What Richard Did (2012) User Reviews

A well made film, but lacking story

[Leofwine_draca · 5/10 · 20 November 2015]

Lenny Abrahamson directed the excellent low budget Dublin film ADAM & PAUL so I was eager to see what this newer production was like. WHAT RICHARD DID isn't as good as that film, although it has some promise and typically realistic performances. The best thing about it is Abrahamson's moody direction, which makes you feel every moment of a torrid and emotional storyline.

Unfortunately, WHAT RICHARD DID is also rather slow and lacking in incident. The storyline is a very simple one that drags out a bit, especially in the latter half, and the almost entire lack of an ending is a disappointment in itself. It's a very realistic movie with a solid script, and Jack Reynor does well in a complex leading performance. But after ADAM & PAUL I expected more, and what I got was merely adequate.

Decent effort "Like"

[sostevokk · 5/10 · 18 March 2013]

I almost enjoyed the film but the dialogue was poor and left the film wanting.To be fair the film did have some half decent acting from a young cast and the film ticked along nicely holding my interest throughout.The setting did seem more like the kind of Ireland i grew up in myself during the Celtic tiger.

I doubt this film will be winning awards but it was a decent watch all the same.So just to have a bit of a moan i have to say my major gripe with the film was how annoying the lead actors accent was.This might be a slight exaggeration but it felt as if every second word that came out of his mouth was "like" it really began to grate on me.I honestly don't think i could have "like" taken much more of it "like" you know what i mean "like".

Where we learn, instead, what Richard did not do

[RJBurke1942 · 5/10 · 23 March 2014]

This is an actor's movie and the first of Lenny Abrahamson's movies I've seen. It might be the last, given the somewhat well-trodden story and plot coupled with the slow pacing of the entire narrative. On the other hand, it gave me an opportunity to see just how good an actor Jack Reynor (as Richard) is. Reynor is a natural, perhaps, and worth watching; but what also should be noted is the acting of the core ensemble of young students - consistently high quality.

So, I have mixed feelings about the whole effort. The acting and direction are tops. The Storyline on the main page for this movie is sufficient for any viewer's needs. The dialogue is true to life with mostly a quite strong Irish lilt - naturally - but which is often so quick, this viewer found some difficulty to understand. Put it down to my advanced age, maybe (but I hope not).

There is a long first act which provides the setup for the equally long second, during which the tragedy develops and unfolds i.e. a fight between Richard and Connor (Sam Keeley) over Lara (Roisin Murphy), Richard's girl friend. The boys are separated but Connor dies the next day from injuries.

The shorter finale provides the viewer the opportunity to ponder a number of moral issues, the chief of which is surely: who was responsible? I don't intend to read the book, but Abrahamson and the screen writer (Malcolm Campbell) obviously decided to allow ambiguity to rule which, ultimately and ironically, shows us what Richard did NOT do: the right thing, in my opinion; but, he was not alone. When you see this movie, you can judge for yourself.

Overall, though, this is an average night at the movies with no great outcomes - no pun intended. Five out of ten. Recommended for all.

March 20, 2014

decent film with good performances but somehow not managing to be great

[mctiernan34 · 8 October 2012]

During the screening for What Richard did I was transported back in my minds eye to review the trailer for the movie. It featured glowing reviews by Irish critics announcing it to be the most important Irish film of the decade. Some may argue that that is simply a marketing tool to get the cinema-goer to purchase his/her ticket but in reality is it a true statement on the actual film?

Having finished watching the movie I pondered that question. I found myself reviewing the plot/characters and finally the ending and the answer I came up with is no. What Richard did is a well made film with some good cinematography and performances from the principle cast. But somehow I felt there was a missed opportunity that dropped it from being a great movie to simply being OK.

The central Triangle of Richard, Lara and her ex boyfriend for this reviewer just fell short. Perhaps the improvised nature of the performances at times hurt it a little as the actual act of violence when perpetrated felt a little strained and not immediate enough to sustain what follows. In fact you could say it was so brief to be deemed unimportant by Director Abrahamson. Strange as its the selling point of the entire movie and what the audience was waiting to witness 'what Richard did'. This distancing approach failed in that scene to illicite the power necessary to hold together the rest of the film.

Perhaps the biggest flaw seems to be the running time as it felt that the plot didn't quite survive the full length of the movie. some would argue then that It might have been even better as a short movie. The setup itself is not exactly original having been used many times before in other movies.

On a positive note there are some standout performances at times affecting and unsettling. Not quite as good as the critics would have you believe as there are flaws present.

A low-key, but brilliant slow-burner

[DubhDoo · 7/10 · 21 February 2013]

Over the past ten years or so, director Lenny Abrahamson has made something of a name for himself in the Irish film industry. He first burst onto the scene with his feature-length debut, the Beckett-esque 'Adam and Paul', which opened to a positive reception. He followed it up three years with 2007's excellent and downbeat 'Garage', a film which showcased Pat Shortt's capability for a career outside of comedy. After making these two quite different films (both of which showed directorial talent) it would no doubt prove interesting to see where Abrahamson would end up next, and with 'What Richard Did' he has delivered his finest piece of work yet.

One of the most brilliant things about it is how natural it all feels, particularly in its depiction of 18 year old Richard and his peers. Often when it comes to portraying young people on screen, things can feel too forced (aspects of Diablo Cody's work come to mind) or on the other hand become completely misrepresented. This film sees Abrahamson perfect the very difficult technique of accurately depicting teenagers, especially with the way they speak, act, their mannerisms, etc, feeling nothing but natural as if the camera had been placed in the middle of an actual conversation.

At the heart of it all is a terrific central performance by newcomer Jack Reynor as the titular Richard, a popular and achieving school rugby player, living in the upper-middle class area of Dublin. He has to deal with a wide range of emotions and conveys them with nuance and expertise, as we witness how his character fluidly develops as the plot progresses and unfolds. The scene where he confesses to his father about what exactly he 'did', played by Lars Mikkelsen (brother of the stellar Mads) is without a shadow of a doubt, one of the finest pieces of acting of the past twelve months.

Proving to be not a world away from Scandinavian cinema (some likened it to Vinterburg and Bergman) or the films of Michael Haneke, with its consistent aurora of unease and underplayed intensity, 'What Richard Did' is an intelligent, complex and understated drama that confirms Abrahamson's directorial skill and heralds the arrival of brilliant young actor.

A touching, accurate portrait of a tragedy

[OJT · 7/10 · 18 January 2014]

The title of this Irish film, What Richard did, contains the excitement right from before you start watching. A neat trick, if you like to create interest, and this does the trick. The script is based on a novel "Bad day in Block Rock" by Kevin Power, which again was inspired by real events.

The film invited us into some youngsters every day Irish life, just outside Dublin. 18 year old Richard Karlsen, obviously the main character, is a sympathetic sports (rugby) guy, and what you would reckon a young alpha male. Irish mother, Danish father, living a normal life. Attractive, serious, sportive and a leader of the pack of youngsters. Not a smoker, but still does, occasionally. Well we're introduced to his holiday life during summer. Happy non important days around a guy with has everything going for him. Even gets a girlfriend, which seems like a perfect match to him.

Great acting all over. Jack Reynor is amazing, and so is his father, Danish Lars Mikkelsen, as always. They're important, but the whole cast is brilliant, which tells us what a great instructor the director Lenny Abrahamson obviously is. Very true, very realistically told, and as far away from what would have been told in a Hollywood film as possible. A very accurate portrait. The film does a terrific job in introducing us to the persons gallery. Beautifully told, and obviously very important if you want to make a film like this with a real punch.

I love realistically told movies like this. We really get inside Richard's feelings, the agonizing pain he suffers from afterwards. The despair. Slowly told, using a lot of silence, this might not be suitable for the one's seeking action. This is a drama which outright tells what a situation like this is, not putting in extra dramatically points to color up the story. I lived the way the camera is used to express thoughts and feeling, showing how it is to be living with guilt.

The film has a very important message. It's very easy to do acts under the influence of alcohol. It may ruin lives in just a bad decision. Things like thick force not only have one victim, is has several, and it'll also easily ruin both the innocence, the friendship and at least a part of the future, making marks which never fully mend. There's many living with this pain around, a pain which will always be there.

Richard charms and then sympathizes

[ridi-arahan · 7/10 · 28 May 2020]

What worked:

• the ambiance and the setting of the movie goes in the right direction in the first half of the movie, good enough for the viewers to understand and sympathize with the lead characters

What did not work:

• the movie did not hit the right mark or at least to the extend to make the audience feel the overwhelming tension of the situation. In my opinion, more could have been done to conclude the movie, maybe a different perspective or more scenes to support the point.

Final verdict: It's okay but not a movie that you need not miss.

What Richard Did? Not Enough to Hold Our Interest!

[flickernatic · 4/10 · 4 February 2013]

This movie is set In Ireland but is not a particularly 'Irish' film - the underlying theme is universal (the eternal triangle) and it could have been set almost anywhere. There is some reasonable acting and occasional sequences of lush camera-work, but the film is let down by a weak plot, dull script and ponderous pace.

Richard is a well-off teenager who swears and drinks a lot. He is popular among his peers for his looks, self-confidence and access to his parents' beach house. He takes up with the girlfriend of one of his pals and they have sex. Later at a party the two lads get into a fight over the girl and a drunken Richard hits him once too often, taking the lad's life. In collusion with his father, he runs away and hides until he realises that his guilt is too much to bear and that he must give himself up to the police. Returning home to hand himself in, he resumes his studies and finds another girl for perfunctory sex. Whereupon he appears to have forgotten about confessing after all . . . and the credits roll.

The movie starts very slowly with lengthy and tedious scenes of Richard and his mates chilling out together, real enough but reality and drama make uneasy bedfellows. Nothing really happens until Richard gets into the fight, but even then there is little to make us like him enough to care what fate befalls him thereafter. He has committed manslaughter and he knows it so his decision to lie and hide just makes him look a coward. So when he 'breaks down' - an embarrassing scene in which he does a lot of screeching and breast-beating - it is hard to have much sympathy. It's not as if he's murdered anyone and faces life imprisonment or worse. A good lawyer would help . . . but these and other practicalities are never considered by him nor his father and (barely seen) mother. Having decided to do 'the right thing', Richard then appears to abandon his intent and return to a life of self-indulgence. Perplexing!

So the story is more about what Richard did not do than what he did. Perhaps his parents should have told him a lot earlier to grow up and get a life!

Unfortunately, it's hard to recommend this movie.

(Viewed at The Cornerhouse, Manchester, UK, 31.01.13)

Great elements, good film

[runamokprods · 8/10 · 6 May 2013]

This film seems to confirm and amplify Abrahamson's (Adam & Paul, Garage) considerable strengths as a film-maker, and, to a lesser extent his frustrating weaknesses.

On the plus side, he is great with his actors, both in who he casts and what he gets out of them. His characters always feel complex and real. He also sets up very convincing, morally ambiguous worlds, situations and people. No easy heroes and villains.

But he also has a tendency to be drawn to melodramatic twists, and those actually make his films less interesting, not more, as it feels like he's trying to force the emotional issues.

In many ways my favorite part of the film was the first 45 minutes before the central incident. Abrahamson is great at observing and capturing the complexities of late teen-age life with subtlety and a fresh eye. These aren't the desperate angry street kids of poverty, nor are they the morally bankrupt idiots we often see rich kids portrayed as. They feel real; they drink, but they're not all alcoholics and stoners. They have sex, but more often than not it's attached to some sense of emotion, at graspings towards being in a relationship. Their parents are flawed but trying. Its people as people, not just symbols, even though subtle issues of class and social standing inform the whole story.

But when it gets to the big twists and the big themes, I felt it laboring more, working at it's effects instead of letting them happen. It's not that the 2nd half isn't good,it's that it lacks the power the set up and situation seems to promise. It sticks to it's ambiguity, but it starts to feel just a touch like an intellectual conceit, not an exploration of darker human truths.

Anchored by an amazing performance from Jack Reynor

[Sir_AmirSyarif · 7/10 · 20 June 2020]

'What Richard Did' is a bit of a slow burn, but it's complex and often emotional, consistently anchored by an amazingly ambiguous and complicated performance from Jack Reynor.

Emperor's new clothes. Slower than lava

[davebest2001 · 3/10 · 10 February 2013]

This is as slow moving and as unsatisfying as "Garage", the other Lenny Abrahamson film I have had the misfortune to see. The problem with his films is that there are long scenes with no dialogue, and the story barely moves along. Even the incident which changes the lives of the characters is very slight, when it happens. There has been a lot of praise given for Jack Reynor's performance. I didn't think much of it. He didn't come across that convincingly. He had a breakdown and he cried a lot. So what. If that's considered superb acting, then blow me down with a feather. He doesn't deliver his dialogue with much conviction. There's lots of hugging going on and the word "man" said a lot. The bulk of the cast are most unlikeable. The one actor in it that I thought was quite good was Lars Mikkelsen as the father. I don't think I will ever sit through this film again. It was 87 minutes long and felt like an eternity

Silent scenes that still speak volumes

[cressup · 8/10 · 19 January 2013]

I would disagree with some of the reviewers on here that the dialogue is weak or flimsy - it is certainly understated but that's really part of the whole film. When something so dramatic happens to the characters there doesn't need to be a rapid outpouring of feelings and melodramatic soliloquies - in fact by keeping it understated Abrahamson slowly builds up the tension as to what it is Richard is exactly going to do next. There may be several shots of silence in this film, but that doesn't mean they aren't saying anything.

There are flashes of brilliance, especially in the scenes between father and son, but I was slightly unnerved/annoyed by the complete lack of mother figure in all of this - the characters are all given some amount of layers which are built upon and yet we see Richard's mother for two short scenes only. I can't imagine that Abrahamson didn't mean for this to be the case but for me it broke the realism slightly - as his mother, wouldn't she have thought something was different about her son recently? It could have added a more interesting aspect to the father as well in that he didn't want to let her in on her son's secret but for some reason she is never dealt with.

Overall though, a beautifully tranquil soundtrack and a cinematography of rustic, windswept Dublin outskirts add to the haunted performance by Jack Reynor to make a slow building but thoughtful film. I think calling it the most important Irish film of the decade could be stretching it a bit - but it's certainly got me looking forward to Abrahamson's next work, which might well be.

Richard doesn't do enough!

[paul2001sw-1 · 6/10 · 8 May 2020]

'What Richard Did' is a distinctly underwhelming title for this film, but it is at least descriptive. Richard is a good looking middle class lad, seemingly someone with few problems other than a bit of entirely normal teenage sexual jealousy; then something bad happens, and he has to deal with it. I thought the portrait of his everyday life was pretty convincing and well done; but the film's refuasl to descend into melodrama thereafter is a weakness as much as a strength: following the shock, nothing much happens. The result feels like half a story: well-enough told, but without sufficient underlying narrative purpose.

A poor effort

[sarahtyrrell82 · 3/10 · 11 March 2013]

I was really rooting for this film despite it's unoriginal 'accidental killer' plot. Narrative was really weak and I was expecting a new and original take on the 'tortured teens'emotional journey in the aftermath of the event..It did try at times. The scene with his dad could have been so much more touching and effective but it lacked depth & substance. Too many long silences and weak dialogue.I understand what it was TRYING to portray, it just didn't have much of an emotional punch nor did I feel drawn to any characters...Well maybe the dad, a bit. For me, the ending was a complete cop out..Was left wondering what the point was..If the director was trying to convey any kind of moral to the story, I missed it.

Very effective

[Red_Identity · 21 December 2015]

I definitely sought this out because I was a big fan of the director's recent film Room. His directorial hand is sort of similar here, in terms of giving a lot of weight and true significant to the little details in character interactions, and in terms of each half of the film being primarily centered around a different development (although the first half of this is basically set-up and character development so the second half hits harder, and boy does it do a great job of that). I thought all of the performances here were very refined and pretty realistic. The actors do a great job of really inhabiting their characters and making the most out of small moments with he director's help. Overall, very effective film, moves along nicely and a very powerful morality act. That ending is genius.

Teenage lack of remorse scene by scene

[PipAndSqueak · 6/10 · 12 January 2013]

It is hard to like this film to begin with - populated as it is by barely grunting hormone fuelled teenagers. Scriptless, it is dependent upon standard Irish bonhomie to convey the 'closeness' of the characters. The Irish are word-smiths to a one - how on earth did this production manage to emasculate their speech? Come on, English subtitles would have been preferable to this - let's just hug one another instead of exchanging words, poetic phrases etc. After rather too long we then learn that we have a love triangle. We have a character who wants the world to be exactly as he plans it. We have a character who can't make up her mind. We have a character who knows his mind and is being foiled by those who don't. We then witness what happens when alcohol is added to the mix. We then see how each character dissembles embroiling others in their deceits. Suddenly, this sleeper of a film packs a volley of knock-out punches. Hell, this story has got legs after all.

a look into how a single mistake can change our lives forever

[thealefmagnus · 7/10 · 19 September 2013]

Hailed as the most important Irish film of the century, I had high expectations before seeing this flick. I knew nothing of the plot except from the title. This Richard guy did something and I aim to find out what it is.

First, who is Richard? Richard Karlsen is the town's golden-boy rugby player. Charismatic, friendly, and at the top of his game, Richard is on his way to success as most people would assume once he leaves highschool for university. It was a typical summertime transition for the seniors and Richard is making sure he is having the time of his life. Coming from an upper middle class family, Richard is not at all what you expect from kids having lived under this environment. He wasn't stereotypically the spoiled kid living off of his parent's beach house. Although he is fun loving just like most people his age, he wasn't portrayed as the evil rich dude of the story. In fact, he's just another regular kid of the block who'll soon leave for university. All is going well one summer until this mistake.

So, what did Richard do? As the screenplay is loosely based on the novel Bad Day in Black Rock, the story revolves around an assault that led to the death of a teen. The first half of the film shows Richard and his friends simply hanging out and meeting new people. At this point, Richard meets Lara who is still involved with her ex Connor. While Richard successfully charms Lara into a relationship, it is still evident how she maintains close contact with her ex. This spells trouble as our lead slowly shows us his insecurity and jealousy despite having his social status. During a drunken brawl, the unexpected happened and now Richard has to face this sudden flip in his life.

The film portrays how an incidence of uncontrolled anger suddenly changes you into a person you never thought you would be and its repercussions. While it was an accident, Richard knows for himself that he is the cause and now he has to face life with guilt. The second half of the film shows how the simple incident has changed the lives of all the characters in the community. It also puts focus on how the lead copes with this event.

So, how did what Richard do affect people's lives? While the event brought out the worst in him, it certainly brought more pain on people around him.

The best thing I loved about the treatment of the flick is the use of silence. It gave way for the actors to express their emotions through actions and subtle changes in their gestures. This is where Jack Reynor excelled in. While many may complain about how the story never got the resolution most people would expect from it, it shows how the experience changed Richard's life. And I think, that's enough to show how we do not really live in a just world. Great work from director Lenny Abrahamson in using tight shots to focus on the character's emotions.

What Richard Did is an exploration of character enclosed within a tight knit community and a look into how a single mistake can change our lives forever.

writelikesundance.wordpress.com

An authentic tale wonderfully acted by its young star

[eddie_baggins · 7/10 · 20 April 2014]

An understated, meticulously made Irish film, What Richard Did is a haunting tale that is in its structure too cold for its own good but also in scenes that can only be provided as gut wrenchingly raw impressively effective and a showcase for the young acting talent that is Jack Reynor.

A major hit in its home country upon release and later on in its life cleaning up at the 2013 Irish Film and Television Awards with 5 big wins, Lenny Abrahamson's (keep an eye on this filmmaker with his upcoming film Frank creating some very decent hype) film is a unique and realistic look into a young life that will forever be changed due to the films centring act that is based upon an all too familiar true life event. The film asks a lot of its audience in its short 80 minute run time as director Lenny Abrahamson is in no hurry to tell the tale of Richard. The film doesn't adhere to normal narrative structure and we don't know a whole lot about who Richard or others in the film are yet what we do end up knowing about them is just enough to care and be affected by their situations that play out in such a realism that it would be impossible not to be moved by the occurrences. Abrahamson can take credit for this but major notices must be made of the films young star Reynor as the titular Richard.

Reynor's performance in What Richard Did was enough to not only earn him praise in his home country but subsequent to the success of this venture Reynor moved straight into big screen behemoth Transformers: Age of Extinction and will likely be seen in more of the same to come. Reynor is a revelation here as the smart, in love and eventually tortured young man displaying a wide range of acting attributes that suggest a long career is to follow. A scene towards the later part of the film at Richard's family's beach house is particularly impressive with Reynor expressing a burst of internal emotion that will leave you feeling just as shell-shocked as the young man is.

Professionally filmed, scored to perfection and acted with class from all involved What Richard Did is a fine film that is held back its sparseness at times and a conclusion that feels like a missed opportunity to provide something truly heart wrenching. For a film about youth and all the troubles that can come with it and a tale about life changing decisions it is top quality stuff and it's always a joy to see a new young actor of considerable talent ply their trade and set their career on a path that hopefully makes good use of some undeniable talent.

3 and a half Irish beers out of 5

For more movie reviews and opinions check out -

www.jordanandeddie.wordpress.com

Crime and Punishment

[Prismark10 · 5/10 · 13 April 2019]

What Richard Did is an uneven drama from Lenny Abrahamson. It does have a natural acting style which also renders it flat.

Teenager Richard (Jack Reynor) has a bright future ahead of him. Handsome, bright, well to do and he has a good bunch of friends. He likes to play rugby and is soon to start university.

At a party Richard gets into a fight with his girlfriend's ex. Conor (Sam Keeley) ends up dead the next day. Richard's friends threw a few punches but it seems Richard delivered the fatal kick. They all decide to keep shtum.

Richard suffers from a moral crisis. He confides in his father. The issue for Richard is that as he is not suspected by the police, does he hand himself in or sidestep justice altogether?

There are some interesting scenes. When Richard confesses to his father. When Conor's distressed mother makes an impassioned speech at his funeral service, incredulous as to how there were no witnesses in a house party.

However the film needed more dramatic tension. It is a slight morality tale that is well acted by its young cast.

Set to become a topic of considerable debate for generations to come

[user-497-290446 · 9/10 · 9 October 2012]

Lenny Abrahamsons nonpartisan observation of the labyrinth of teens with 'the world at feet - head in clouds' fragility, and naïve expectation for success, reflects a generation of (seldom seen outside of caricature) Irish youth during the Celtic Tiger era, whose cotton wool wrappings come unraveled as a consequence of one single act of savage brutality, albeit something brewed and simmering from early in the plot.

The feeling that you are engaged directly with the cast as a silent participant is audible in the atmosphere of the auditorium. The subtle threat of the 'something sinister' draws you to observe, with diligent attention, as the characters are pieced carefully around you and their reactions become internalized, while you yourself will be increasingly disturbed by the 'what if that were me?' that stares out of the screen at you.

These young actors give themselves unreservedly to the film in a way that draws you into the fringes of their circle and their world. They are giving you their time, enabled by tender direction, and you are captivated by their exuberance.

Worth watching too for the portrayal of some of Dublins leafy suburbs in a most charming light, and for the poignancy with which the musical score draws the emotions out of the flatness of the screen and plants them into your heart.

A masterful piece of collective art forms from the first frame to the abrupt credit roll which leaves the Audience silent and unsettled. One for parents…. and then to pay for your kids to go and see. Certain to illicit some significant family and peer group discussion. Well worth your time.

Asks questions of the viewer

[paudie · 7/10 · 2 January 2013]

This movie is a slow moving drama that puts its "hero" in a horrific moral dilemma of his own making and examines his actions. I found it impossible not to wonder what I would do if I was in a similar position, which I presume is what the director wanted.

The main character, Richard, seems to have it all. He is a young man from a privileged Dublin background who has just finished secondary school. He was captain of the school rugby team and is universally liked by everyone. He seems set for an enjoyable summer before he starts university. At a party he meets the girlfriend of a teammate. He "fancies" her and after a while they start going out.

At a later party Richard and the ex-boyfriend exchange harsh words and things soon get out of hand and the ex-boyfriend dies. The authorities don't know who is responsible. Richard has to decide what he will do. We watch him wrestle with the dilemma of giving up his rosy future by admitting the truth or doing nothing and hoping it will all fade away.

There are great performances all round from the cast, especially Jack Reynor in the lead role. Lenny Abrahamson is one of the great Irish directors with movies such as "Garage" and "Adam and Paul" and this movie is up to that high standard.

Intriguing theme terribly wasted. Missed all potential opportunities for interesting dramatic developments

[JvH48 · 3/10 · 17 October 2013]

I saw this film at the Ghent (Belgium) film festival 2013, where it was part of the Global Cinema section. The descriptions on festival website, Facebook and IMDb sounded intriguing. But I can tell upfront that it was a disappointment, after all. The movie starts wrong, letting us endure half an hour of tittle-tattle, partying etcetera, which time could have been spent more fruitfully. It was probably meant to gradually introduce the characters involved. It did not work for me. I got lost in the process to remember who would become important for the plot, and who was just entourage. After that, there were a few potentially memorable moments, but the film makers missed all the opportunities without exception.

Some examples of what I found wrong:

Firstly, the mother of the victim held an impressive and moving speech in church during the memorial service. This could have been the trigger for interesting developments, but it was not. It should have been placed much sooner in the script anyway, and could have been the perfect point where people start fighting with their conscience, and contemplating arguments pro and con, so that we can feel along with their reasoning.

Secondly, the conversation with his father where Richard finally confesses what has happened, is also poorly written and executed. The intro about the tree house is negligent and a waste of time. It is still not clear to me how and why Richard decided to confess, being visibly hesitant at first. He evenly could have chosen to lie to his father and deny every involvement.

Thirdly, several friends of Richard knew more or less what happened, and one of them could have leaked the truth by accident (to police, to parents, to other friends, whatever). Conversely, they all saw the victim standing up again after the confrontation, but wasted that observation to defend themselves to everyone why they did not make an issue out of the fight and check the victim's condition, or even call anonymously for an ambulance.

Finally, the police investigation falters for reasons unclear to us. This could have been exploited much better while Richard's friends knew more of the fatal accident than they told the police. This could have been excellent material for a so-called prisoner's dilemma. Alas, the police was not that competent in the case at hand, and this opportunity also got wasted.

At first sight it does not seem useful to add my user review to the many that already appear on IMDb, given already a few as negative as I am. On the other hand, their negativism has many other reasons than I had, so the above may be useful for some readers anyway. This film received a lowly 50th place for the audience award, with score 3.64 out of 5.

Morally complex Irish drama with a fantastic central performance.

[urbanlegend23 · 8/10 · 4 August 2013]

"What Richard Did", which I saw as part of the New Zealand International Film Festival, is a low-key but very powerful and morally complex film.

It features an excellent performance from newcomer Jack Reynor. While his titular character is obviously charismatic and charming throughout, Reynor's performance explores the depth of the character, particularly his restrained rage. There's a scene near the end of the film where he breaks down alone in his family's beach house, and it's truly heartbreaking and memorable. You really feel for the character's plight throughout the movie.

My only real complaint would be, by contrast, the performance of Lars Mikkelsen. He's not a good crier at all and one key scene in the film almost had me laughing because of his acting. A small flaw in an otherwise highly recommended movie.

What Richard didn't do.....

[FlashCallahan · 7/10 · 5 December 2013]

Richard Karlsen is the golden-boy athlete and alpha-male of his set of South Dublin friends.

The summer between the end of school and the beginning of university is here, and the world is bright and everything seems possible.

That is until one summer night, Richard does something that destroys it all and shatters the lives of the people closest to him.....

Its a really difficult film to watch, it hangs a low mood from the offset, and just gets more and more maundering as the film reaches its climax.

But the subject matter is powerful, and the performances are brilliant, especially the lead. The split decision to kick a man in the head, will haunt the titular character forever.

The guilt will stay with him, and his family, but the fundamental thing about the act is the cowardice that was involved, giving a while new meaning to the phrase 'kick a man while he's down'.

So there's the added frustration of him doing it out of spite, and the character will always have that, 'what if I'd just walked away?'.

There are so many what ifs? In this movie, that it can get bogged down in its own preaching, but other than that, its a solid movie.

Pretentious and unstructured

[Tyndareon · 3/10 · 7 May 2013]

There is nothing really redeeming in this surprisingly disappointing endeavour. The viewer is subjected to 88 minutes of terrible acting, unimaginative dialogue and inadequate cinematography. One might just say it was a decent enough if a bit amateurish work and leave it at that, but if we are debating whether this is the best Irish movie of the century..well that would really be just sad for Irish cinema.

So without revealing any key elements of the (nonexistent) plot, one could point out that achieving absolutely no character depth in a movie that its pace would suggest it pursues nothing else but character development is an achievement in its own right.

Add to that the development of a romantic relationship with no use of meaningful dialogue -because that might have served as indicant of personality particularities and as I said there is no reason to think one character is different from any other here- and no intensity of feeling portrayed, yet a relationship that will supposedly prove to hold great significance in the unfolding events.

Then there is the unfolding. The director manages to downplay the only event of significance in the movie. It is deliberate but wrong because it wastes the lulling first half and creates the demand for a powerful emotional buildup which needless to say, the lead actor fails to deliver. There this movie dies.

What follows is another lulling part, laden as the first with youthful frivolity and promiscuity, which one could claim if juxtaposed with the first and presented as tasteless and lacking, might help this movie prove it had reason to exist. Obviously that opportunity passes by unseen too.

Now those who have surmised that this is a work of art and originality I urge to watch Paranoid Park or even Elephant and see the difference between true mastery and sad imitation.