‘Dead Man’s Shoes’ is the fourth full-length feature film directed and written by Shane Meadows in 2004. Starring Paddy Considine, it tells the story of an ex-soldier who returns home to a small town in the Midlands seeking revenge on a group of thugs who have terrorised his younger brother. The film, at first, embraces the ultimate act of revenge with dark humour and disturbing violence, but soon turns out to criticise what effect vengeance has on the protagonist. The film questions the role of masculinity in British working-class society by having very different male stereotypes thrown together in a very isolated environment. Not only does the film make a statement about gender roles, but more importantly, it tackles the issue of honour and justice. The audience’s allegiances sway dramatically throughout the film as Richard (Considine) becomes more brutal in his execution styles. A similar British film that challenges the audience’s perception of who is right is Stanley Kubrick’s ‘A Clockwork Orange’. On simple viewing of this film, you could say that it is a revenge slasher-flick with plenty of gore; however, I feel that this film is a powerful piece of cinema that is a statement for the immorality of British society and the ideologies it imposes but it also uses Uttoxeter to show the corruption of human nature. ★★★★★

When a former British Paratroop Regiment soldier (Paddy Considine) returns to his home town in rural Derbyshire after his tour of duty, he is determined to avenge his young brother (Toby Kebbell) whose learning difficulties made him the frequent butt of the bullying from local hoodlum “Sonny” (Gary Stretch) and his pals. It was one afternoon when things got completely out of hand that has fuelled this quest for revenge, and so “Richard” sets about meticulously planning to use their own tools to bring about their downfall. What ensues is effectively devoid of dialogue, it really just focuses on this man’s psychological warfare with his quarry. It’s a game of cat and mouse with him in plain sight - they know he is there, they know what he wants and as his plans start to take effect their terror and panic becomes more manifest and desperate. What’s a bit different about this thriller is the palpable sense of guilt “Richard” displays towards his brother whom we know was wholly dependent on him from their childhood - things we learn from flashbacks. It’s brutal and violent, but it’s also clever and menacingly calculating, too, as it challenges some established perceptions of masculinity and at times the photography puts us unnervingly close to the unfolding scenario - a scenario that doesn’t quite run as you might have expected and that showcases just how bullies work and at how their sheer force of personality can lead others to just go with the flow, regardless of their own reservations. It’s not an easy watch, but Considine brings a considerable screen presence here and it’s a fairly savage indictment of how cruel people can be.