To me, this movie is perfection.

Pretty Good

Just perfect...

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

'The Scouting Book for Boys' tells the story of a teenage boy who helps a girl he fancies run away from home. Ultimately, the unidirectionality of that relationship is to have dire consequences. In many ways, it reminded me of the sort of novels I used to write: the problem is, my novels weren't very good. So you have a naive protagonist; conflicts of interest at first hidden or ignored, later painfully apparent; stylised minor characters who ultimately seem more like the embodiment of ideas rather than real flesh and blood; and a plot that makes sense in outline but doesn't quite hold up in practice, in part because the protagonists seem to be stretched to fulfil its demands, instead of the story feeling like the entirely natural consequence of who the protagonists are. The film is set in north Norfolk: an attractive coast, but I didn't get a profound sense of place from how this movie is shot. The reliably excellent Thomas Turgoose does what he can with the material, but is limited by the lack of depth in the story. In fact, this isn't an awful movie; but it feels like a first time effort, and less than the potential sum of its parts.

Film4 have been showing " The British Connection " which is a euphemistic title for British made film productions devoid of American funding . While this might be well and good to a degree what it does is show up the fault of British film making:producing films that are unable to shake off the feeling that they're television productions rather cinematic ones and sharing the same visual style THE SCOUTING BOOK FOR BOYS is a case in point . This was shown immediately after Shane Meadow's ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE MIDLANDS and you'd be forgiven for thinking both films share the same director . Much of this is down to the cinematography where everything is brightly lit the colour yellow is rather prominent . In fact many of the films being shown such as LAYER CAKE and KILL LIST also have this visual look ( Though Matthew Vaughn style did make LAYER CAKE cinematic ) which led me to believe the same cinematographer was responsible for all the movies featured. I was shocked to learn this was not the case There's also a similar type of feel to the narrative . It's poignant , bitter-sweet and not entirely plausible . At the risk of sounding repetitive while reviewing these type of Brit flicks I was reminded of these PLAY FOR TODAY that were getting broadcast on a weekly basis by the BBC in the 1970s . Unsurprisingly both the director and screenwriter have a background in television In that case I won't be too critical because there does seem to be an element of the film being produced as a cinematic calling card by the director and obviously the budget is always going to be a worry in this type of production . That said there needs to be something stronger in order to grab the audience having a conveyor belt of British movies being broadcast on a channel means any viewer with a brain will quickly notice how similar contemporary films from this country are

So who was she, the girl you desperately tried to convince yourself was more like the sister you never had? The one who locked you in the toy box of her heart like some dependable old teddy with a glassy stare and a permanently knitted frown, as she parcelled out her favours in front of you? For David (Thomas Turgoose), being that "brotherly" best friend to Emily (Holly Grainger), a girl he's known all his life, just won't cut it anymore. Focusing on adolescent urges turned jealous, possessive and cancerous, The Scouting Book For Boys describes a day-glo dream plummeting into nightmare.As it opens, the teenage pals are depicted at their Norfolk coastal resort leaping between rows of caravan roofs at sunset: a gorgeously photographed shot perfectly encapsulating the giddy rush and risks of youth. For now, everything is ice creams and waterslides, sunshine and sherbet. There's even that Noah and the frickin' Whale hit on the soundtrack, and you can't get sunnier than that. Then things start turning crap: when an unwilling Emily is packed off to live with her divorcée dad, David helps her hide out in a cave on the beach. ('How to hide yourself' being a section in Baden-Powell's near-eponymous handbook.) But Emily's motives for lying low are more complicated than David imagines. And when the truth is uncovered, the film takes a lurching left turn into Hell-by-the-Sea.Director Tom Harper and writer Jack Thorne (Skins) have both dealt with wayward adolescence before, and have proved extremely skilled at getting inside those scheming little brains. If the film's adult characters behave like dangerously overgrown children, the kids think they're grown-ups way before their time. Wearing an expression like a bruised knee, Turgoose continues to build on a diminutive but hugely impressive CV; while Grainger, playing slightly younger than her actual age, and sharing superb chemistry with her co-star, is just brilliant: equal parts girlish, manipulative and naïve. Like its protagonists, this is capricious, nuanced drama; just when you think you've a handle on it, it twists out of reach like a flipping fish. Catch it.

Nicely shot. Very well acted by the two young leads. Apart from that? British indie-lite. Every five minutes the action stops so we can have another artfully-done montage set to the music of some no-doubt achingly-hip acoustic singer-songwriter. This is called "padding". The actual story is, frankly, cretinous. Girl goes and hides in a cave on the Norfolk coast. Her best mate takes her crisps and bin-liners (he's read about the beneficial, warming qualities of the latter in - wait for it - the "Scouting Book for Boys"). Comedy policeman (the terminally miscast Stephen Mackintosh) and comedy parents and comedy friends (a pathetic gallery of over-the-top grotesques with not a single amusing line of dialogue between them) never realise that the best way to find the girl would be to follow her best mate, who goes and sees her several times. It never occurs to them. Why not? The only conclusions we can reach are, either: all these people are utterly stupid, or: the makers of this film think we, the audience, are utterly stupid. Great. Thanks for that. SPOILERS BELOW... And all that the vile act of violence at the end proves is that the film-makers have no idea how to end this hopeless little film and think that showing a young boy smashing a young girl's leg with a rock (and later kissing her dead, vomit-encrusted mouth) is enough to "shock" us and make us think - wow, what a great work of art. No. This is not a great work of art. It wears its influence on its sleeve (Shane Meadows, Shane Meadows and, um, Shane Meadows) but it doesn't earn its heavyweight finale. Instead it is badly written, insipid, full of utterly unrealistic events and motivation (why on earth does that woman in the pool suggest the boy hold her baby; why are the forensic team combing a crime scene while the main suspect sits there in the middle of it?) and loose ends and trite dialogue and banal scenes that serve no purpose (the dire bit in the club, with his dad dragging him on stage, for example). I'm all for supporting new talent and British films and blah blah blah, but, really, someone out there (apart from Shane Meadows) must be able to do better than this.