To me, this movie is perfection.

Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

I remember watching London to Brighton in a festival shortly after it's release. It was recommended either by a friend or a critic, which is irrelevant now, since it remained in my memory as an excellent thriller.In retrospect i think the reason why this movie has been do fresh was the influence of UK television on the production. Besides, i remember seeing Johnny Harris (Derek) in a couple of TV shows. But let's get to the movie itself.London to Brighton is very strong and gritty. The cast was so good, that at certain moments i've asked myself whether these were actual people in a documentary. This, however, lead to the moments where they underperformed (in particular Sam Spruell), but even this hasn't spoiled the overall impression.

After the stunning in its violence riots in Great Britain, the world was taken aback by the anarchy on the streets.Those of us who are passionate admirers of British crime fiction and TV mysteries, might have not be as surprised as the rest of the people. The British class system seems to be designed to keep people where they are, and the consequence of this injustice is the large number of desperate, drug addicted young people, living in the estates, who have nothing to lose. "London to Brighton" is a quick and quirky little independent movie that tell a story about these lost souls. The prostitute, the scumbag dealer, the lost kid, the pedophile gangster, the psycho son. an ensemble of great actors, above all Lorraine Stanley.

I thought that London to Brighton was a great film it starts in London, a pimp called Derek assigns the prostitute Kelly that works for him to find a young girl on the streets to escort the powerful mobster Duncan Allen. Kelly finds the twelve year-old runaway Joanne in the train station, and Derek gives one hundred pounds for her service and the girl accepts. Kelly makes friends with Joanne and takes her to Duncan's mansion. When Joanne cries in the bedroom where she is with Duncan, Kelly runs and helps the girl. At 3:07 AM, a bruised Kelly and the tearful Joanne lock themselves in a public toilet. Kelly asks Joanne to stay there because she will raise some money for them to travel to Brighton. Meanwhile, Duncan's son Stuart Allen calls Derek and asks him to meet him in a night-club. When Derek arrives at the nightclub, Derek calls his friend Chum and they begin to chase the girls. It thought that this was a great and powerful film, which featured a lot of strong violence. 8/10

'London to Brighton' is a modern film, but has a peculiarly eighties feel to it. In the heyday of Thatcherism, an endless stream of radical film makers wanted to document the plight of the underclass. While Britain has become more affluent in the subsequent years, this does not mean that all social problems have disappeared; but except for films about the plight of immigrants, this sort of movie appears to have vanished as a genre. Perhaps this is one signal of Thatcherism triumph: that (usually middle class) film-makers are no longer interested in the plight of the poor. 'London to Brighton' is not just (or even mainly) a work of social compassion: it's a violent gangster thriller, but it takes place in a Britain best described as squalid. And one is struck at how unfashionable it seems to be to paint the country in such a light; and how commonplace it once was. Aside from these observations, the film is well acted, beautifully shot and and genuinely harrowing. But it takes place in a landscape almost devoid of hope. We don't know what made the characters into the people they are - and I found myself increasingly detached at the end, because of the clear impossibility of a happy ending. Indeed, I didn't know really what I was supposed to make of the fact that the eventual conclusion was not the worst imaginable. It's a short film, but although the initial premise is gripping, it eventually suffers from the absence of wider context - "girl goes home" is a less powerful ending to a story if we have no idea of why she went away. That's not to say it's bad, in many ways it feels more real than Neal Jordan's authentic eighties gangster and prostitutes movie 'Mona Lisa', to which it makes an interesting companion piece. But Jordan's movie had a more involving plot.