For some, Gangster No. 1 was the archetypal Brit gangster movie. It's excessive violence and stylistic direction was a breath of fresh air to a used and abused genre. Added to which, it unleashed the new roses in Brit cinema - namely director Paul McGuigan and actor Paul Bettany.

But for others, it was over the top rubbish.

With the latest collaboration between McGuigan and Bettany, it's more than likely the majority of viewers will fall into the latter of the two categories.

It's the 1300s and Bettany is Nicholas, a priest running from his recent adulterous past. It isn't long after we join Nicholas that we discover him discarding his vicar's robes in a river, and looking for a new life in the woods.

Soon enough, he comes across a travelling band of actors and, after witnessing them finish off a cancer riddled member of their troupe, convinces them to let him join their ensemble cast which is led by Willem Dafoe and includes the likes of Simon McBurney and Brian Cox.

After a couple of days travel, the band arrive in a small town governed by a seemingly evil Lord, who presides over the sentencing of a deaf and dumb woman accused of murdering a small boy.

Breaking from the norm, Dafoe insists that the actors perform their own interpretation of the murder in the form of a play instead of their standard morality tales taken from the Bible.

And soon enough, they discover there's more to this small town than meets the eye.

It's arguable as to whether or not McGuigan really is one of the brightest young Brit directors around, although it seems unarguable that random arty shots of Willem Defoe half naked, inter-cut with flashes of the actors putting their make-up on are ill-placed in a period movie set in the 1300s - as are the numerous jump cuts.

The film's strength lies in the play it's based on. But somehow in the screenwriting process, the case of the deaf woman has been over simplified.

After hearing that someone found the stiff body 2 days after the alleged murder, Nicholas declares: "Riga mortis has passed after 2 days!" thus proving someone's innocence.

This is overlooking the fact that it's snowing in half of the film - probably because the director forgot to make it snow in the other half.

The cast list is very impressive, and the performances are surprisingly strong but what was with the accents? A southern Bettany, a northern Cox and a random American-English accent from Dafoe all go some way to making this film seem decidedly silly.

Which, for want of a better word, is exactly what it is. You certainly won't find the name of any roses here.

Richard Phippen