary aspects. Just a few examples:How come the bad guy was someone who'd only been in the movie for 30 seconds prior to your finding out he's the bad guy? What exactly wasthe point of showing that Caine's bodyguard ended up killing Joe Mahoney, other than perhaps character development which was very unnecessary at that point? Why did they randomly flash the man with the baseball cap during the final scenes of the movie, when Caine was going to the roof of his building?What was the point of introducing the aspect of losing so much money if that had nothing to do with the motive, plot, or ending of the movie?I was unhappy with this movie, and would like my two hours back.

"Shiner" is a gritty character-driven drama all about Caine as the title character; a shady, unsuccessful, aging British boxing promoter whose world begins to implode when he gambles everything on one fight featuring his son in the main event. The story in this B-flick becomes an overwrought mess as Caine's character becomes an overwrought mess, making Caine's performance the only reason for spending time with the film. Okay for Caine fans and passable stuff for all others. (C)