Mojo (1997) User Reviews

Lost Mojo

[paul2001sw-1 · 4/10 · 10 November 2004]

'Mojo' is a story of fifties London, a world of budding rock stars, violence and forced homosexuality. 'Mojo' uses a technique for shooting the 1950s often seen in films that stresses the physical differences to our own time but also represents dialogue in a highly exaggerated fashion (owing much to the way that speech was represented in films made in that period); I have no idea if people actually spoke like this outside of the movies, but no films made today and set in contemporary times use such stylised language. It's as if the stilted discourse of 1950s screenwriters serves a common shorthand for a past that seems, in consequence, a very distant country indeed; and therefore stresses the particular, rather than the universal, in the story. 'Mojo' features a strong performance from Ian Hart and annoying ones from Aiden Gillan and Ewan Bremner, the latter still struggling to build a post-'Trainspotting' career; but feels like a period piece, a modern film incomprehensibly structured in an outdated idiom. Rather dull, actually.

Mojo

[blackcaravans · 6/10 · 11 May 2020]

This is a massively underrated film, after studying this for analytical review for uni, I had to watch it several times and the more I watched it the more I loved it, I would find myself discovering new meanings and connections every time, I think it's funny and actually I thought baby was a psychopathic but lovable character with daddy issues, he was my favourite character and I loved how he is so unpredictable

A Confusing and poorly acted movie

[CharltonBoy · 6/10 · 21 February 2000]

Mojo is a strange film in the sense that everyone seemed to be trying to out act each other which lead to some very poor acting especialy from the actor who played "Baby" and the actor who played "Skinny" ( i dont know what accent he was trying to do but it definately was not a London one!). The story is about a night club and the fight between owner and gangsters of who should have ownership of up and coming Star Silver Johnny not for career reasons but for sexual ones. The script could have been handled so much better but having said that it is very watchable. 6 out of 10

Brilliant and entertaining

[kevmott · 22 October 2011]

I so thoroughly enjoyed this movie I thought the acting was excellent I found it very gripping and tense and unpredictable. Some one had made very negative comments about Ewen Bremner in their review...........they were really unfounded. I just wish some one would cast him as some psycho bad guy I'm fed up of seeing him as the inept fall guy there is much more to this actor.

I found the dialogue an authentic portrayal of wanna be thugs and small time crooks and hustlers wanting to believe they are bigger than they really are. Thoroughly entertaining, well written, well directed and well produced.

candidate for the worst film ever made

[magus-9 · 1/10 · 5 March 2000]

This is truly terrible: painfully irritating stylised performers screech and mug gratingly incoherent dialogues which take place in scenes which seem to have no purpose, no beginning, middle or end, cut together without any apparent narrative or even cognitive intention, all in the service of some entirely uninteresting and almost undetectable "story". What makes it worse is the film's pretentions to "style": suddenly a remote-head crane shot spirals downwards, and, without any apparent reason there are sudden whip-pans or wobblyhand-held sections: all this "style" merely serves to magnify the almost unbelievably huge misconception of the project and the almost offensive vacuity of the material. Definitely a candidate for the worst film ever made.

Let down by a bad script ,bad acting and a terrible director

[mufdivtwo · 1/10 · 25 April 2018]

I managed to watch about 30 minutes of this before I decided to switch it off. The acting is so bad and the script is worse. Why on earth did Jez Butterworth think that every other word that came out of Londoners mouths in the 1950s began with an F? The leading actor such as Ian Hart overplays the hard man role and I felt sorry for him because he knew that the script is poor and he was miscast as "Mickey." The worst of all though is Ewen Bremner who played "Skinny" his performance is so bad, it's enough to curl your toes. I am surprised that Ricky Tomlinson took part in this because I thought he was experienced enough to know the difference between a good and bad script. Nevertheless, his perfomance as "Ezra" is more convincing because he has that natural ability to lead. Overall, this movie is what I would describe as a "toe curling classic" it has all the elements that make a bad movie worse. A bad script full of swear words and cringe worthy lines. The director should have learned how to write a good script before going ahead with this movie.

Rubbish

[47464 · 1/10 · 28 January 2005]

I looked forward to watching this film and then realised that any hope of a coherent dialogue between the actors was swamped by the unnecessary swearing. Now I am not a prude in any way, but to shout obscenities at each other does not a good film make. Ewan Bremner is arguably one of the worst actors in the world at this time (witness his performance in the god awful Life of Stuff) & his "Cockney" accent is almost as bad as his Edinburgh accent. Avoid. How many more of these films "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang", "Beautiful Creatures" do we have to suffer before the film makers realise that the f-word, the c- word etc does not replace proper dialogue.

I thought it was rather good!

[Suki_Weeks · 10/10 · 25 August 2007]

Worst film ever made?! I think not! It is different, I'll give you that, but the performances and feel of the film is quite haunting and stay with you long after. Jez Butterworth has great vision and this was (originally) from a stage play (which is always a risk) but it comes to screen very well. I feel its an underrated movie which needed more attention when it was released at the cinema. I do hope it gets the DVD release it deserves. The cast do a great job, it has become a kind of cult film to people I know have seen it. I am disappointed by the only review there was of it, so felt compelled to write my own. It may not be everyone's cup of tea but if you like films which are a bit different, try it.

Aidan Gillen's film

[izawaryoko · 8/10 · 14 November 2002]

I watched this film on late night TV and I was hooked. I didn't know Aidan Gillen at the time but his presence was dominant in the film. Whenever he laughs in the film, his eyes never laugh. His character is totally unpredictable - you never know what he's gonna do next. Gillen's acting makes the film tense.

And personally, it was a fun to watch Ricky Tomlinson playing his father.

It could have been so much better

[dennis-77 · 10 November 2004]

Well it's true. This could have been really good. Most of the cast are good actors, the setting and plot were intriguing, the characters interesting and the score was good but for some reason it failed to come together.

A few comments about the good things first - the music over the opening credits was beautiful, really beautiful. The actors' performances were all good, Hans Matheson especially surprised me with how good he was given how bad he'd been in Dr. Zhivago.

The bad things - the plot didn't really hang together, the script was badly written and even the characters that weren't supposed to jabber did at times. It was also unfortunate that there was only one sympathetic character in the whole story and that the characters as a whole were a little underwritten. The directing was a little flat and if you can get Harold Pinter into a film at least use him for more than five minutes.

I like crime films, gangster flicks, those sort of things but this is definitely one not to recommend. Except for the first fifteen minutes which I would watch just for the music over the beginning credits and the appearance of Silver Johnny I would avoid this unless you're a fan of one of the actors since all of them get a decent amount of speaking time.

The Actors Make This Movie....

[claireallen100 · 8/10 · 1 July 2006]

I don't know how he did it but Jez Butterworth was able to collect some of the brightest British actors into his beautiful, little Debut Movie and what a movie it was!!! Set in 1950's Lonodn Soho, the story revolves around the lives of the people working in The Atlantis Club, one of the hippest joints around. Johnny Boy (Hans Matheson) is a sensation - he woos the girls, is a role model to the boys and can boogie-woogie like no other. Plus, he's making a whole lot of dough for the owner (Ricky Tomlinson). Thats when he starts to get some attention by local villain, Mr. Sam Ross (Harold Pinter) and has a proposition..... For me it's a wonderful film, and full of superb actors, for example, Ian Hart who seduces you into his world, one that you will never get out of. A gem of a movie which deserves a DVD release....NOW!!!!

Major disappointment-- Butterworth can write, but...

[jwarthen-3 · 28 February 2000]

A clever, economical play founders and collapses in its author's adaptation, in the most obvious way-- Butterworth indulges a character's psychotic eccentricities until a viewer cringes each time he re-enters the picture. Too bad he knocks the film so badly out of whack-- the two stooges whose interplay so delighted NY stage critics become spear-carriers in this rewrite. Harold Pinter has a talent for playing creeps, but the films one redeeming feature is Ian Hart, a good actor who here has gravity and authority, but he can scarcely keep the camera, so inclined is Butterworth to let the nutcase role to show off some more.