filmtruth-1 the other review for RWTN was published as a PR exercise by the film makers."You could polish a turkey and make his beak shiny but he will still be a turkey"this film has no good vibes, you are meant to go to cinema to be entertained not disgusted.Deeply offensive. not even cathartic* guns = glamour (or so this film decrees)would not be an issue but the makers use completely inappropriate tagging of their film that implies there is a sociological message to the piece when there is not, nothing clever about this clichéd endorsement of criminality

bernie-122 This film affected me profoundly; I had no reason to suppose I wasn't seeing an accurate depiction of the black subculture in Britain. I still don't.I can't flaw the direction, acting or camera-work. Why I only gave it an 8 instead of 10 is because of the storyline.*Spoiler* If you haven't seen the film, skip the next paragraph.This film is different in that there are really no good guys. Sure, our hearts go out to Hope (Naomi Taylor) when her drug-dealing brother is whacked and she is beaten up. But can we really condone her taking his place? Here is where the morality wagon loses a wheel. In the end she gets away with murder and being a drug dealer. I couldn't help it, it made me feel kind of dirty for being on her side.Apart from that little glitch, which is actually pretty important, I can hardly fault this piece of work. It has been reported that the film is technically flawed. Whatever factual inaccuracies it may have are only apparent to someone close to the scene and don't affect me, who has never been there. I was anyway left with the impression that the West-Indian subculture in Britain makes the Afro-American scene look relatively tame.

malcomxmanz Rollin' with the Nines (RWTNs) is a British made independent feature that it being sold on the tag line of being 'the first black British gangsta film', and for this reason alone it makes it highly exciting and an original cinema event. The film starts simply (showing lots of guns being loaded) and by introducing us to the main characters, which are black 'street' hustlers & the rest are white middle-class 'cops'. The film is set in London (many locations are used including Brixton) and tries to show us the current issue of the day that is 'black on black' gun crime and it's truly tragic results. The films set-up is simple: there's a murder, revenge, drugs to be sold for serious cash, car chases, hip-hop soundtrack, serious violence, bent coppers, a love scene & the nicest looking one makes it out alive at the end through all the carnage etc etc. It's way more Hollywood than indie-Brit-flick (which it wants be), more reminiscent of U.S. produced 1980's studio-revenge-action than anything else. What initially appears to set it apart from any previous similar efforts is the fact that it appears to be a black film aimed at a mass cinema going audience: out of the urban into mainstream, kinda thing… The biggest questions open here are what is the connection between black culture, urban society and the rise of street gun crime in the U.K.The film uses 'drugs' as an obvious link to drive the film on its simplistic narrative course of endless extreme violence. Drugs are used (yet again), as a simple plot device, and just the presents of their either powdered-form visual allows complete dictation and authority for all actions and bloody assaults etc. In London, the problems with drugs and gun crime - like this film tries to direct us, are solely linked to those who live in the most deprived 'black' areas – There is no denying that a major problem exists in such areas, but the impression left is that gun/drug crime rarely extends beyond them, and if so is only an export from the inner cities. Even the most basic of research shows that this is very misleading.The first major problem that this film runs into is one of stigma ethics. In recent social-ethical debates it has been made clear that many black 'urban' Londoners feel too greatly over stigmatised and scapegoated by 'gun crime' media publicity (like this film portrays) being so consistent with its strongly enforced 'black-on-black' tag. The quasi-moral code here is: black urban societies regardless, must shoulder some of the guilt for any black related gang/gun crime. This film simply enforces this irresponsible, unresearched theorem for the big screen.At a recent screening of RWTNs, the director appeared next to his fellow cast members to give an after screening Q&A session. Whilst the cast came off as likable and humorous during the Q&A; the director (who is white and seemed very upper class) didn't seem to do himself any favours by speaking with arrogant and pretentious comments, pointing out things like: that due to his 'accent', he was obviously never from an urban society background etc….not very interesting nor inspiring. It should also be noted that many of the numerous 'glowing' reviews written about this film here have been written by either friends/family or those associated with the actual film's production – this has become quite a standard affair with web movie-reviewing, but is still somewhat obvious to most.It is inevitable than that at one point a film like this should appear on our screens, but being black and from Peckham myself, I cannot help feeling that this film, due to a narrative/direction failure, cannot even make it's mind up about being either realist or just a 'movie'. All issues touched briefly in this film are too serious for just a 'movie' version to be created. My guess is that it is not concerned with any real social message or reason, (like the publicity claims) mostly through ignorance – the reality is that this is a Brit indie crime/gangster film that happens to feature black actors in leading roles. The films lacks the rawness and emotion display of Saul Dibb's 2004 film 'Bullet Boy' – there is not one performance in RWTNs that comes close to this level of intelligent direction - and on the whole, the actors (some well known, others new faces) either under perform or poorly act out undeveloped characters. This is always a shame to see - given their professional backgrounds, which made me wonder again about what the director was really doing (setting up the big shoot-outs?) - there really is more to storytelling than just close-ups of guns being endlessly loaded to a blastin' soundtrack…I can't be the only one who feels this way?? The driving role of its tag-line that a third of all British murders will be 'black on black gun crime'- is nothing more than cheap publicity for yet another amateurish debut British feature

maniacfictionfilms I saw Rollin' with the nines in Newham Showcase Cinema on Friday, and I was very pleasantly surprised! The first maybe 20-25 minutes was extremely hard to get into. It was a bit of a barrage on your senses getting thrown into this world at the deep end. However the film changes direction at the half hour mark and goes from strength to strength.The best bit of the whole film was the first raid on the yardies. It was as good if not better then the Hollywood film Narc, which I love. It was really excellent, got the heart racing and was filmed brilliantly. Another nice scene was the tale of the Sawn off 12 gauge, original and clever.Me and my mates who went to see it all agreed Rollin' was best when following the coppers. Weird I know, because after most gangster films it kind of makes you want to be a gangster, but the film shows those characters life's so brutally that after the film it kind of makes you want to a hard arse detective, even though they were 'corrupt' cops! The best performance is from Terry Stone, he has a real screen presence, stealing scenes away from seasoned Brit flick actors like Vas Blackwood and Jason Flemyng.A really brilliant effort for a low budget British film, I hope it gets the cinema time it rightfully deserves, especially when their is rubbish like Scary Movie 4 out there clogging up our theatres! It may start very heavy for the average cinema goer but stick with it, because by the end you don't want it to end.