Without question, the worst film I've seen for a long while. I endured to the end because surely there must be something here, but no. The plot, when not dealing in cliches, rambles to the point of non-existence; dialogue that is supposed to be street is simply hackneyed; characters never develop beyond sketches; set-pieces are cliched. Worse, considering its co-director, the photography is only so-so.

Comments elsewhere that elevate this alongside Get Carter, Long Good Friday or Kaspar Hauser are way way off the mark; Lives of the Saints lacks their innovation let alone their depth and shading. In short, their craft. A ruthless editor could probably trim it down to a decent 30-minute short, but as it stands it's a 6th form film project realised on a million-pound scale; rambling and bloated with its own pretensions. That it received funding (surely only because of Rankin's name) while other small films struggle for cash is depressing for the British film industry.

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?
Options are: I. negative; II. positive;
I.