Urchin

2025

Action / Drama

8
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 96% · 103 reviews
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 65% · 50 ratings
IMDb Rating 6.8/10 10 3274 3.3K

london, england drug addiction homelessness surrealism understated tragic

Director

Harris Dickinson Photo
Harris Dickinson

Top cast

Harris Dickinson Photo
Harris Dickinson as Nathan
Michael Colgan Photo
Michael Colgan as Scott
Ruth Wilson Photo
Ruth Wilson as Meditation Tape
Frank Dillane Photo
Frank Dillane as Mike
720p.WEB 1080p.WEB
914.25 MB
1280*694
English 2.0
NR
Subtitles us  
24 fps
1 hr 39 min
Seeds 15
1.83 GB
1920*1040
English 5.1
NR
Subtitles us  
24 fps
1 hr 39 min
Seeds 55

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by samyuldavis 8 / 10

Truly dark in a way films rarely are.

With his debut, Dickinson wants us to finally see society's invisible man. It's not pretty. The even more uncomfortable truth that perhaps not everybody can be saved? That some people can't be helped?! Insane takeaways from a drama piece about a startling social issue, but you can't say it's not blisteringly real. At every point in Urchin, someone is offering a genuine lifeline. There are so many chances for redemption in this film. Kind characters try to tell him this, the SOUNDTRACK tells him this. This judgment isn't what I go to movies for, nor is it where my values lie...but it's one hell of a honest, brutal character piece. Whatever salvation is being offered in this movie, it's clearly not enough. He could've kept his job if he hadn't walked away from an employer who clearly has his back. His foster parents are described as lovely people without elaboration. His momentary love interest tries to tell him that there's more to life than money. You dismiss it at first as well, she presents as a stereotype. But she's right in that his rot isn't exclusive to his class. He would be this person no matter what hand life dealt him. He's a person with his own agency like any other. And though the ending might be truly too cruel for me in the point I think it's making? This film has more respect for the unhoused than it seems. No stereotype here. Just someone diving into said stereotype without reflection or regret. It won't infantilise disaffected people. They're still adults who deserve chances. If they don't value those chances, things get painful. Painful movie. Dark movie. More unique movies please, Mr Dickinson.
Reviewed by mademoisherl 7 / 10

Frank Dillane's raw performance gives this film a punch of realness, as if you're truly watching someone's life unfold before you. Mike's reactions towards his own ups and downs make you simultaneously sympathetic and frustrated towards him.On that note, the same thing can be said for Harris Dickinson's direction. Perhaps this being his debut film as a director, he was overjoyed to incorporate a lot of elements into this; yet personally, when the ending credits rolled, I didn't feel the coherence as there's always some kind of duality in the presentation of this film. Is this a surrealist or a slice-of-life? Did Dickinson want his film to be a social commentary on how the government fails society, particularly the vulnerable group, by not giving them the full protection and support system that is essential to the rehabilitation process, or did he want to say that a piece of trash will always be a piece of trash?The overall tone is just uneven for me. Nevertheless, I'll surely tune in to whatever Harris Dickinson cooks in the future.
Reviewed by mademoisherl 7 / 10

A bit uneven, but real nevertheless

Frank Dillane's raw performance gives this film a punch of realness, as if you're truly watching someone's life unfold before you. Mike's reactions towards his own ups and downs make you simultaneously sympathetic and frustrated towards him.On that note, the same thing can be said for Harris Dickinson's direction. Perhaps this being his debut film as a director, he was overjoyed to incorporate a lot of elements into this; yet personally, when the ending credits rolled, I didn't feel the coherence as there's always some kind of duality in the presentation of this film. Is this a surrealist or a slice-of-life? Did Dickinson want his film to be a social commentary on how the government fails society, particularly the vulnerable group, by not giving them the full protection and support system that is essential to the rehabilitation process, or did he want to say that a piece of trash will always be a piece of trash?The overall tone is just uneven for me. Nevertheless, I'll surely tune in to whatever Harris Dickinson cooks in the future.
Read more IMDb reviews

1 Comment

Be the first to leave a comment