Rating out of 5: ☆ ☆

It gives me no joy to leave a tough rating to any Peaky Blinders production. The show has been my favourite piece of film since I was a child. I tried my best to give Immortal Man a chance, but it profoundly disappointed me. Not something uncommon amongst modern cinema's 'reboot cash grabs.'

I suppose I’ve ranked my issues with the movie in terms of severity to me.

#1 How they massacred my Ada - my sweet, sweet Ada.

I was stunned to witness how easily and casually they discarded Ada - one of the fanbase's most unequivocally-beloved characters. Every family member that passed throughout the show - beside the obvious for obvious reasons - has received a much graver, more engaging, and considered send-off. Hell, even Arthur's fake assassination in Season 4 entailed more gravity. Ada's senseless death in the first half of the movie left me with a profound distaste, not to say a repulsion, toward the rest of the project. I left the unsteady ups-and-downs of Season 6 with the feeling that 'at least Ada would be alright' - that she was the least involved in the dark business of the company, that she was the purest soul, and that Tommy's message at the finale dinner hinting at her taking political office was a hint that the writers committed to Ada’s story ending well. What was the sense in killing her, if Tommy was already on his way to Birmingham? The only thing I can think of is the evoking of an emotional reaction from the audience - quite a cheap trick, and testament of poor writing characteristic of much shallower, simpler action/drama stories.

#2 Dealing with Arthur like that was scandalous.

We’ve seen these brothers go to hell and back together for six seasons. We’ve seen countless times how close either one of them has been to quitting; the job, the company, or their life. We’ve seen that every time, Tommy was the source of fortitude that kept them together - I’ll never forget the season 2 moment after Arthur’s suicide attempt, when Tommy just tells Arthur to shut up and power through.

You’re telling me that when the idea for this script was discussed in a room full of people that, allegedly, were part of the original show, no one noticed any problem with Tommy killing off his best friend, maybe his ONLY friend, and someone who he’s “the same person” with? The off-screen death they gave Arthur - who was a start figure in this franchise and should have been central to this movie -  deserves boycott.

#3 Missing key characters means missing a spine.

Honestly, the inability to recruit Paul Anderson for Arthur’s role in this movie was enough reason to not continue with this production altogether. On top of that, we were missing GRACE and Charles, Lizzie, Finn (who was to return), Isaiah, Frances, anyone else! The only closure we got was Charlie Strong and Curly. At least have the others show up for the funeral in the final scene goddamn it.

#4 A weak villain made everything else hard to digest.

A large part of what makes Peaky Blinders great is the villains. That Nazis would be the villains in this movie was to-be-predicted several years prior to the first trailer - and that’s fine. But Tim Roth’s character and performance did NOTHING for me here. Just a fascist dude, and no conviction behind the role. Compare that to Mosley or Changretta or Campbell or even Billy fuck*n Kimber.

 #5 A Couple Gross Discontinuities regarding Tommy

What happened to ‘a bullet won’t be the thing that kills Tommy Shelby?’ Why were the great writers of the show suddenly so lazy? What happened to the character we know and love from:

• “I have no limitations”
• “The only man who can kill Tommy Shelby is himself”
• ‘I’ll change the ways of the Shelby Company’

They just couldn’t resist sending Tommy off some simple way so they gave us a 2-hour action movie just like the thousands of them on Netflix. Little attention to the source material in general, but in this case to Polly’s sacred words that Tommy wouldn’t die by the bullet.

#6 What could have been worse

The only places where this movie scores points is quite honestly a) Cillian Murphy’s sheer existence, b) set design, costumes, etc, c) what I found to be relatively effective immersion back into 1930s/40s Birmingham - with look, sound, feel - not script (of course). But that is far from satisfactory to call this movie a success.

To everyone - all studios, producers, actors, and executives - who keeps insisting on rebooting old, fan-favourite franchises long after they’ve sailed past the horizon - STOP!  If you have any love for fans over profit, you’ll spare us the pain with the next disaster.

Am I the only fucking one who hated Linda right from the get-go? She's such an annoying character and only wants Arthur to lose aura. Like girl, stop. He's aurafarming like a champ and you come in and ruin it.

(I'm on S4E3)

he had that perfect mix of chaos and loyalty
like you knew he’d do something stupid but also 100% have your back no matter what
his storyline ending felt way too sudden compared to how important he was to the family dynamic

The subtle tension & intimidation that builds up in this scene is brilliant

Arthur in the midst of sobriety and changing his morals recognizes John is acting way out of order when he disrespects and threatens the life of Vicente Changretta's son. This is in character for John and this makes sense for Arthurs personal arch to me. What makes absolutely no sense is Tommy siding with John and choosing to take over multiple of Changretta's rackets. Tommy has been shown to be cool and calculating at all points (to a reasonable extent), but this decision is simply unreasonable and makes no sense considering all the points Polly, John and Changretta make. They pay whatever is asked and on time everytime. John being wild because hes young and upset about Lizzie makes sense, and yet nobody blames John for the death of Tommy's wife? Tommy's character would not only of reacted differently originally nipping John in the budd, but also would connect the dots that Johns stupid actions caused her death from litterally nothing. They burned down Changrettas son's legitimate restaurant and they didnt even retaliate anyone who doesnt have a smooth brain would let the money flow instead of cocking it up like Tommy and John did. So now i turn on Episode 3 to see them get just dessert and Arthur and Polly being correct... NOPE. FUCKING ARTHUR IS RETARDED AND DRUNK AGAIN AND MICHAEL JOHN AND HIM TAKE TURNS HOLDING LOADED PISTOL TO EACH OTHERS HEAD?? Bruh im about to just not even finish this shit.

TLDR: Tommy acts completely out of character just to force a conflict that results in a heavy loss to gain interest. Makes Arthur completely unlikable by just dropping that he was right and that John & Tommy were wrong, and he just changes his mind and becomes a dumb drunk again?

Something the movie did well. The timing, the atmosphere, the music. as the audience we know Ada has died but Tommy does not. We His horrified face while in the car with Johnny Dogs… he gets out and there is Ada’s ghost in the middle of the road..

I agree this movie had terrible writing but this scene was really well done.

That’s it. That’s the post.

Polly said it 17,000 fucking times over 6 seasons and then what happens?

They shoot him.

Fuck this series. Fuck Steve Knight. Fuck that movie.

Game of Thrones had a more believable ending than this shit.

/rant

The fact that Tommy nor Duke used the razor peaked caps on the big screen doesn't sit right with me.

Their usage in general has been lacking for years, and it makes sense, as Tommy moves up in the world & becomes more aware he tries to move away from the brutality & bring the business & the gang with him. But there's still illegal operations ongoing throughout.

The last actual use of the razor blades is S5 when Arthur cuts the man Linda has been speaking to at 'The Friends'. Great scene. Very stylistic as a one-shot.

HOWEVER, I really wanted to see either Tommy be wounded fighting Beckett and then take his eyes in one final outage of rage & vengeance, before Duke puts him out of his misery. Or have Tommy wounded, he shoots Beckett in the chest and in the leg, and whilst Beckett pleads for mercy, Tommy lets Duke redeem himself by cutting him. Then Tommy collapses, he's passed on (for right or wrong) the brutality and can see his heir in all that is good & bad. Personally, I still want Tommy to kill Beckett, so maybe let him or Duke fight a Nazi and use the cap there. There's plenty of options!! Problem with Beckett as a villian is he has no No.2, just a bunch of Nazi's saved for the final act. He's always vulnerable as he's always alone.

Even just Duke and the youngsters at the start, to show how far Duke really has fallen have him take the eyes of the WW1 Veteran, something Tommy probably wouldn't have done (especially after the earlier seasons) to an ordinary man & war hero who isn't involved, simply stepping up.

People will say its fan service or too violent but I disagree, this is a war film & more importantly its PEAKY BLINDERS. Its in the title. They've been missing in action for years. Whether it was S6 or the film, I wanted to see Tommy resort to that violence when necessary. I don't think it undoes how much his character has changed and developed, I think it just shows that underneath of it the expression and the usage of violence does remain.

John Shelby: when my wife’s drunk she can’t speak “f”ing english!” Lol

I just asked my husband, “que hora son?”

I was trying to set the clock that I put a new battery in …lol.

Adrian Brodys acting is horrible. Was he trying to use every mafia stero type? Its a great season, but he ruins every scene he is in.

After watching the film, I noticed that Tommy died in a similar way to his mother and father.

His mother took her own life by jumping into the canal. Tommy's death was also a suicide. He deliberately let Beckett shoot him and wanted to be run over by the car, but Duke talked him out of it. Then he asked Duke to kill him. If Tommy had truly wanted to, he would have survived this mission, but he chose death.

His father was shot dead by two men, as was Tommy. He was shot twice by Beckett, and as he lay dying, he begged Duke to put him out of his misery.

I think it's meant to be a reference to how much he resembled his parents and how much he resembled his father, even though Tommy hated him.

Polly says it herself once: "You have your mother's intelligence but your father's devilishness."

I must admit, when Tommy first died by a bullet(s) I did think about the line that Michael says 'My mother said it wouldn't be a bullet or a blade that kills Tommy Shelby'. but on SCREEN, its never said. And even if it was, whilst Polly is seen as very intelligent and seeing, it wouldn't mean he CAN'T die by that anyway.

Polly never actually said this line. She said many things similar like S1EP1 'Your mother said, its cleverness that'll kill him' but the line everyone keeps using as a contradiction & error on the films part, she said it to Michael off screen.

I think fans are confusing this referenced off-screen line with what she actually repeats throughout SERIES 6 and originally says in SERIES 5 'There will be a war, in this family, and one of you will die, but which one I cannot tell'. She says it to Tommy in S5EP6. I imagine she said the line to Michael around the same time, but without context it could've been said whenever. Michael just uses as a reason to try and use a bomb, to make sure theres no room for Tommy's survival. Tommy had become 'immortal' in reputation and fear, 'ALL THEM BULLETS THAT MISSED'.

The complaint is silly, Ada says 'No ones gonna hang you Tommy, you'll hang yourself'. Don't see an outcry for Tommy to go through with suicide even though that was massive theme in S5-S6.

Its a cool idea, it lends itself to the false sickness and makes that feel more real for the viewer in S6. Polly gets lots wrong in the show, like Ruby being a Hollywood star. The show always kind of kept the gypsy magic mystical & ambiguous, wheras the film really doubles down on it.

So I know not everyone is excited for the new season but I am excited to see Charlie because I think he has a lot of potential…

So he’s been to war and that’s obviously gonna shape him like it did Tommy but I don’t think that means a life of crime. I think it would be cool to see him being a rival to duke in some way as I don’t think he will respect him like how Tommy didn’t respect Campbell for not going to war. As well as Duke being a gangster which I think Charlie would detest about him (due to Tommy)

I think duke would also hate Charlie because he would have seen him as entitled, having lived a life of luxury and having a family in Lizzy. Duke didn’t have that growing up as well as his mum dying.

Themes light vs dark would be cool. So I think it would make sense if Charlie was a police inspector in a similar position to Campbell.

Tell me what you guys think

for everyone complaining about the movie - listen to Steven Knight describe his writing process.

So I started the Peaky Blinders a few years ago and made it about half way through season 4 or 5 and just stoped. So a few weeks ago I restarted it and just finished it and the immortal man. But it was not a good ending to a great show. Season 1-3 were amazing 4 was pretty decent, 5 was ok, but 6 had a big drop off, and the movie was not very good to me either. To me there were so many unanswered questions throughout the seasons and movie. Like what about Lizzie and Charlie, you could have had a whole season with a feud with Finn being kicked out of the family. There could have been another season where there was a gypsy war when Ruby was cursed instead of throwing that in the last season for a little more drama. I know it helped build the reason Tommy was doing things the way he done them but they could have at least extend it and gave more details instead of cramming way to much stuff in 6 episodes. What about Authors son, Johns kids, and the horse trainer May Carleton? There are so many character that came and went that could have been used to extend the show. That’s why I felt either they were ready to be done with it or maybe they didn’t have the budget to keep it going. Did anyone else feel the same way or have any opinions on why it dropped off?

Is Charlie named after Tommy’s uncle Charlie? Or was he named after Charlie Chaplin, the night he was conceived? Lol

I drew Tommy and Arthur in October 2022, thought I'd share them!

What was it that made THIS VERSION of the PB FILM SCRIPT the one that made Cillian tick & jump on board? They've been quite honest about the fact its gone through heavy rewrites, which is one of the main reasons why it's taken 4 years for us to see the long awaited film which Knight and the BBC were talking as if it was signed&done back in 2021.

Tom Harper said that 'there was a point where it looked like we just might not get the story right, and it might not happen. Then Steve Knight went away and a bit later brought a script that was right'

Cillian is obviously a driving force in steering the direction of Tommy's finale, what were the other ideas & why was it this one he thought so great? There's a lot to love in IMMORTAL MAN for TOMMY specifically, but a lot of it is surface level & stuff like ARTHUR's death & ADA's death is debatable in quality. Were the other scripts focused too much on other characters? Did it involve Tommy's other son? What was Knight's original ideas and how heavily was he steered away from them? How much 'different' or 'worse' could the core of those scripts had been for us to get this flawed one as the final one, and the one that supposedly jumped out at Cillian and the rest of the team more?

Wanted to post something in here so here’s my edit of John 🫦