Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Kailansorac Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

edula I've been a bit vocal in my urging for people to go and watch this film, purely as I feel that someone with the balls to make a movie for under a grand deserves to have their film noticed. Still, though, after finally getting to see it, I think that it could have been much more. Instead, could someone please explain to me how something so recent can feel like it has aged so terribly? It felt dated like a late 80's TV play that may once have had something, but the years have worn away at its impact. A real shame, as with a little more care and attention, there could have been so much more power. Whilst I have nothing but admiration for McMahon's punk rock take on the "let's do the show right here" ethos, I just wish that the final result had been as powerful as his post-festival-screening campaign to divide the viewers and rile the critics. The script had some wonderful moments, admittedly, but for my tastes came over a little stagy in places. However, despite this, Emmett Scanlan's delivery and performance were very deserving of all the accolades that have since come his way. Terry McMahon definitely has a way with actors, and gets the best out of his cast. Unfortunately his direction appears to be more towards what the cast do, and less to what we actually see in the frame. In the hands of another director, there may have been a different outcome - dialogue-heavy scripts are not always stagy, and can often provide an electric energy when combined with intense visuals (just look at the early films of Andrzej Zulawski for great examples of this). Perhaps it was due to budgetary constraints after all, but then again wasn't that one of 'Charlie Casanova's big selling points? Did adopting the punk ethic unwittingly sap it of all its punk energy?. Maybe if the funding had come Terry's way before shooting, then this film might have delivered tenfold, with a little more time and a little more care. I've no doubt whatsoever that Terry McMahon is a great writer, and has a gift for directing actors. I'm sure that one day he will also be able to add great filmmaker to that list, and will one day make a film that delivers on all its promises. It's just a shame that this wasn't it. It could have been, and I really wish it had been...

pmckenna-2 I like to keep an open mind when going to the cinema. I generally avoid all reviews and press relating to movies on show, depending on word of mouth and personal recommendation instead. I arrived at the cinema expecting nothing, and it dutifully delivered. It was easily the worst film I've ever had the misfortune of seeing. The only positive I could draw from this movie is that it is mercifully short, although seemingly endless when you have to sit through it. Most people didn't bother (there were probably 20 people at the beginning of my showing and around 12 by the end). The dialogue was unintentionally hilarious at times, but mostly cringe-worthy. The acting is of an impossibly low standard. The story line is confused and forgettable. Even the movie itself looks extremely amateur. I'd imagine they were intentionally going for a dark and gritty look, but the technical expertise obviously wasn't there to pull it off.Avoid this film at all costs. N.B.: Aside from the disingenuous 10 star reviews of the film on this very site, the IMDb score is also massively misleading. It has the same ratio of 10* reviews as The Shawshank Redemption, IMDb's number one film of all time. If only real votes were counted, I'd say it would be in the 2 star range.

speakerstudio In spite of a ridiculous rant by a sad and pathetic fool called 'billy the hick' (Aptly named) I will keep this short and state that this groundbreaking movie has taken many of the staid opposition to change in any form by surprise. With the result that they can only comment on the negative. OK not everybody will enjoy this movie. (I hated 'The sound of music') but for a first time low cost incredibly well written, acted and directed film Charlie Casanover, has opened a door of hope for so many independent film makers with the courage to present their work on their own terms. you can like it or loath it, but you can't ignore Charlie Casanova.

brianmcgov This film was made at a time when the reality of the sickness which permeates the Irish ruling classes came sharply into focus. It became apparent that the country had been raped by those who were entrusted with her wellbeing. In Charlie Casanova writer/director Terry McMahon churns up the emotional landscape of the times. In this world the delegation of responsibility is absolute. Consequence and accountability are divorced. A murderous tendency rises to the surface. And these are just the good times ? Charlie Casanova deals the hate because he can and in his wake deposits one fat line of reptilian WTF?. Perhaps not surprisingly at the outset this film received very little by way of support from the Irish funding authorities. They have since jumped on the bandwagon. A great debut feature film from the auteur. It begs the question, what next ? Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Roight ?