AKA

2002 "Lies are like wishes: tell enough of them... some of them come true."
6.3| 2h3m| NA| en| More Info
Released: 19 January 2002 Released
Producted By: Bard Entertainments
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

In 1970s Britain, 18-year old Dean feels hampered by his working-class background and his family. In order to make something of himself, he assumes another identity and manages to enter high society.

Genre

Drama

Watch Online

AKA (2002) is currently not available on any services.

Director

Duncan Roy

Production Companies

Bard Entertainments

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.
Watch Now
AKA Videos and Images
View All

AKA Audience Reviews

SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie
Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!
Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.
BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.
hshowe This movie is better than Ripley or old-time Vanity Fair (both from British writers) because the last tinge of the seventies had that "maybe you can be anyone" potential still being born. This is also a true story. This contrasts against England's "birth first, achievements second" class structure still alive today. A handsome young man might very well follow "Lord' Gryffoyn"'s road every day. What are also allowed to see is the pathos and confusion that whips and buttresses the choices behind such pathways.I think my favorite moment is when privileged Lord Glendenning tries to Charlton Heston his way to rifling Thatcher off the TV screen, and when he belittles her, across the room, an obviously Labor class guy, "Lord Gryffoyn" watches wide eyed, while the third member of their troika mocks her hair. So much political correctness has washed out current cinema, it's eye opening to see gay life the way it was in New-York/Britain/France capitals among the upper class. Practically a history lesson in class consciousness, this movie roves from the main character's motivation, to shifting maturity, to the shifting sands underneath and around him.Most of the reviews I've read fasten on the split screen as topic and almost ignore the film as a whole. The version i downloaded had split screen in areas, but not a jaw dropping medium at all, merely a savvy cinematic comment on the media of the press.What I found most entertaining was that the "slut" character was for once played by a man. It's tired to see every floozy and hustler portrayed as a woman, Youngblood Hills really energizes the film with his attempts to work two men who are so chained by their secrets they are immune to his lures, and his desperate "fixes" only precipitate more conflict and pushed them into negating him. His character's attempts to be used by these men and thus be used by him backfire in ways we can see through even when he can't.An excellent film to watch, for discussion, study, and enjoyment of cinema.
BH5000 This film is excellent, and obviously effective, judging by the lively debate it has inspired. Whether you loved it or hated it (and I loved it), you just couldn't forget it. It keeps creeping up on you for days after. In my opinion it's beautifully shot, with lighting that effectively elicits the the right emotional response for each scene. The acting is terrific, with an wonderfully subtle and stirring performance by its lead, Matthew Leitch. The supporting characters are all excellently played, although the American is annoyingly shrill (which is probably the point). Not for the faint of heart, this is a beautiful, moving film.
neofight2 I'm a little surprised at how much vitriol is invested in some of the reviews of this film. As a film, it is tells a story that is challenging, thought provoking and fresh, while the filmmaking as a whole takes creative risks. With that said, it is also flawed in many areas, and many of the criticisms have merit. But on balance I was engaged by this film and have to applaud the filmmaker for trying to tell his story with a unique voice. Sure it's a low budget film, and that shows occasionally. But budget issues never "took me out of the movie" and the split screens - while reminiscent of Timecode - were altogether differently used - specifically using obviously different takes. That was clearly a creative decision, presumably commenting on the accuracy of memory (among other things). I'm not sure whether it entirely worked, but it was a brave attempt. I'm glad he made the film, glad I watched it and a year later, I'm still thinking about it.
uscfrankie I loved this film. I just loved it. I was so amazed by the split screen. I saw it at Sundance and I was blown away. I very rarely cry during a movie but I sat there in the dark and cried. It was so moving and beautiful. Of course it reminded me of other stuff but I just felt that due to the split screen device I left the movie having had a unique experience. I read these other reviews and wondered if we had all seen the same thing. The bad ones are totally inacurate. I urge you to go and see this film and make up your own mind.