(Finally reposting this - the review didn't make it across the site changeover - to coincide with the film screening at Sitges 2009. One of the best films I've seen this year - so here again is my attempt to explain why.)
Love is trite, pedantically speaking. The idea we profit from performing simple acts of kindness for the benefit of our fellow human beings has been worn down and dulled through over-use. People flock to torture porn, visions of the apocalypse and similar examples of genre voyeurism which have been done to death in turn. Even the conservative fantasy of the decline and fall of Western civilisation is a tired, empty stereotype.
The first feature in fourteen years from cult director Philip Ridley (The Reflecting Skin, The Passion of Darkly Noon), Heartless is a story about learning to love and accept love; a hallucinatory fantasy; a study in pain and terror, both physical and mental; a violently explicit horror movie and a stark warning modern society is on the verge of collapsing in on itself. That it manages to take so many potentially disastrous clichés and mash them together into what is undoubtedly one of the best films to be shown this year is nothing short of a triumph.
It is not perfect; it is wilfully ambiguous, occasionally incoherent; the genre aspects will dissuade many viewers and the actors have to visibly work to make several key parts of the narrative anything more than platitudes. But it succeeds. It feels the epitome of a film that could never work with any other director, cast or crew but it does work, and frequently magnificently.
Jamie (Jim Sturgess, Across the Universe) is a young man born with a large, heart-shaped birthmark covering most of his face who lives in an unspecified London borough plagued by rising crime rates. Ostracised and introverted, Jamie doesn't socialise much beyond spending time with his immediate family - his brother, their mother, aunts and uncle - and people's repeated warnings the world is going to hell in a handbasket largely wash over him.
Then one night Jamie witnesses the gang terrorising the neighbourhood, only where others see delinquent youth masked beneath their ubiquitous hoodies he sees demonic faces. Increasingly convinced there's some supernatural explanation behind events, when his mother is brutally murdered by the same gang members he decides he's destined to mete out vigilante justice on the forces of evil.
Yet when Jamie catches the attention of the demonic Papa B (Joseph Mawle), the figure behind the rising violence, he finds himself tempted into giving up his crusade as part of an ominous bargain in exchange for everything he's ever wanted - only Jamie's obligation as dictated by this bargain threatens to grow darker than he ever imagined possible.
The fourteen year hiatus doesn't seem to have hurt Ridley's extraordinary talent - even his detractors tend to acknowledge his eye for fantastically striking imagery. From only minutes in, Heartless is typically gorgeous, an effortless blend of haunting urban decay and eerily beautiful found compositions. But it quickly becomes apparent this is a new Ridley - the lush, baroque surrealism of his previous films is still partly in effect but far more reflective, with much less of the over-emotional melodrama that plagued the end of Passion.
Though Heartless is in some ways a far more conventional, more grounded genre narrative it is definitely not solely a genre film. Ridley switchbacks with jaw-dropping ease between any number of influences with barely a pause for breath, seemingly comfortable with any and all of them. Heartless veers from fantasy to horror to family soap opera to gritty urban drama to broad comedy and even to a musical, of a sort; every song on the soundtrack was specifically written around the narrative, not to mention sung by Sturgess.
Ridley's cast play a large part in the success of his eclectic approach; the supporting lineup of experienced British character actors turn in sterling work (Timothy Spall and writer/director Noel Clarke (Kidulthood, Adulthood) among them) but Jim Sturgess is phenomenal in the lead role. Jamie has several key dramatic setpieces which could so easily have collapsed into saccharine tedium; he dreams another, 'normal' Jamie lives a successful life in an alternate reality; he doubts his self-worth, his ability to make friends, have relationships.
Yet Sturgess imbues these moments with an honesty that is nothing short of devastating. A quiet conversation with his mother where (like any caring parent) she assures her son he is a wonderful person who's going to find that person who will love him for who he is inside is heartbreaking for all its obvious simplicity. A later monologue where he doubts this is similarly effective. One key scene shortly after the central demonic bargain has been struck switches from queasy (yet very funny) comedy to nerve-shredding horror with dizzying speed, yet it's Sturgess' performance as much as Ridley's direction that means such genre-hopping never falters.
To reiterate - that horror is horrific. For the first two thirds or so Ridley trades largely in tension and boo scares (one particularly effective), yet he later throws in two major effects sequences, both shockingly graphic. While neither is entirely seamless, technically speaking (though they are both extremely accomplished) each time it is the context that leaves the viewer shaken beyond anything most horror directors in recent years have ever accomplished.
While Ridley spells few things out explicitly (he tends to avoid being drawn into analysing his body of work) the thematic material is wonderfully thought-provoking and multi-layered, yet also fantastically succinct. The eventual final confrontation with Papa B is far from the bombastic showdown genre convention would seem to dictate, and Jamie's character arc in general throws in any number of surprises both comforting and upsetting.
And it bears noting that while the film definitely carries a message urging people to open their eyes, resist the temptation to live their lives in fear and generally behave like decent human beings this is not positivity for its own sake. The ending is almost a warning against blind faith or wide-eyed naivete.
Will Heartless see Ridley accepted by the mainstream, or even a wider genre audience? Difficult to say; again, it is a strange, unsettling little story that refuses to do anything the easy way - questions left unanswered, light on the gore and viscera, emotions left wide open. It's still a brave, bold film, unrelentingly personal, thrilling, heartbreaking and downright terrifying. A fever-dream mashup cherry-picking from a staggeringly diverse portfolio of high and low art, fantastically creative, impeccably produced and beautifully acted by all concerned, Heartless simply cannot be recommended highly enough.
More from Heartless
- Reviews: TADFF 10: HEARTLESS Review
- Interviews: Fantasia 2010: Philip Ridley Talks HEARTLESS
- Reviews: Fantasia 2010: HEARTLESS Review
- News: Philip Ridley's HEARTLESS, Now In Trailer Form.
- News: HEARTLESS set for multi-platform UK release
- News: Noel Clarke Talks Philip Ridley's HEARTLESS
- News: LIFF '09: Philip Ridley's HEARTLESS takes the Silver Melies!
- News: HEARTLESS preview plus Philip Ridley Q&A in London
- News: First Footage Arrives From Philip Ridley´s HEARTLESS!


Loved, loved The Reflecting Skin. Darkly Noon, not so much. Have heard good and bad about this. Fingers crossed.
Like the reviewer I saw this at the World Premiere at Empire Leicester Square back in August. The review is a very good read but to be honest it left me totally confused and bemused. Why so? Well because I'm wondering whether I saw the same movie as the reviewer did. Now dont get me wrong, overall I thought Heartless was OKand was a reasonable diversion for 90 minutes but I really cant say that I'll go see it again at the Cinema when its released or hunt it out on DVD and it certainly doesnt figure in my top 20 movies of the year so far.
So as not to waffle on I'll summarise in points:
- Original story ? Faust and feral hooligans are hardly original so No
- The "Twist". I didnt really see it as a twist because I guessed what was going on very early into the movie. As twists go - its no "Sixth Sense"
- "Message"?. Umm I'm struggling to see it sorry
- Did I connect with the characters ? No - found them a little cliched
- Liked the soundtrack? Not my thing - all a bit "EMO" for me and I didnt really need to see a scene play out and then have someone sing about it for 5 minutes. I could work out was was going on without that.
- Acting performances? Sturgess was OK, Noel Clarke played a similar character to one he always seems to play so hohum, Eddie Marsan always Good, French Harry Potter Girl - instantly forgettable, Nikita Mistry Very Good, Joseph Rawle - did well with the cliched character he was given.
- Ridley's "extraordinary" talent? The reviewer is seemingly obviously a Philip Ridley fan and has seen his other work. I havent but at the same time didnt really see anything in Heartless to justify the "extraordinarily talented" bit here so again I'm struggling.
To the reviewer I say - very happy you got so much out of the movie, but I really cant in all honesty agree with your gushing endorsement.
To those who havent seen it - seriously dont expect a stunning, highly original masterpiece and you'll probably find something to like in it. Keep an open mind but dont get set your expectations too high.
I had never heard of Philip Ridley before seeing this movie. Since seeing Heartless I read a little more about him and his work. Sounds like an interesting multi-talented guy but seems to be a character whose work polarises opinions - a real love him/hate him split. Seems like Heartless will continue this trend.
Overall I give it 2 out of 5
Eh, what can I say? I did think quite a bit about whether it warranted such a glowing review, and whether the atmosphere of the festival was getting to me (I mean, enough of the crowd seemed to love it; the audience applauded that particular boo scare and gave it thunderous applause at the end, compared to House of the Devil earlier in the day). Still, at the end of the day I had to go with it - I've seen more than eighty films this year so far and none of them affected me like this one. I was pretty much blown away directly after watching it and the wait to see it again is very frustrating.
I did try and admit it's a film not everyone's going to 'get', but I honestly felt that was down to people's personal preference more than me being too generous. Apparently Todd didn't like it anywhere near as much as me, if that reassures you. Still, hey - at least you enjoyed reading it, heh.
Eight Rooks - yes indeedy we all like different things - I thought House of the Devil rocked big-time for example and kicked Heartless's ass ;) Quite a cinema fan here too (2-3 times weekly) with no particular genre/type as a favourite. Be interesting to see how it goes down when on general release - Feb 2010? - box office stats will make interesting reading. Only just stumbled on this Twitchfilm site - plenty good reading here.