n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

A London based film, Spiv has the mood of a classic London based Gangster, or wide-boy, films such as 'The long good Friday', Layer Cake, Lock Stock and two smoking barrels. It tackles fundamental, international, human rights issues. There is a reasonable review posted on "Eye for film'. The review doesn't adequately acknowledge the disturbing topic matter of the film: humans, children as a commodity for trade in Western captialistic culture. Life and sex as something that has monetary, tradeable value.Beautiful lighting and attention to photographics details. For example, during the opening credits we see the Spiv dressing. Smart 3-piece suit, classic style with the last button of the waistcoat undone. Inbetween the calm attention of his dressing we see and hear loud scenes from racecourse. We swiftly move to the spinning a yarn. We watch the Spiv talk in one screen frame while simultaneously viewing the story he is recounting in an inset. This technique of multiple frames is used sparingly, to good effect. The ending is clever and leaves enough to to feed your imagination. It's more of a turning point in a story than a 'wrap up all major themes' ending.For Anglophiles there are some excellent scenes of London, Docklands, Victorian red-brick terraced streets, slummy high-rise flats, gray skies, the London underground. Jack Dee plays a significant bit part as a builder called 'Nige' with impressively powerful perception and sublety. Summary? This is half way between a well constructed art film and a socially conscious film. It doesn't hit the heights of either, it does meld the experiences well. It is worth watching if either genre moves you.

well first of all i want to say that the featurette on the DVD is better than the actual film, which is why i gave it a seven. i only watched this movie because i knew dominic monaghan was in it, i think they underused his character though. i thought it was a good plot and nothing at all what i expected it to be. its quite a sad movie and doms characters only purpose, apart from 1 line, is only there to lighten the mood. it was very...British. lots of grey, if you know what i mean. but still a good bit of British film. they had a very low budget and many investors were actually given places in it as extras. so with no money and limited resources i think they did a pretty good job. byeX

This wasn't at all what I expected. I was expecting something along the lines of Snatch and instead got a reasonably thoughtful story about a middle aged man realising he has wasted the majority of his life on cheap con tricks. I went to see this for Dominic Monaghan and let's be honest, Dom is barely in this and his character is, though entertaining and sweet, largely irrelevant to the film. In fact one of his scenes is so irrelevant you suspect it of having been inserted merely to up his screen time.I didn't actually enjoy the film all that much, not because it was bad but I think because I could find no handle with which to identify with the three main characters. They lived lives I would never live, behaving in ways I would never consider, and the lead character (Ken Stott) more so than the others. There were a few moments when you felt emotion for him, but for me the whole thing was just too far from my sphere of experience. I am not a con man, I could never be a con man and have no desire to be one. I don't understand the mindset. Dom's character is actually easier to empathise with, for me anyway, and not just cause I can feel some sort of connection for any character played by Dom cause the connection already exists. He's a simple minded lad who doesn't think much about what he's doing, he drifts through his life in a cloud of cannabis smoke and that's enough for him, he's the pettiest of criminals, not out to hurt anyone in particular and not looking for the big time. He comes across as a sweet if slightly deluded guy, not the best influence in the world but not the worst either. He does add a nice lightness and goofiness to scenes that might have been a bit heavy otherwise. I would have liked to see more of him but there wasn't room for him in this script which settled down into a psychological drama with gangster side salad.The film was good, but not great. It lacked connection and I can't take all the blame for that, a truly great film can make you connect with it's characters no matter how far they stray from yourself. Perhaps it was too tight lipped, you could never quite see deep enough into the characters to touch what was implied.

Spivs has a believable, clever but not over complicated plot. As the film starts with the stereotypical spiv characters we seem in store for a light hearted conmen comedy, an attempt at 'The Sting' maybe. But the film becomes gradually darker and nothing you thought you could predict occurs. The desperation and anguish that overcomes the main character is brilliantly portrayed by Ken Stott, as we are transferred from the feel of 'Shooting Fish' to 'Mona Lisa'. All performances are good with Stott stealing the show but the mafia boss wasn't menacing enough and seemed slightly out of place, while his main henchman was very frightening. The direction was generally OK with some genuinely gripping scenes but some overused flashy camera-work did lose the film some momentum in places. Overall, I enjoyed the film.