Ron West First, let's get the black and white choice out of the way; it obviously was brilliant. The textured, earthy context is vital as a sort of expository casing for the story. Color would've all but obliterated the characters; they'd have been absorbed by their surroundings, rather than growing out of them, as they do. Monochrome manages to supply their backstories in a completely visual, pervasive manner. It's the sort of choice that prompted me to mention after I'd seen the trailer, Behind the Scenes, and the other clips that it reminded me of Cassavetes, Falk and Gazzara during their early work together: filmmaking with an emphasis on the film. The story, I think, treads a rather gracefully drawn line through rough-edged ironic humor, frustration, almost accidental cruelty, the wish for some kind of tenderness or simple meaning, and the nearly abandoned hopes for love. These people have lost their direction, but they still seem to think there's a path to find. That seems to emerge for each of the characters at various moments, and to be guided by different impulses. It's very intriguing that, despite the serious flaws in Eddie Jemison's lead character Ditch, the only really reprehensible of the four men is Art, the guy Ditch supposedly has wronged. The characters all are thoroughly nuanced and intricate; they bring a compelling urgency to a set of potentially mundane situations. Intriguing as they are, though, they're only one part of the film's subtle fabric.Roughness and cruelty among the four central characters masks a deeply vulnerable core that becomes most evident in Ditch and his pal Gat. The two guys only can express their fears and insecurities to each other, not because of some illusory macho "bonding," but because of their lifelong knowledge of each other; they have no secrets, no need to protect themselves. It's not a "buddy flick;" it's a film about the fragility of humanity and fate of love in a world that marginalizes hope. Gat shows that, instead, the knowledge fosters a visceral, instinctive drive to protect each other, as well as themselves. Both Jemison as Ditch and David Jensen as Gat pick up the excellent script and carry it into completely believable and recognizable characters. Anyone used to Jemison's more frequent comic roles will be gripped by the troubled, incendiary, self-destructive character that he brings to life in Ditch. Anyone who's been watching him closely, however, will see this as the realization of his skill in treading the edge between comic and desperate. Here, he shows serious chops and takes a walk on the bleak side. In the process, he shows his considerable range, bringing in the comic to heighten Ditch's underlying rage and desperation. As his partner Gat, Jensen brings together a personal despondency, lingering optimism, a bruised sweetness, and a startling turn for rage. They both believe they're worthless, but manage to hold each other upright. To a point.All of the male characters' defensive reactions to their haunting sense of inadequacy reach a destructive peak in Ditch and Gat's inability to connect meaningfully with their wives, with women in general. The essential fear of rejection, of discovery, that has shadowed their lives has made them fearful of those they need the most. Ironically, it's those fears that ultimately contaminate and destroy the relationships that mean the most to them. This film is filled with irony, all of it subtle and all of it crucial to the narrative; even the title carries a multi-level, pivotal irony.Thankfully, the guy-driven narrative doesn't strand or omit female characters, though the script rather elegantly sets up that expectation before pulling the rug. Both women stand on their own as deceptively nuanced personalities. In her brief appearances as Ditch's sister Evie, Andrea Frankle's restrained but focused portrayal suggests a backstory worth telling and, most importantly, her attraction to the shop-worn Gat becomes perfectly reasonable. But it's Laura Lamson's embodiment of Ditch's wife, Mary, that rounds out the film's characters with a multi-textured rendering that spins from tragic naiveté to fragility, then surprises with an eruption of assertiveness and acuity, demonstrating Mary's depth and complexity, shifting her from pathetic to almost majestically tragic. The effect is enhanced by Lamson's transitions, razor sharp, but so smooth that they're believable even as they catch the viewer off guard. In fairness, all of the characters develop surprising depth; there's just not enough room here. Even the worst of the lot, the somewhat loathsome Arthur, neatly articulated by Joe Chrest, may not be excusable, but his pointless deceitfulness, his almost cheerful underhandedness, still subtly conveys the disappointment and sense of inadequacy that afflicts them all. And it must be said that Wayne Pére's sensitive depiction of the damaged Leon shows him as both tender and potentially dangerous.All of this derives from an intricate, multifaceted script, of course, though it's difficult to see the division between that, the performances, and the strong, insightful direction. This could be lots longer; there's more to say. In the end, I have to return to the riff on Cassavetes, Falk, and Gazzara. That seems a bit effete, perhaps, but not when it produces this sort of harsh, delicate, angry, almost tender filmmaking.

smithespian This film is proof that when you get the right people in the room good things are going to happen. These actors have been in the right room together for over 20 years and something great happened. The first time I saw this film, I watched as an audience member. Getting to know these characters who sustain themselves off of coffee and trivial games. Cheering for Mary to find something remarkable on the other side of the train tracks (if only she'd risk it)! But the second time I watched the film, I watched as an actor. The work by the artists in King of Herrings is so effortless while the characters are so detailed- it's like watching magic. This film makes you want to be in the room with these artists.

dramateacherworship King of Herrings is a wonderful film. It speaks to a way of life in New Orleans, to anyone who has lived with the same group of people for many years only to find you don't like them all, to anyone who has hoped for rescue only to find that they must rescue themselves.When you look into the world of King of Herrings, you see characters that have fallen into painful rhythms, hurtful, manipulative relationships, and petty oneupmanship. And yet some of these beautifully rendered characters still strive to reach beyond the limits of their day to day existence and make good on their dreams.The characters are each brought to life in performances that are visceral and truthful. Some content with their way of life an others hoping for a change that will make their life somehow better. The story follows the characters as they go about their lives over several days, and through events and interactions that will impact their lives going forward.The actors have been friends for more that twenty years, and their on-screen chemistry comes from a genuine friendship and rapport. This charm is evident from the first frame and through to the end.It is the winner of the Audience Favorite Narrative Film at the New Orleans Film Festival, and I was fortunate to have seen it there. I have to recommend this film to anyone who loves film.

champ_clark-540-155191 What can I say about "King of Herrings?" So very much. First....you will recognize these people. And that doesn't happen often in American movies. "Ditch," Gat," "The Professor," "Leon," "Augie," and most especially, the women in this film, "Mary" and "Evie." We all know them. We see them in the corner diner, or on the subway, or, likely, in our own homes. Particularly if you have lived in any big city...New Orleans as depicted in "King of Herrings"....but also Chicago, New York, LA....or Philadelphia or wherever. These are real people. Urban characters that live and breath and live and love and strive or fail. What is it about "King of Herrings" that makes it stick in your head and in your thoughts? The story and the writing first. Not many American movies let the viewer decide for themselves how to feel about the characters up on screen. The acting, certainly...uncompromising and rich. Eddie Jemison, known for his wide variety of character roles, often comic, zones in on a whole other realm of his talent. Brando-like he is here. And Joe Chrest, David Jensen, Wayne Pere, Carl Palmer and John Mese all compliment and further Jemison's breakthrough performance. This is excellence in ensemble acting. But, when all is said and done, the secret of "King of Herrings" is its women and the soul they give to it. Andrea Frankle, a featured player in a number of movies, gives a breakout performance as "Evie." It is a performance that should be seen and, when seen, will be appreciated. But, most of all, Laura Lamson is the heart and soul of "King of Herrings." Her performance is impeccable and heartbreaking. Without Lamson, there is no movie. It is a quiet performance amidst all the testosterone hue and cry. And it kills. Lastly, the co-direction of Sean Richardson (with Jemison) and music of Chris Walden fulfill every moviegoer's hope by bringing completion to this wonderful writing and acting. I loved "King of Herrings."