A great trilogy that just falls apart in the final act. In the first two films, we followed one protagonist on their mission to bring a killer to justice while also bringing down corruption within the Yorkshire police force. In 1983 however, the narrative fractures into three separate people, two of them having been involved from the start. We follow a member of the force who has for some reason just now decided after ten years of being corrupt and feeling bad about it that he's actually going to do something, a loser lawyer who basically gets yelled at until he tries to save the innocents that have been harmed by this seed of evil and a young male prostitute who has just had enough of all the wicked.The film doesn't have enough time to fully resolve all of it's story lines, but it tries very hard to wrap it all up as efficiently as possible. I admire this in a way (with something like this I'd rather have everything resolved over a lot being left wide open), but as a result the entire thing feels very rushed and a lot of stuff comes seemingly out of nowhere to help tie it all up in a neat bow. Aside from the whole thing being very rushed and all over the place, the actual narrative structure of the film takes a bizarre and disjointed shift. The other two films had pretty straight-forward narratives, but this one tries to do so many different things to help explain it all.There are flashbacks to the events of 1974, to help explain more about the corruption back in that day, but aside from the first time they never tell us when we're going back in time and sometimes it's honestly a little hard to figure out when we are. Along with that, we spend almost half of our time back in 1974, so the film doesn't even really feel like it should be titled 1983 because the focus doesn't seem to be much on it. They throw in some voice-over narration that feels very out of place as well, I guess to help with the lack of worthy screen time for one of our main players.Don't get me wrong, the themes are still strong and I love the grit and darkness of this entire trilogy, but this one just falls apart on so many levels. There's a whole subplot with a mystic that feels very out of place for such a grounded series and in some scenes they turn these corrupt police officers into such overbearing caricatures that you can't even buy that they're just greedy, selfish men who abuse their power. When they stand in a circle and toast themselves by saying, "To the North! Where we do what we want!" you can't help but laugh at the ridiculousness of it.The biggest surprise of it all is that, despite being very rushed and all over the place, the film drags along a lot. They should have had more time to properly explain everything, but even with that belief I was still losing interest in a lot of scenes. Overall, just a massive disappointment after two great films that came before it.

Almost literally. In truth there are a few moments featuring outdoor scenes where the sun MIGHT be out amongst clouds, though camera and lighting do their best to avoid such potential charm. And therein are presented the underlying themes of evil, greed, debauchery, misery, hopelessness and...... did I mention....evil.The Red Riding Trilogy is a five hour adventure into a dark world of vile corruption, pedophilia, brutality, fear and futility. It is certainly not without merit. It features police corruption and brutality as well or better than anything I've viewed. (Example: When a mentally deficient character wets his pants upon sight of the cops we understand entirely his reaction.) The lead characters, arguably there are four, are so flawed that they function less as protagonists than as faint glimmers of humanity. Yet they are genuine to a fault. The bleak hopelessness of the British working class is well supported by the lighting, tinting (its neither color nor B&W) and drab settings. There is certainly a story in here somewhere, not so much moved by the characters as by the ugliness of human nature and it's ability to overwhelm the good.Rather than say the RRT would be better pressed into a single feature length film, the true merits of RRT would be better presented as a multi-part, episodic production more slowly introducing and intermingling the various characters. RRT is certainly more about characters and their natures, reactions and failings than anything else! As I mentioned before, only arguably have we four main characters. The story, quite artfully, ebbs and flows re the importance of and emphasis on certain people. A seemingly minor character is a plot devise at one point, only to be more fully drawn much later. An eight or ten part RRT, at an hour a shot, would/could provide something as engaging as ; e.g., a BBC Dicken's production. Imagine a modern day Bleak House adding drugs, sex, gruesome violence and overwhelming fear.The major problem with RRT is that what we ultimately learn to be the great evil has by then become so obscured by characters and emotions that it almost gives new definition to anticlimax. There may -or quite possibly may not - have been sufficient clues, dialog, etc. attending to the "story" to have made its outcome satisfying. Assuming there were enough such tips (this is arguable!) by the end of RRT the viewer is far too exhausted to piece the story together. In a nutshell, the backbone story/plot takes such a distant backseat to the grittiness, characters and tragedies that it will be long forgotten before RRT's fears and tears are still remembered.

(The following review is a follow-up on the reviews written for Julian Jarrold's "Red Riding: 1974" and James Marsh's "Red Riding: 1980"; for further info on the Red Riding trilogy and content related to the series' continuity, read the other reviews before this one.) The excellent Red Riding trilogy has finally come to a close...and it went out with quite a bang! Anand Tucker helms the final film, "Red Riding: In the Year of Our Lord 1983" and does a pitch-perfect job of joining the two previous films, solving up most of the enigmas that had been ignored, and closing the circle. Tucker is a master at his characters' catharses and at carefully observing and commenting on the infinitely heartbreaking human characteristics of revenge, redemption and atonement. Tucker concludes Jarrold and Marsh's films in this way: he extracts Jarrold's poignancy from "1974" and Marsh's intelligence from "1980", mixes them and adds his own masterful touch while tying the loose ends of each film's plots. The result is, as I've said before, an excellent closure to this harrowing series and a very satisfying finale.The film returns to 1974, and the opening scene shows us the corrupt and darkly evil group of villains we've already come to know assembled in a country estate, including Harold Angus (Jim Carter), the seedy police superintendent, and Maurice Jobson (David Morrissey), the mysteriously cryptic and detached crime investigator. The child murders we saw in the first film are only just being discovered by the police, and their shady dealings with John Dawson (Sean Bean) are beginning to be discussed. Then the film shifts us to the year 1983, where attorney John Piggott (Mark Addy) is being commissioned to appeal for the killer of the three girls, whom his family believes to be innocent (and secretly, so do we).The film dangerously shifts between 1974 and 1983 without letting the viewer know. At first we're confused to see so many characters who're supposed to be dead already involved in present-time events, but as the film goes along it is all explained. Tucker is interested not in the chronology of events or making sense out of the twisted plot...after all, what sense can ever be extracted from such base crime and corruption? We eventually manage to sort the plot out, and by then we just KNOW that no matter whether the events make sense or not, the depravity and evil behind it all can never explain itself to our consciences. Tucker digs deeper into the Yorkshire murders than Jarrold and Marsh could because he can play with all of the characters from the previous two films, giving us everybody's side of the story, everyone's point of view and every person's true face (as opposed to the mask they've been painting all along). And the new character (Piggott, the attorney) who we've only come to know is such an ambiguous, flawed and relatable character that (even through his weak points) he becomes the most human character of the film. Piggott leads the investigation taking place in 1983 and Maurice Jobson leads a covert investigation back in 1974 parallel to Eddy Dunford's (but obviously laden with a corrupt agenda).Once again, the film builds a steady tension that reaches unbearable heights as each minute passes on, as as the answers to all the questions we had are revealed to us, we can't help but lift our hands to our mouths and stare open-eyed at the horror behind the truth. The first two films dealt with one person trying to expose the guilty murderers and crime lords; this film is about the murderers and members of the Force seeing how they can cover up their footprints, how they can redeem themselves from tainted consciences, and how they can go on living while internal disagreements arise. And Anand Tucker, who has shown us with films like "Hilary and Jackie" and "Shopgirl" that he's a master at exploiting guilt and internal conflict, makes the most of his characters and blows them up from the inside out.I can't say anything about the ending without spoiling everything for you, but I WILL say that the series couldn't have ended better. I saw these films on DVD, in the comfort of my bedroom, and as soon as "1983" was over I felt like jumping to my feet and clapping my heart out. I'll never tire of repeating this: I am amazed! Overwhelmed, really.I've recently heard that Ridley Scott's been taken into consideration to direct an American film which joins this trilogy into one full-length feature. That is just ridiculous. These three films put together amount to over FOUR hours and a half, and not a minute is wasted in any of them. Trying to summarizing this will take out the POINT of it all, and is sure to be a flop (after all, there's a reason why the British made this into a trilogy). I seriously recommend you see this before the USA releases its own reduced version. This is as good as trilogies are ever gonna get. Rating: 3 stars and a half out of 4!

It is now three years since The West Yorkshire Ripper has been (allegedly)caught & disposed from society,but things are no better for the citizens of West Yorkshire. Another disappearance of a young girl has been duly noted. This time,Sgt.Major,Maurice Johnson is on the case to find out just who is the (so called)ripper. This time,he's assisted (against his knowledge)by a sleazy lawyer,named John Piggott,as well as a "New Agey" clairvoyant,figure into it,as well as a wrongly accused,mildly retarded young man falsely accused of the original set of murders,and a mysterious young man just released from prison who is just referred to as B.J. Other elements (rampant police corruption,organized crime,political graft) figure into this to make this final chapter in a triptych a true nail biter,to keep you guessing until the very end. Anand Tucker (Hillary & Jackie,Shopgirl)directs from a screenplay written by Tony Grisoni,adapted from the novel by David Peace. The moody wide screen cinematography is by David Higgs,with precise editing by Trevor Waite. David Morrissey returns as Maurice Jobson,with Warren Clarke,as Bill Molloy,Lisa Howard as Judith Jobson,Sean Bean as John Dawson,and rounding out the rest of the cast (among others)is Chris Walker,Shawn Dooley,Jim Carter,Mark Addy,David Mayes & Robert Sheehan. Not rated by the MPAA,but contains outbursts of strong language,adult content,gruesome images,including brutal police interrogation scenes & violence,as well as much smoking of tobacco & marijuana & drinking of alcohol