Featured Audience Ratings

• Anthony L

  
  Red Riding - 1980 is a case of same characters different story. This time it is the Yorkshire Ripper that the Police are after, headed by the brilliant Paddy Considine and supported brilliantly by Tony Pitts who I think is under-sung in the series. The cast is great, aside from… More
  Red Riding - 1980 is a case of same characters different story. This time it is the Yorkshire Ripper that the Police are after, headed by the brilliant Paddy Considine and supported brilliantly by Tony Pitts who I think is under-sung in the series. The cast is great, aside from Considine though it is Sean Harris who steals the show as the terrifying Bob Craven, 100 times scarier than Peter Sutcliffe is portrayed. It is similar but also very different in its pace and tone compared to 1974 which I think was very well realised. It still looks great but it works as a stand alone film in its own right. This is a not to be missed trilogy.

• KJ P

  
  For the first half of the film, it feels like a mediocre movie that has not much to do with it's predecessor, but just there to continue the story and find the killer. We are thrown into an entirely new story with new characters and plot lines, but it is far less interesting than… More
  For the first half of the film, it feels like a mediocre movie that has not much to do with it's predecessor, but just there to continue the story and find the killer. We are thrown into an entirely new story with new characters and plot lines, but it is far less interesting than the first. The mentioning of past characters is really the only thing that kept me going until the second half when things start intertwining. The whole film makes you wonder what is going on, until the very last moments of the film where it all comes together and you see why it is a sequel/continuation. Andrew Garfield only makes a cameo in this film, but it has the most meaning out of anything else seen in the film. I thought the first film was great, so I found it very hard to put this film on the same level, but once the end of the film comes full circle, you see why you watched it, and it's worth it!

• Michael S

  
  Part two of the "RED RIDING TRILOGY," 1980 is a far superior film to the already strong first chapter. Unlike it's predecessor, James Marsh's episode takes a stream-lined, focused approach towards it's narrative and the result is an infinitely more chilling… More
  Part two of the "RED RIDING TRILOGY," 1980 is a far superior film to the already strong first chapter. Unlike it's predecessor, James Marsh's episode takes a stream-lined, focused approach towards it's narrative and the result is an infinitely more chilling and effective work. Playing like a classic detective noir, the film does a phenomenal job of bringing you in and smothering you with it's dark, dank atmosphere. Paddy Considine, the anchor of the film, is outstanding. You really feel for him and grow increasingly more nervous as he slowly gets in over his head. The film is a slow-burn, but one that never settles on being less than gripping. "1980" is a great film in its own right. If it didn't address details and clear up some of the plot of the first film, it would almost work as a complete standalone. It`s a movie so good, that it made me like the first part even more. Also, I've never been more sickened by law enforcement corruption than in this film. A bold statement, but one that is truthful and a testament to the film`s eerie, stomach-churning effectiveness.

• Lady D

  
  Another brilliant British cast for the 2nd installment of the Red Riding trilogy, with my personal favourite of course, Paddy Considine. I do feel on this one, that the acting was far superior to the actual plot at times and whilst I was expecting more in depth investigation to the… More
  Another brilliant British cast for the 2nd installment of the Red Riding trilogy, with my personal favourite of course, Paddy Considine. I do feel on this one, that the acting was far superior to the actual plot at times and whilst I was expecting more in depth investigation to the Yorkshire Ripper, what was delivered was the background of the investigation along with a personal sub plot to the investigators, still a great watch though.

• Bruce B

  
  The second in the Red Riding Trilogy, And this movie is as intense as the first one. Police Corruption has run wild and as a detective is getting closer his life becomes mre in danger. 5 Stars

• El Hombre I

  
  These are not easy films to sit through, but it's hard to imagine to imagine seeing the first two films and not going back to see how it wraps up. The film could be watched and enjoyed apart from the other two. It's a good film on its own, but suffers a little with the… More
  These are not easy films to sit through, but it's hard to imagine to imagine seeing the first two films and not going back to see how it wraps up. The film could be watched and enjoyed apart from the other two. It's a good film on its own, but suffers a little with the lagging personal human drama as a second act of 3 films. The cinematography is loads better than the claustrophobic 1974 entry. <a href="http://s273.photobucket.com/albums/jj203/goji9000/?action=view&amp;current=red_riding_trilogy_1980.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj203/goji9000/red_riding_trilogy_1980.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

• Cynthia S

  
  I tried the second part of this trilogy hoping that I would like it better. I did a little, but a very little. I didn't even bother with the third one.

• ♥˩ƳИИ &

  
  Cast: Warren Clarke, Paddy Considine, James Fox, David Calder, Nicholas Woodeson, Ron Cook, Maxine Peake, Tony Pitts, Jim Carter Director: James Marsh Summary: After six years of vicious unsolved murders, Manchester policeman Peter Hunter (Paddy Considine) arrives in West… More
  Cast: Warren Clarke, Paddy Considine, James Fox, David Calder, Nicholas Woodeson, Ron Cook, Maxine Peake, Tony Pitts, Jim Carter Director: James Marsh Summary: After six years of vicious unsolved murders, Manchester policeman Peter Hunter (Paddy Considine) arrives in West Yorkshire to supervise the Yorkshire Ripper investigation, along with a copycat killer case, in this second installment of the Red Riding trilogy. Meanwhile, he must also deal with local police corruption and his struggle to remain faithful to his wife while working closely with his ex, fellow investigator Helen Marshall (Maxine Peake). My Thoughts: "An intriguing second installment to the trilogy. It is more of a sleeper compared to the first film. Reasons why I say that are, it's slowness, and that it does't have any action. It played out more like an unsolved mystery film, which worked. It gives the audience a look inside the Yorkshire PD, showing you might want to be more scared of the Yorkshire police then "The Ripper". Interesting, but not as good as the first. All the acting, as well in the first installment, is great. Also like the first film, the ending leaves you wondering what will happen next, which leaves you wanting to see the last installment."

• Stella D

  
  strong stuff and grim. by 1980 the yorkshire ripper has claimed at least a dozen victims. with paddy considine now heading up the case as an outside investigator, the murders are just a backdrop to the massive corruption of the west yorkshire police, who seem no better than the… More
  strong stuff and grim. by 1980 the yorkshire ripper has claimed at least a dozen victims. with paddy considine now heading up the case as an outside investigator, the murders are just a backdrop to the massive corruption of the west yorkshire police, who seem no better than the criminals they hunt

• Aaron N

  
  Peter Hunter: You don't like the police much, do you? Martin Laws: No love lost, no. Peter Hunter: So when someone kicks down your front door, kills the dog and rapes the wife, who you gonna call? Martin Laws: Well it certainly wouldn't be the West Yorkshire Police -… More
  Peter Hunter: You don't like the police much, do you? Martin Laws: No love lost, no. Peter Hunter: So when someone kicks down your front door, kills the dog and rapes the wife, who you gonna call? Martin Laws: Well it certainly wouldn't be the West Yorkshire Police - they'd already *be* in there, wouldn't they! A trilogy of films set against a backdrop of serial murders, including the Yorkshire Ripper case. While they are each standalone films, handled by different directors, they share the same setting and feature some of the same characters and themes throughout. I could review each of these films separately, but this film project was ambitious enough to warrant my viewing of them in quick succession of each other, and in doing so I feel that it would be best to sum up my thoughts in one review. The films are set in 1973, 1980, and 1983. The first film features Andrew Garfield (future Spider-Man) as a journalist looking into the unsolved murders of several young girls. During his investigation he makes encounters with the mother of one of the victims (Rebecca Hall) and a corrupt businessman (Sean Bean). In 1980, Paddy Considine stars as a police officer brought in to investigate the Ripper murders. In this film, the focus moves towards corruption from within the police department. The final film focuses on the redemption of some of the characters and wraps up many of the running plot lines. It also features Mark Addy as a public solicitor looking into the past abductions. This final film relies the most on the previous films, utilizing many flashbacks, but still functions as a solid standalone feature. John Dawson: Fucking A. I'm no angel. The three films were directed by Anand Tucker, James Marsh and Julian Jarrold. Each of them have distinct visual styles for their films, which is fitting with the time frame that these films are set, as the quality becomes better and better. 1973 is filmed with 16mm film, giving it the grittiest feel of the three, while 1983 was filmed with the Red Camera, making it the cleanest. This approach again adds to keeping these films separate as features, while feeling appropriate to their tone. This trilogy as been frequently compared to David Fincher's Zodiac, which is apt. Both these films and that one are sprawling crime sagas that maintain a dark tone throughout and feature many characters and plot lines. While Zodiac is the better feature, this trilogy sure does manage to ring very true in the same ways, by featuring a solid set of stories, focused more on what the events cost these characters in their own lives and the procedural elements surrounding their stories. Certainly aiding these films are its performances. Garfield does a solid job, even if much of his job requires having his ass kicked for probing to deep. Bean is at his sleazy best. Rebecca Hall does quite well in one of the smaller roles, as does Peter Mullan (an actor I admire). David Morrissey does a fine job, being the one actor to have a fairly important role in all three features. In terms of ranking these films, I am actually having a fairly indifferent feeling towards which one is the best, but if I had to choose, I would say the second feature, 1980, is the best conceived. 1974 certainly relishes the most in it's style and 1983 is about concluding the series, but 80 seems to be the one I would come back to most easily. The dark tone of these features can certainly hold one back from getting the most out of them. It takes a bit of time to really embrace what is going on, and the thick Yorkshire accents certainly didn't an American like me get deeper involved at a quicker point. This is certainly a series I have high praise for. It was an ambitious project that certainly paid off. A unique film series that benefited from the approach to its scope. BJ: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. All good children go to heaven.

• familiar s

  
  Okay, so even after having been disappointed by the first part, I couldn't resist the temptation for going for this one. And I'm glad that I did. This was way better & intriguing than the first one. The credits roll with some clips taken from real life, giving it an… More
  Okay, so even after having been disappointed by the first part, I couldn't resist the temptation for going for this one. And I'm glad that I did. This was way better & intriguing than the first one. The credits roll with some clips taken from real life, giving it an authentic touch. Even after the credits, it starts off interestingly. But I was skeptic since the first part too began well enough, only to turn out to be a big time disappointment later. Thankfully, that wasn't the case here. It maintains the thrill & holds its grip for most of the part. Not that it's flawless, though. To point out a few: Once again, there's a romantic track, sans excessive sex scenes, forced in. I thought that the makers wouldn't repeat the mistake. Wish they'd realized that such things don't always add to the dramatic effect of the movie, but instead sucks the life out of it & make the proceedings a drag. After a point, the movie does become kind of run-of-the-mill thrillers, but that was fine with me. Anything as long as it doesn't get as boring as its prequel. And then there's the predictable ending, once again with......... sorry, no spoilers this time around. I wonder what's in store in the third & final instalment, for one of the main crimes is solved here. I guess it deals with pulling off the the mask of the corrupt officers. Gotta check it out. The passable quality of this part has encouraged me enough to go on a ride for the final one. Hope I won't be taken in for a ride :P 6.5/10. Way above my expectations.

• Luke B

  
  Considine takes the lead in this sequel set 6 years later. In this time the notoriety of the Yorkshire Ripper has escalated into an out of control media circus. Considine leads a "super squad" of cops to start the investigation from scratch. Unfortunately he gets a lot more… More
  Considine takes the lead in this sequel set 6 years later. In this time the notoriety of the Yorkshire Ripper has escalated into an out of control media circus. Considine leads a "super squad" of cops to start the investigation from scratch. Unfortunately he gets a lot more than he bargained for when he begins to question one of the victims attributed to the Yorkshire Ripper. Once again dealing with similar themes and a similar character, just replacing idealistic journalist with idealistic cop, this ran the risk of feeling a bit samey. Luckily the direction and performances are all different, as is the general aesthetic. Once again it's a dark and powerful drama that shows what can be done with talent, time and money.

• Walter M

  
  It is 1980. The Yorkshire Ripper has killed twelve women, making the police look incompetent. To make matters worse for them, DCS Bill Molloy(Warren Clarke) commits an unforgivable public relations gaffe and is removed from the investigation. This gives the higher ups cause to… More
  It is 1980. The Yorkshire Ripper has killed twelve women, making the police look incompetent. To make matters worse for them, DCS Bill Molloy(Warren Clarke) commits an unforgivable public relations gaffe and is removed from the investigation. This gives the higher ups cause to bring in a fresh eye to review the case in the person of Peter Hunter(Paddy Considine) from Manchester. He had previously been in Leeds some years previously investigating a mass murder but had to leave when his wife(Lesley Sharp) had a miscarriage. This time around, he has help from detectives John Nolan(Tony Pitts) and Helen Marshall(Maxine Peake) which complicates matters since Helen and Peter had an affair at one point. Regardless, the team discovers inconsistencies in the murder of Claire Strachan, one of the Ripper's victims. "Red Riding 1980" is an engaging mystery, even if strains are starting to show in the series at this point, as the continuity starts to overwhelm things. Like the previous installment, this is a also a character study with Paddy Considine giving another excellent performance, playing a flawed character who believes the system can be changed from within. One of the challenges these characters face is misogyny. It goes without saying that the Ripper hates women. Probably, so do most of the police, along with their everyday brutality. Peter is a definite exception to this. Yes, it is awkward for him to have Helen on the case but he probably recognizes that she is very good at her job and treats her no differently than Nolan, at a time when it was rare for a woman to be a police detective in England.

• Alec B

  
  I think that this one is the real heart of the trilogy. Most critics accuse it of being the "weak link" in the series but I completely disagree. Its really about the utter hopelessness of doing the right thing against all odds. In the end no one really triumphs over evil.… More
  I think that this one is the real heart of the trilogy. Most critics accuse it of being the "weak link" in the series but I completely disagree. Its really about the utter hopelessness of doing the right thing against all odds. In the end no one really triumphs over evil. Good fails miserably here, even the arrest of the "Yorkshire Ripper" is viewed as a worthless accomplishment in the light of frightening police corruption that surrounds it.

• Stephen E

  
  "Red Riding: 1980" is more focused than its predecessor, largely in part due to superior direction and outstanding cinematography. Paddy Considine turns in a solid performance, which is masterful in its own way. Overall, the film isn't has haunting as the one that came… More
  "Red Riding: 1980" is more focused than its predecessor, largely in part due to superior direction and outstanding cinematography. Paddy Considine turns in a solid performance, which is masterful in its own way. Overall, the film isn't has haunting as the one that came before it, but it's much more riveting.

Read all 15 featured audience ratings