Shank Reviews

THE FLICK
The British drama Shank is billed as a coming out story, though it might be better described as a coming to terms story.  Each character on the screen, both major and minor, has a unique issue to work through.  Thug Cal (Wayne Virgo) is understanding his sexuality; best mate and fellow tough guy Jonno (Tom Bott) struggles with seemingly the same feelings; gang leader Nessa (Alice Payne) deals with a personal tragedy which informs the person she is; and teacher Scott (Garry Summers) has the twin issues of a disastrous anonymous sex hookup and a heartbreaking revelations from his past.  With the number of demons the cast is forced to fight off throughout the film, it may be too obvious to say the story is a personal one for writers Darren Flaxtone and Christian Martin.

From the get go, it is clear Shank is going to be a vastly different cinematic experience than what the audience expects.  It is tender at times and gruesomely brutal at others.  This is by design, according to the commentary track.  The point, at least in part, was to make the audience not turn away from what is happening right outside their doors and windows.  See, first time director Simon Pearce's film doesn't simply want to tackle the gay storyline.  No, it also comments on the problem of gang violence in Britain, something the general population turns a blind eye to, while having something to say about the brutality of rape and the way an audience expects both those things to be handled on film.  The camera does not shy away from the same sex scenes, opting to show them in all their uncomfortable glory.  In the finale, when one male character is raped by another, the film goes to great pains to show the aftermath, with a bloody rear and red-stained white track pants.  At first, this scene is thrilling for the audience, the sense of danger mixed with dread combining to create increased adrenaline levels.  But as the camera cuts to different shots of the act, it turns uncomfortable.  This is the time most movies would show something else, move to reaction shots or simply get to the end of the scene.  But not Shank.  We are privy to the entire rape, the screaming, the yelling, the pleading, the anguish.  Pearce doesn't let the characters or the audience off the hook, so to speak.

And that's to the great advantage of the film.  Shank chooses not to play it safe in any sense of the word.  It could, theoretically, focus on just one story to the exclusion of everything, but it doesn't.  There is a sense the finished product is going to be important as not only a gay film but also as a call for social change.  Therefore, Shank has a moral imperative to do everything it can to examine all the storylines it can.  Some are fleshed out more than others, naturally, leading to a mild "huh?" feeling when the twists start coming in the third act.  But they all work in the greater scheme of the film, feeding off of one another to create a wholly realistic environment for these personalities to play in.  At least initially, the competing storylines don't seem to have much in common.  What does Nessa's antagonistic attitude have to do with Jonno and Cal?  Is Scott simply a trick for Cal?  Why do Jonno and Cal share longer-than-normal glances?  Who is it that Scott is talking to in the aftermath of a beating?  Why does Jonno have a hard time having vaginal sex with Nessa?  All the questions essentially lead to one place: Cal.

As the main character, Virgo has an uncanny ability to convince the audience to be on his side even at his most despicable.  His baby face almost demands we embrace him and excuse his bad decisions since he doesn't face any adult role models to speak of.  Cal wants to be loved by someone, constantly reaching out for affection.  Even in the first sequence, when he has forest sex with Scott, it is clear he needs the human contact that comes with the act.  It is true Cal needs to be either high or drunk to have sex with another man, as evidenced by his copious cocaine use.  For someone fighting his homosexuality, it makes sense to a certain point.  If he can plausibly deny this is something he wanted to do-and blame the drugs-it gives him an out, so to speak.  It's also true he is trying to beat the gay out of him, almost literally.  Cal wants to hurt himself to such an extant another man doesn't arouse him in any way.  That's why he has Scott record their encounter and why he submits to a muscular man a short time later.

But when Cal meets thin exchange student Olivier (Marc Laurent), the entire movie veers into something else.  Gone is the angry, destructive Cal to be replaced with a tender young man who makes love for the first time in a tender, passionate way.  Their relationship gives both characters a reason for being, another person to literally "be" with.  The sex they share stands in stark contrast to Cal's encounters early in the film as well as Nessa and Jonno in a cemetery.  It's sensual and gentle, everything the first half of the movie isn't.  The partners care about one another's enjoyment; there is no stigma to what they're doing.  Cal lets himself get wrapped up in the experience, to understand two men can be happy and fulfilled together.  Olivier is perhaps the one character in the film who isn't fleshed out in any meaningful way, though it's not a disadvantage to Shank.  With so many other fully formed personalities around him, he can afford to recede slightly into the background.

With Olivier on his own in a foreign country and the other teens sheer hooligans on the street beating people up and vandalizing buildings, it may occur to astute viewers there are no responsible adults in this film.  (Scott is an adult, though he also makes poor choices early on.)  The commentary participants mention this seeming oversight, arguing it is better not to have all the information on the screen.  In fact, a scene of exposition detailing where Cal's mother is was removed from the film because it was unnecessary.  To argue with this line of reasoning is foolish, especially in light of how the story draws the audience in almost immediately.  The audience doesn't need any more backstory than the finished film provides.  In fact, with a few exceptions, Shank could very well have been a silent film; the images are striking and plain enough to carry the narrative on their own.

To be completely fair, it would be helpful for the audience is all the cards were on the table when it comes to Nessa and Scott.  Throughout the film, it's hard to not to wonder what makes her tick and to simply assume he's talking to a therapist after his first encounter with Cal.  What made this teenage girl go completely off the deep end, abusing and vandalizing everything she gets her hands on?  Shank provides an answer, with a few clues along the way.  However, there needed to be more, especially if the finale is going to have the intended emotional impact.  For Scott, it's more of a case of misdirection; the camera never strays from his face as he confesses and talks about Cal.  The assumption is therapy, since it would be the most obvious course to take.  When the camera pulls back at the end, fully connecting all the proverbial dots in the film, his story comes full circle, making the audience realize how he has the same types of demons as everyone else.

Pearce uses two distinctly different shooting styles: during Cal's violent period, he employs a hand-held camera to simulate the rough and tumble atmosphere while more fluid, steady shots are used when Cal feels Olivier's influence in his life.  This was a conscious decision by the filmmaker, sort of an easy way to tell the audience where Cal is as a character.  In the early going, the hand-held becomes annoying, zooming in and out, never allowing a clean look at anything happening on the screen.  Thankfully there is a reason for it outside of being "edgy" and "cool."

THE LOOK
Presented in anamorphic widescreen, I'm split on what to think of the video specs on Shank.  On the one hand, this is a gritty film with new actors filmed almost entirely on location in Bristol, England.  The filmmakers can't be expected to deliver a Hollywood-style look on a non-Hollywood budget in under a month of shooting.  On the other hand, the picture is of poorer quality than many other films with the same budget.  For starters, blacks tend to have very little depth or texture, eventually coming off as a mass of nothingness on the screen.  Pixelation and blocking is apparent-mostly in forest scenes-and the picture appears to not have the clarity it needs.  It doesn't hamper the audience's understanding of what's going on; rather, the details are often obscured, leading to a less rich experience in the end.

THE SOUND
The English 2.0 mix (no subtitles are included) is somewhat of a disappointment.  Dialogue is clean and there aren't any audio defects to be heard in the track; the problem is in the "punch," so to speak.  Very little in Shank stands out from the pack.  A headbutt should not come across as mundane, but it does here.  Pearce states he was able to use a boom mic in his budget (ie. he didn't have to rely on the microphone in the camera). That's all well and good, to a point, though the boom mic needs something to pick up.  The destruction of a car and Barnaby Taylor's score are likely the only high points of the track.  Ambient sounds are picked up most of the time, lending Shank a realistic sound and feel.

THE STUFF
Shank comes packed in a black keepcase with no insert.  The feature is divided into 12 chapters accessible from the main menu.  Five trailers play at start-up: a generic TLA Releasing trailer; Chef's Special; Schoolboy Crush; Another Gay Sequel: Gays Gone Wild!; and Wrangler: Anatomy of an Icon.  They are also available from the Special Features menu.  (This version of Shank is billed as the Unrated Director's Cut though no one mentions what was added to the theatrical version.) 

The group commentary track is a breathless, lively conversation about the film from a production standpoint.  It doesn't really matter who says what in the long run, considering the British male voices all tend to run together even after introductions.  For the record, Pearce, Martin and Flaxtone are the participants.  They describe Olivier as "gazelle-like," capable of being beat-up yet strong.  There's also abbreviated talk about Laurent having a difficult time with his sex scenes, though no one delves into the matter in any kind of depth.  Another topic they're reluctant to discuss are all the real world inspirations for the film.  Martin begins to tell a story of being gay bashed, but then apparently thinks better of it.  It's a pity, really, since the men are more than comfortable discussing the film and the way it came about is a vital piece to that puzzle.

A making-of featurette jokingly titled "Shank...From Behind" (39:36) combines on set footage with interviews to provide a quick run down of the production using various topics like story, production problems and shooting.  Remarkably, after the commentary, there's still some new information in the piece such as the desire to tell the coming out story in a different way, the emerging European style of storytelling and the aforementioned advantages to having a budget.  Three minutes of deleted scenes are included, though there are more if the commentary is to be believed.  None add anything new to the movie and one destroys the tension in the finale.

The cast and crew are cut ups in the outtakes (4:39), mostly giggling through scenes or sticking their tongues out at one another.  The film's theatrical trailer (2:35) is also included.