There is always space for unbound and experimental creativity, a place for art and film making just for the fun - but any project with an inspiring director, talented big-name cast and budget of nearly £2,000,000 has to have some kind of merit. Bottom line: There was no reason for this film - The outcome wasn't original, entertaining or artistic and it certainly wasn't of any monetary value.Garage manager Derek (Rhys Ifans) has his marriage proposal to girlfriend Shirley (Shirley Henderson) turned down live on national television. Shirley's ex Jimmy (Robert Carlyle) sees the show and then lands in trouble in Glasgow and so decides to return to the Midlands and pursue his old flame.Shane Meadows usually shines producing well observed British realism in drama format. Those dramas may well contain subtle or dark elements of comedy which play their part in telling a wider thought-provoking story. Meadows set his formula aside and dips over the line into the reverse: a comedy with drama elements. Meadows' signature poignant observations of character are replaced with a bunch of flat caricatures that conform to the prejudiced outside view of the working classes as told by entertainment shows such as 'Vanessa'. The proved style of delicately building events and then forcing the audience to have a hard look at society is here swapped for a what-you-see-is-what-you-get predictable narrative.A complete change in style from a film maker is brave and commendable, if the product works, but a comedy is a comedy and sadly 'Once Upon a Time in the Midlands' just isn't funny.The famous faces detract from the realism but generally the actors all do an alright with the flimsy cartoons that they had to work with: Scottish McTroublemaker, Welsh Wetfish, Shellsuit Bingomum and Jim Royle. Some commentators have lost their sense of perspective and lauded Finn Atkin's performance as Marlene as 'outstanding'. This says more about the overall quality of the film than about Atkins.A blip in the (otherwise sensational) Shane Meadows collection.

I hoped this would be good on the lines of The Full Monty. Carlyle played his part very well at first but towards the end goes off the rails, I assume because the script forces the actor to make the character become such a jerk that the wife's final decision and even more the astonishing behaviour of the child attempt to make some sense.Ifans was a crashing bore. The daughter's hostility to her father was totally inexplicable. One understands she's upset that apparently he hasn't been in the habit of seeing her much if at all since the parents split, but her complete disinterest in her father and complete devotion the rival is simply unbelievable in my view.Carlyle's character is ultimately disappointing since he fails to achieve what he has decided he wants just now, ie reuniting his family. If Ifans' character had anything dynamic or even interesting about him, I could have lived with the finale when the wife chooses the new lover instead of the ex-husband. But Ifans' character is just a colourless wimp.I feel that what really spoils this film is how the child is acted. Where's the trauma at seeing her father again if she genuinely loathes him. Or if she's scared he'll interfere between her and the substitute father she's apparently chosen (though in no way clear why), ie Ifans' character? Instead, the child is measured and calm and appears to have no doubt she'll get what she has decided she wants, and sure enough she does.The wife is also confusing. She appears to want to be with Ifans. Then Ifans moves out (GOOD ! I said. Him and that ridiculous pink vehicle, it was dreadful). Then suddenly Carlyle's character after arousing all my sympathy (and especially because of his daughter's near total blank feelings for him) suddenly gets silly. The wife is totally unreadable at this stage, you can't see any conflict, she just seems to accept whoever's there.Carlyle character's thug friends are also a muddle. It seems they are all crooks and Carlyle has helped beat up some guy and steal money to make the trip south. The thug friends follow and all of a sudden with no clear explanation invade the ex-wife's home and terrorise those inside. I never made out why they did this. It was ridiculous. Perhaps the idea was to tell us that the Carlyle character was a violent thug too so don't support him. But this isn't at all clear.Then all of a sudden, when you think maybe Carlyle's character has redeemed himself somewhat in spite of his sudden silly behaviour, the child makes the decision and then the mother suddenly goes along with it.A very confused script in my view. Especially a loopy script for and direction of the child who might as well not have been in the story at all as she doesn't contribute anything to it really until suddenly she near enough says to her mother, I'm going with "Ifans" and Mother runs out to do the same.

I generally agree with all the above negative reviews. But what got me was the casual dismissal of 'the Midlands' having hijacked it for the sake of a smart movie title. There was not a single midlands accent anywhere behind the leading voices of a Scot, a Scouser, a Cockney and a Taff or any kind of geographical peg. There is also a big problem with a so called light hearted movie employing Robert Carlyle as a moody violent character. We've seen him play those parts so convincingly in the past that it's impossible to see him in a lighter vein. I guess the fault lies in the lack of purpose or direction from the outset.These sort of efforts give British movies a generally undeserved bad name. And Rhys Ifans doe eyed simpleton shtick is really beginning to grate.

Right, now where do I start?... If you had the choice of watching this film or something else, then choose the something else. This is definitely a film I will not be watching again. I watched this film with a class of students, and all of us felt the same way about the film - it was poor.Expectations were not met. The 'known' actors who starred in the film did not pull it off in this one, they were poor. Actors known to us in life to be comedians and funny e.g. Ricky Tomlinson do not use these qualities to their advantage. This maybe however due to the fact that the poor scripting did not help them use their qualities successfully. These comedians have a specific audience and as this film wasn't a good one, their audiences will have been disappointed with what they had seen. If this film was supposed to be funny then it failed miserably. I rarely laughed at some of the clips. However I could tell that certain scenes were aimed to make the audience laugh - which they didn't.As you can guess I did not like this film at all. I will not be watching it again. In fact this film has put me off all Shane Meadows films completely. I advise you to watch another film if given the chance.