Cheap, shallow and British--what's not to like?

Rating: 7/10 (13 April 2019)

Apparently, there are a few things not to like about Guy Ritchie's "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels". This is a film whose ugliness and gaucherie make it work, but despite being made by a director who developed a trademark style, the screenwriting gets in the way of what could have potentially been a masterpiece. But without getting off on the wrong foot, let me tell you that this film offers nearly scene after scene of humor, all driven by the incompetence of its characters.
Guy Ritchie feels like a Quentin Tarantino who suddenly decided that he fancies a warm pint of lager in some Ye Olde Pub to an American Dukes of Hazard or a regional Martin Scorsese who, after spending two weeks in the UK, would lower his standards. This is a director who fully encapsulates the cheapness and piss-off-ery of London thugs with indecipherable accents and about as indecipherable of a plot. In the end, it all pays off, though, as the plot complicates so much that even its characters are caught on the wrong foot and the film explodes into a ridiculous and funny climax. All these thugs are pretty much carbon copies of each other (as if the plot isn't hard enough to follow) and their actions and motives feel rather basic to their job. The only ones that stand out are the four main friends: Eddy (Nick Moran), Bacon (Jason Statham), Soap--because he was clean, legit (Dexter Fletcher) and Tom--boring name, by the way (Jason Flemyng).
Even if the characters' shallowness feels like the film lacks a certain meaning and makes it difficult for us to relate with anyone, it is a good thing that Ritchie at least went all the way with it. I mean, imagine how cringy it would have been if Eddy had found out that the local gang-land boss, Hatchet Harry (P.H. Moriarty) was cheating at the poker game and justice would have been served or whatever. No morality here as the inevitable end of most of these gangsters comes simply from stupidity which makes it funny and the fact that you don't really connect with any of them makes it even more effective.
An interesting observation is that the streets are often empty, unlike Scorsesian pictures in which the entire environment is aware, Ritchie takes a deader approach. Every frame is devout of any extras except some rare scenes in the bar or two random people talking to each other in one scene. It almost feels as if Ritchie put this characters into a maze-like world as he examines their interactions but it's not that. These are not that type of characters and this is not that type of film. Unpretentious and simple yet complex, this shouldn't even have such a long review.