All Things To All Men (2014)

Set in modern day London, UK. The issues are criminal activities versus police responses. Riley moves stolen diamonds. Joseph Corso is a crime boss, the 'Merchant' of London; Cutter is his henchman. Mark Corso (Joseph's son) seems to be running drugs, and doing them as well. Parker, Dixon, and Sands are on the New Scotland Yard/Metropolitan Police side of the issues.By squeezing Mark on cocaine possession, Parker and friends leverage his father Joseph into trapping Riley, who has been skirting Joseph's rules of order. The plans move forward, glacially. Joseph wants his son safe, well-treated, and preferably free; Parker wants Riley in jail and off the streets. At least that is the first story.Joseph sets up Riley to do 'one more job' that is a complicated heist that has to be done lightning fast. Parker gets Mark back to Joseph. Joseph tells Mark that he is retiring as the Merchant, but that succession is unlikely since Mark is a known addict. So, the stage is fully set.Given the complicated arrangements, something is bound to break down. Will the cops keep faith with Joseph on the deal? Will Joseph help Riley just enough to get him caught? Will Mark pull a wild card out? Will Riley diagnose the whole setup and get free of it? Where does the difference start between normal police procedure and straight up corruption? -----Scores-----Cinematography: 8/10 A bit too dark for me, but presumably done for effect. Focus and framing and the like were just fine.Sound: 8/10 The tension building from the background music was good, and the actors seemed to be miked OK.Acting: 6/10 Normally I like Byrne, Sewell, and Sands. They were fairly good here as well, although perhaps the material was not enough of a challenge for them. I like Toby Stephens as a comedian in television (Vexed) and film (Severance), but not so much as a dramatic actor. I kept expecting a flippant remark or seven together with a sneering smile. Terence Maynard was rather good, and I liked Leo Gregory's performance.Screenplay: 5/10 How does Riley get shot in the abdomen then can keep going with high-stress muscular maneuvers for a good continuous 20 minutes afterward? This seems unlikely. The heist succeeding seemed unlikely. The wrong amount of valuables being in the vault open for inspection seemed ridiculous. Normal police discovery seemed to be almost absent. The ending (and much of the plot) reminded me of LA Confidential. This worked in the year in which LA Confidential was set, but not so much in 2013. Perhaps worst of all, the 84 minute play time felt like 130.

Very difficult to follow plot. This film is a poor mans British version of LA Confidential. Complete with the overly predictable cryptic reference to convey guilt. Too bad because these are talented actors. The chase scenes in automobiles and on foot are the highlight of the film. Completely nonsensical with clandestine meetings and corrupt cops expected to go undetected in the city that has more closed-circuit cameras than any place on the planet. A serious movie should take into account that follow-up investigations made by law enforcement will look at cell phone records and bank account histories. These criminals behave as if they aren't concerned about getting caught. The director and writer of this film apparently forgot these obvious facts. Cannot recommend this film.

It is obvious what George Isaac was trying with this. A story involving crooked cops and a London gangster, a mysterious thief with a heart of gold caught in their game, and (a try at) a twist. A mix between the old film noir and more modern UK gangster/heist films; just from the film's start it seemed quite good and promising.Yet, it does not work. The script is very weak and unoriginal, without a single great moment; a mere 'copy and paste' of film noir's more usual situations/clichés and character stereotypes (like the crooked cop that is just 'following the system' or the mysterious, often quiet and sometimes cynical main character). The plot gets overly muddled by the middle of the film to the point that the viewer can easily get confused; by the ending, things get resolved in such a ridiculously predictable way that the film becomes overly simplistic in hindsight.It does not help that the film feels silly. There is not a credible tension like in most heist/gangster films, which is further enhanced by the extreme predictability of it all. There is also no memorable moments at all, nothing that could make this film worthy remembering (for the good or for the bad).The cast is interesting. Gabriel Byrne and Rufus Sewell stand out and make the most out of their characters; Toby Stephens does feel like a noir protagonist, though the emotionless-ness of his character is overdone; and Terence Maynard and Leo Gregory also do a nice work despite their overly flawed characters.Overall, while not necessarily a bad movie, 'All Things to All Men'/'The Deadly Game' ends up as a forgettable, overly predictable and silly mess that does not work despite its fine cast.

Well I've been a fan of IMDb for some time but i have never contributed and even if id preferred to make a nice statement for a first timer i couldn't watch this dud and let it get away with it first of all DO not pay too watch this film everything about it is terrible plot ,actors camera-work even the twists are terrible and as a londoner (london being the place the film takes place in ) believe me you don't feel one breath of the city .. its sad too see good actors like gabriel byrne who was brilliant in usual suspects which is too some extent everything this film isn't i kid you not he seems to decay throughout the plot as if he understand what hes getting into .. everything feels bad and nobody is at his place and you just don't get whats happening and especially why ? the storyline seems too have been written by a ten year old at the best terrible too see people make films this bad .