Archive for May, 2016

I found a way. We all found a way, I suppose!

Year Released : 2015Untitled
Director : Mike Testin
Cast : Gene Jones, Krstine Klebe, Hassie Harrison, Peter Cicella and Richard Riehle

This one has been hanging around on my “Films I Want to Watch” Youtube Playlist for a while, so I figured that as I have my first day where I have nothing planned for the first time in a while, I might as well review a film, especially as I have been a bit slack recently.

“Dementia” covers a subject that terrifies me, memory loss. The thought of gained a mental illness, such as Alzheimer’s, absolutely horrifies me and worries me a lot. That’s what will make this film uncomfortable watching for me, and therefore an unusual choice.

I’m not going to lie though, despite my initial enthusiasm for it, the comments on IMDB, such as calling it predictable, make me less excited than I normally would be. I didn’t open any of the threads, but the fact that there is one that has a title suggesting that they predicted what would happen in the first 15 minutes, doesn’t fill me with hope.


War veteran George (Jones) suffers a stroke whilst help a teen fight off bullies. He wakes up in the hospital to find a young lady called Shelby (Harrison), she turns out to be his granddaughter that he hasn’t seen for many years. She helps take care of him but a few days later he is hostile towards her, claiming that he doesn’t know who she is. Later that day Michelle (Klebe) arrives from the hospital to check that George is ok, and she is soon approached by the family to care for him full time.

Although things start off seemingly well, George starts questioning everything Michelle does, and calls her a liar when she makes claims to his family about him wandering off. George accepts that it is part of his condition and forgives her.

George shows Michelle some pictures from his time in the army and he recalls a story about how he escaped a POW camp, whereas someone else couldn’t take it and bit their own wrists open to end his suffering. Michelle is visually upset at the story but tries to hide it. That night George sees Michelle cleaning a knife and covered in blood, but when he wakes up the next morning he is the one covered in blood, and his cat is shredded to pieces in the kitchen. He again accuses Michelle of being a liar to his family, but with no evidence to suggest that it wasn’t him, they take Michelle’s side.

The family soon starts to leave and Michelle suddenly takes a much darker turn, but is George simply imagining everything?


So is it as predictable as those on IMDB suggest?

I have to say that despite not being a completely negative experience, I have to agree with those on IMDB that the film is unpredictable, and without revealing what the ending is (obviously), as soon as the flashback scenes take place, as well as the story that George tells Michelle about his former fellow soldier, it did feel inevitable about how the film would end, and sure enough it does.

The main problem with the film is that you don’t really feel sorry for George. You find out that he was physically abusive towards his wife, disconnected from his kids, and a bit of an arsehole during his youth. When you’ve got a film in which someone is being tortured, you have to really position that person as someone who is likeable, because if not then you’re not going to be emotionally impacted when that person is in pain.

I know some will look at him and say that an elderly person shouldn’t be treated like this, but just because they’re old it doesn’t mean that they’re not an arsehole that shouldn’t end up being punished for what they did earlier in life.


It’s quite interesting how easy it is to manipulate the family of someone who is suffering with symptons similar to Alzheimer’s disease. For example, there is a scene in which she tests George in front of his family about how to make a cup of tea. At first he boastfully claims that he knows how to make a cup of tea and initially refuses, but he then struggles to describe the full process (from getting up to make it to the drinking of the tea).

One element that I did like is that you’re never entirely sure what is just in George’s head and what isn’t. For example, the scene in which George notices Michelle covered in blood and cleaning a knife is then countered by her walking in to check on him and her clothes are perfectly clean, and that he himself is covered in blood in the morning. You do question whether she simply got changed quickly, or whether George has imagined, made even trickier to figure out given that is all countered by some scenes in which Michelle starts acting very strangely. There is an element of mystery about it, although it does feel a bit forced in places.

You have to really ask yourself if the situation is realistic or not. Would you offer a job of caring for your father/grandfather to someone who you had literally only just met a few minutes prior, and who hadn’t shown you any ID?

The soundtrack is far too loud in “Dementia” and is often higher than at a higher volume than the speech of the characters, and the lighting in some scenes in also terrible. In the scenes set at night, you can’t really see what’s happening. This is exceptionally problematic towards the end of the film, in which pretty much the entire conclusion to the third act is in near pitch black.



Whilst not an awful film, “Dementia” never really gets going and the seemingly interesting aspects of the film just didn’t feel like they had their potential filled.

The problem is that George is an arsehole. Ultimately the story is about him getting his comeuppance for being an arsehole, and because of this you don’t care about him or feel sorry for him.

If you are going to watch it then don’t get too excited because it’s just not that exciting.

Maybe you’re living in my world. I’m not living in yours. You’re just material for my songs.

posterYear Released : 2016
Director : John Carney
Cast : Ferdia Walsh-Peelo, Lucy Boynton, Jack Reynor, Aidan Gillen, Ben Carolan, Mark McKenna, Percy Chamburuka, Conor Hamilton, Karl Rise and Aidan Gillen

It’s not often I review films that are out at the cinema, infact it’s exceptionally rare, with only three examples that I can think off of the top of my head, but I have just got back from watching “Sing Street” and noticing it’s low amount of votes on IMDB, I decided that it’s still obscure enough to review.

Again, I don’t often review mainstream films that are released at the cinemas, but I get the feeling that this won’t have much of a market outside of it’s native Ireland, and therefore I’m taking a punt and reviewing it. Obviously I could be completely wrong, and I hope in many ways I am because this is a fantastic film.

Anyway, time for the review….


In the mid 1980s a lot of people are emigrating from Ireland to England to prosper, however, Conor (Walsh-Peelo) and his family aren’t going anywhere. His parents are arguing constantly due to restricted finances and because of this, Conor has to change schools and go to the local catholic establishment. There he is soon targeted by bullies, both in terms of other students and the faculty.

After being beaten up by one of the bullies, he is befriended by Darren (Carolan), and he soon notices a girl standing on the opposite side of the street that he is attracted to. He braves it and decides to flirt with the girl, Raphina (Boynton), an aspiring model. During the conversation Conor tries to impress her by saying that he has a band and would like her to appear in the video. She agrees, but now Conor has to actually create a band from scratch.

He does so with the help of Darren, as well as the musically talented Eamon (McKenna), and various others. As time goes on, the group becomes highly competent, but Connor’s relationship with Raphina takes several unusual twists and he soon questions whether it’s worth the effort.


So why worth the review?

Being an 80s kid, I love the music from that era, and this film genuine feels like a throwback to a time that ended nearly 30 years ago. The songs are fantastic and catchy, the characters are likable, the development is pretty much spot on, and the three-act structure is well used throughout.

So let’s start with the music, the central point of the film, and for me, it was music that definitely fitted into the era pretty well, albeit with an obvious modern twist. I have seen some other reviews, including one or two personal friends, who didn’t like the film, nor it’s soundtrack, but I think is definitely a film for anyone who is over a certain age, and probably won’t appeal to a lot of people, but songs such as “Drive It Like You Stole It” not only sound like they would belong in the 80s, but would potentially be successful today.

The characters are interestingly written as well, and seem to capture the era quite well, especially when Darren uses a racial slur to describe a potential new band member, and genuine seems to not know it’s an offensive term. This was at a time in history where racism was still relatively common place in the UK and Ireland, with numerous footballers of a non-white origin regularly getting abuse on the terraces.

Visually the film looks appropriate for the era, although not being Irish I can only compare it to the way the 80s looked in England, with the haircuts especially reflecting the era. For example, the character of Eamon sports a haircut that is bordering on a mullet, as well as Conor’s attempts to redefine his look to match his musical heroes.

But for me, the best part about the film isn’t someone who is in the band, but rather the character of Brendan, played by Jack Raynor. Brendan is very relateable due to his desires of escaping his mundane life, only to get trapped and feeling like he has no way out. It’s how most late teens/twentysomethings that haven’t achieved anything feel, and he just shows how you can turn out if you depend on music and don’t have a back up plan.

His is just one of a number of different issues tackled by the films, and despite being what is ultimately a musical romantic-comedy, it touches on a lot. Themes of bullying, divorce, ambition, depression, rejection and friendship. It’s rare to get a film that covers so many different themes, and it’s nice to see a smaller film make such an effort.


There are a few issues with the film though, the first of which is arguably the more important and that is that everything seems a little effortless. The band are just good right from the off, something which is highly unlikely. The school and the local area just happens to all of the musicians that they could want, all of whom know straight away what they’re doing. There is seemingly no bedding in process, they’re just a cohesive unit right from the off and there isn’t really a struggle.

And the same can be said for the relationship between Conor and Raphina. It never really feels like Conor has to really do a lot to get with Raphina. In some ways I liken the relationship to that of Scott and Ramona in “Scott Pilgrim vs the World”, i/e a shy, socially awkward guy suddenly becomes attracted to an outsider and gets more than he bargained for, but unlike that relationship, you never really feel like Conor and Raphina aren’t going to end up together.

My only other issue is that some members of the cast have very strong Irish accents, which don’t get me wrong, I expected going in, but there are occasions where I couldn’t catch what was being said.

Other than those minor issues, “Sing Street” is very enjoyable.

sing street b



“Sing Street” is an enjoyable coming-of-age romantic comedy that explores more films than your averageapproved Hollywood blockbuster. Although the band members don’t really seem to face any struggle at any point in terms of forming a band and making songs straight away (I’d be really curious how long this film is supposed to take place over), you are behind them all of the way.

With catchy songs throughout, the atmosphere and feel good factor is there for all to see and here, and considering that this is my first exposure to Irish films (that I’m aware of), it’s left me wanting more.

Definitely watch it if you have a chance.

It came to my attention recently that I was approaching my 200th article for this website, spread across reviews and “Keeping it Reel” articles, and so I thought about how I could celebrate reaching 200. 

Firstly, I’d like to thank those of you that subscribe to the site, or have liked our page on Facebook, it is greatly appreciated and I hope that as the blog continues to grow, you will stay with me.

I thought about reviewing one of my favourite mainstream films, but I thought that would be too obvious. I then considered doing an overhaul of the look of the site, and that is something that I am still considering, but instead I have decided to do what I have been thinking about for a while and that is producing a list of the bottom 5 films that I have seen and reviewed during the run time of this site. I have often said in reviews “if I was to rank the films” and I’ve decided to put that into force.

Now just to make this fair, I have decided that it wouldn’t be right if I included all films that I actually saw before I started this site, even if there was a review on here at some point or another, so after taking out those films, we are left with exactly 140 films to pick from. Out of those, I’m going to come up with a bottom five, and narrow it down further from there.

Please note that I am not going to go as in depth as I normally do in my end of year reviews because I really don’t have the time, and I’ve already reviewed the films so don’t really want to repeat myself. All will have a link included to the original review.


Well let’s start off by saying that my number one is already firmly in place. Those who have been reading the site a few months will probably already know what is coming with that spot, but for the other four spots I have a problem because I hated them all, it’s just a case of putting them into an order of how much I hated them. I have to leave out A LOT of awful movies and whittle it down to five.

The bad movies that I have reviewed on here far, far, far outweigh the good films, so this has been tricky……

5 – The Black Waters of Echos PondThe_Black_Waters_of_Echo's_Pond

Original Review : Imagine “Jumanji”…..but shit

We start with a film that I am going to just outright spoil it now…it ends with the film’s events basically having been a day-dream from one of the characters.

That sealed the feeling of dislike towards this film and even turned it from a 3/10 (at best) to a 1/10. The acting throughout is awful, especially from two cast members in particular.

If this had been done right then this could have actually been a relatively decent. It’s not a bad idea in the slightest (even if somewhat unoriginal), but it is so poorly executed that it left a bitter taste in the mouth.


4 – Wrestlers vs ZombiesUntitled

Original Review : Calling it trash would be a compliment

At the time of watching this I was training to be a wrestler and this was recommended to me by one of my fellow trainees.

If you’re a wrestling fan then don’t let the big names of Kurt Angle and Matt Hardy fool you, they add nothing to a very flawed film, although in all fairness the acting in the wrestling world is very different to film acting.

I must admit that I am a bit surprised that this is this low down on the list, which gives you an idea just how awful the top three are.


3 – Bloom144666

Original Review : Bland vampire movie that’s not worth wasting money on

I don’t watch many vampire films, infact I think I’ve only reviewed two whilst doing this site (the other being the excellent “Summer of Blood”) but when I do I try and make sure that they’re at least somewhat worth watching, that certainly wasn’t the case with “Bloom”.

“Bloom” is so bad that it makes the “Twilight” franchise somewhat enjoyable by comparison, and that is definitely saying something. It’s got awful acting, a boring storyline and it’s just a waste of 90 or so minutes of your life.


2 – Feltfelt_ver3

Original Review : One of the most non-sensical peoples of crap I’ve ever watched.

The second film that I reviewed as my run of 31 reviews in as many days for Halloween set the standard for that month, but certainly not in a good way.

“Felt” focuses on the aftermath of a woman being raped, and yet the irony is that the only thing I felt after this film was that I had been raped of 80 minutes of my life, and it feels almost strange saying that because it certainly feels longer than that.

I hate this film and would happily burn every copy that exists if the opportunity came about.


So before I reveal the number one pick, here are a few honourable (or in this case dishonourable) mentions from the films that would have made a top 10 if I’d decided to go that far – 7500, Accidental Love, It Was You Charlie, Nocturne Six and The Poker House.

So we’re finally here, and let’s face it, it’s not going to be much of a surprise……


1 – Aimy in a Cage


Original Review : A film so bad that I couldn’t even finish it!

As I mentioned earlier, anyone who has read this site for a few months will automatically have known that this was coming. Afterall, how many reviews have you ever seen that describe the film as a cancer?

This monstroisity still haunts me now, and it’s over 3 months since I watched it, and I make no qualm about saying that it is not only the worst film that I have seen whilst reviewing films for this site, but it is also the WORST film that I have ever seen.

I know that that might sound like a bold statement, but I challenge anyone to watch it and not feel ashamed. Everyone involved in this film should be ashamed of themselves.


Pretending is this superpower that we all have. When we pretend we can be anybody that we want to be!

Year Released : 2015emelie-film-poster
Director : Michael Thelin
Cast : Sarah Bolger, Joshua Rush, Carly Adams, Thomas Bair and Chris Beetem

I am currently trying to work through my “Films I Want to Watch” playlist on Youtube and it brings me to “Emelie”, a film about an unusual babysitter. I’m all up for films that look like they have potential to be dark and twisted, but I don’t get that with this film.

There is just something that seems to be missing. I can’t put my finger on it but there is something not quite right when I watch the trailer, and whilst it peaked my interest enough for me to want to watch it, I’m not expecting this to be a good film, or even remotely decent.

I could be wrong, it has been known to happen, but this is one where I think I’m pretty safe….



Anna (Bolger) is hired by Dan (Beetem) to babysit his kids for the evening so that he and his wife can celebrate their anniversary. Everything seems fine at first before Jacob (Rush) starts noticing that she doesn’t behave like a normal babysitter, purposefully going out of her way to make the kids uncomfortable, such as asking him to hand her a fresh tampon. He soon discovers ID that says her name is Emelie, and not Anna.

The evening continues to get more and more disturbed as she feeds the family’s hamster to the snake, forces the kids to watch their parents having sex, and everything that arouses their suspicions that something isn’t right.

She soon tells the youngest of the children, Chris (Bair), a story about how she previously had a baby that died, and now her and her lover are basically looking for a new child to have, all disguised as a story about bears. It becomes obvious to Jacob what is happening, but can the actual Anna turning up change the evening back in the children’s favour?


Decent or a missed opportunity?

I would say that this falls directly into the latter of those two as, whilst there are elements of “Emelie” that are generally well done, ultimately it’s 82 minutes of pure and utter “meh”.

Let’s start with the bit I did actually like and the part where you learn why Emelie is doing what she is doing. There is nothing more that I love in films than an antagonist that you can understand, and that you understand where they’re coming from. For example, one of my biggest issues with the Marvel franchise is that the antagonists are usually a bit crap, and yet in the latest installment, “Civil War”, I found myself impressed by the antagonist because you understand his motivations wonderfully, and he actually succeeds in what he wants to do.

My point is that if you want a great film, you have to start with a great antagonist, however, other than her motivations being made clear, there isn’t really a lot going on with the character. The acting for her is fine, but she is such a forgettable antagonist that it’s hard to get truly invested in the story, or indeed anything relating to her. There is only one part of the character that disturbed me and that is when she bizarrely asks Jacob to find her a tampon, which is something very odd indeed.


She’s not alone in poor character writing though, with the character of Sally being horrendously written and mind numbingly awful. Okay, we get it, she likes being a girl and wants to do girly things, but seriously, can we have a secondary character trait?

Then we get onto a strange decision regarding the characters and that is Emelie’s lover. SPOILER ALERT : When Emelie knows that she won’t get everything set up in time before the parents get home, she says to her lover than she needs more time. He subsequently dies after ramming their taxi……but there’s no emotional impact there at all. The character isn’t even slightly developed and now, nearly an hour after the film had finished, I couldn’t even tell you the character’s name. In reality, how can I be expected to care about such a character?

One of the main problems for me is that this film had the potential to be very good, but it simply isn’t dark enough. There’s nothing that scary about a girl cutting off a family’s broadband and electricity, especially when one of them relatively easily escapes later on in the film.

Whilst I was never bored during the 82 minute run time, it wasn’t really that interesting and never felt like it was getting out of second gear.



“Emelie” isn’t an awful film and whilst you understand where the central character’s motivations come from, it’s just not overly interesting.

With a lot of one dimensional characters, it’s hard to really get invested in the plight of the kids and want them to survive, especially as one of them is exceptionally irritating. If anything, I’m a little disappointed (spoiler) that none of the main characters die, and more importantly, that Emelie doesn’t really get a commupence.

This is a missed opportunity.

You sound like a human being male!

Year Released : 201481l4EGjg4UL._SY445_ (1)
Director : David Thorpe
Cast : David Thorpe and his friends

I’ve mentioned a few times that I have a list of trailers saved on a Youtube playlist that I want to watch. There are some that I have only had on there for a few days, whereas others, such as “Do I Sound Gay?” have been on there for quite some time. So I decided that as I can’t find anything that I want to review that I would finally get around to watching this.

I am fully aware that the subject matter of this film could potentially cause offence…..not to homophobes, I couldn’t give a shit about whether they find it offensive, but rather people who are actually gay. Now before I start this review, please note that I am not homosexual, so I am looking at this from a complete outsider’s point of view.

The main reason that I am interested in this film and that it touches on and looks at vocal therapies (at least what I can gather from the trailer) and I have attempted it myself. For my first time readers, I am transgender and part of that was going through vocal therapy, but it definitely didn’t work and I still sound male, and this causes all sorts of issues given that all of my accounts, such as at my bank, are all in a female name, but they often don’t pass me on security as my voice doesn’t match my name. It’s an interesting contrast to those in the docu-film who sound feminine when some don’t appear to want to.


Following on from splitting up with his boyfriend, David Thorpe decided to film a documentary in which he explores the human voice. He interacts with homosexual friends and celebrities as he tries to establish how having a feminine voice impacts your life as a man.

David also attends vocal therapy sessions in order to try and make his voice more masculine, and delves into his earlier life in order to pinpoint the moment his voice changed.


So, offensive or praise-worthy?

I’m going to go into a minor personal view before I go any further and it’s the issue of stereotyping. As I am currently in the process of changing from male to female, I get stereotyped a lot and it really bugs me, and the reason is that people just revert to the typical image of transgendered people that they see on TV and in movies, such as the automatic assumption that just because I want to be female, I must automatically have been homosexual when I was male. That is not the case and that stereotype always bugs me. It deeply annoys me when people expect me to act a certain way just because I am becoming female, mainly because being female doesn’t necessarily equate to being girly, and in that sense I can see why a lot of homosexual men might not like this film, and some would find it offensive.

David spends a large section of the film going through vocal therapy to try and get a more masculine sounding voice, and he talks at length with other homosexual men about the subject of gay men tending to have effeminate sounding voices, and there didn’t seem to be a balanced argument to the docu-film. Whilst there was a lot of support for the anti-feminine sounding side of the argument, there isn’t a lot to say for the other side. For example, there is a discussion in which one man says that if he is having sex, he wants his lover to sound like a man and not a woman, which whilst I can see where they are coming from, the way most of the docu-film is presented almost as if that is the preferred option for most homosexual men to sound masculine, which I’m not entirely convinced is the case.

For me the docu-film felt like it was trying to get to the bottom of a root-cause and have it not being David basically trying to find an excuse why his relationship failed. It definitely felt more like a vanity project more than anything else, and since watching this I have asked a few of my friends that are homosexual and had break ups if they ever doubted their voice, and not one of them said that they had. It’s basically just one guy’s issue with his own self-confidence.

Filmmaker David Thorpe practices vocal exercises he learned from a speech pathologist in an effort to alter the way he speaks. In Do I Sound Gay?, Thorpe searches for the origin of the "gay voice" stereotype.

That is not to say that the film isn’t entirely without it’s interesting discussion points, such as featuring several young men who were bullied during their teens for an effeminate manner, and almost forcing their voice to change so that they could camouflage themselves in public. For me this was easily the most enjoyable part of the docu-film and it’s one that I can relate to personally, not to mention when one of his friends says to him that she felt like he had been lying to her the whole time, again, something that is relatable, but whilst there are some moments that I do genuinely like, there just isn’t enough substance in the film.

Throughout the 80 minute run time, there are numerous examples of clips from TV shows, movies and various other forms of media being shown, but very rarely do they have seemingly any relevance and they feel more like they’re there simply to add to the run time, rather than actually add any substance. The docu-film already feels like it lasts too long and it’s blatant filler. Nothing more, nothing less.

At just shy of 80 minutes, “Do I Sound Gay” drags…..badly. I felt like I had been watching it for a long time and decided to see how long was left….and only 35 minutes had gone by. I think the main reason for this is that I’m not entirely convinced that David Thorpe had a real end message that he was trying to convey throughout the docu-film, and for me at least it felt a bit aimless. I made a note at around the 50 minute mark of “where is this actually going?” and half an hour later, at the film’s conclusion, I felt no different, or no more enlightened than before I had started.



“Do I Sound Gay?” offers very little in terms of genuine substance and feels more like a vanity project, as opposed to something that actually has a message to say. David Thorpe’s approach to film-making could potentially result in a very interesting documentary one day, but he hasn’t achieved it with this as, even at just 80 minutes long, it feels at least 35 minutes past it’s welcome by the time you get to the end.

During the exploration, I never once felt that it was coming to a natural end and when it did end, it didn’t really make it feel watching for 80 minutes seem worth it, and as weird as it sounds, I’m going to use a quote from American Psycho to describe it. These are the final few lines in that hit film and wouldn’t have been out of place at the end of “Do I Sound Gay?”……”there is no catharsis. I gain no deeper knowledge about myself, no new understanding can be extracted from my telling. There has been no reason for me to tell you any of this. This confession has meant nothing”

We might as well just put a bunch of no-hopers on TV and have the public decide who should be Number 1!

Year Released : 2015kill-your-friends-movie-poster
Director : Owen Harris
Cast : Nicholas Hoult, Georgia King, Ed Hogg,  Tom Riley, Joseph Mawle, Jim Piddock and James Corden

As time moves on there has been a noticeable lack of originality in Hollywood. This is somewhat understandable because films have been arguably the biggest industry over the last 100 or so years, and everyone writes based on what has inspired them in life. Some will obviously use ideas from films that they’ve seen or books that they’ve read, and whilst sometimes it comes across as a still somewhat unique idea with borrowed elements, some are blatant rip-offs.

There are those films that are just blatant rip offs of others and hope that no-one will notice, such as how the “Hunger Games” is a blatant rip off of “Battle Royale” (it is hilarious that the author claims not to have seen the latter before writing her books).

From most of the reviews I’ve read, plus the trailer, “Kill Your Friends” appears to be a rip-off of one of my favourite films, “American Psycho”, although set in the 90s rather than the 80s and with a central character that just isn’t compelling.

We’ll see……


Steven (Hoult) is a high up music scout for A&R music and he is desperate to climb the corporate ladder, and he is given that opportunity once his boss is sacked. However, he takes great offence when the role is offered to Roger (Corden), a bumbling mess of a man. Steven pretends to be happy for Roger, but he tricks him into having a drug-riddled evening to celebrate, and subsequently kills him.

Put in temporary charge, Steven struggles to find the next hit, and when his latest find in the form of dance-anthem “Suck my Dick” (yes, really) fails miserably, Steven is replaced by Parker Hall (Riley), a rival from another promotion and a man who Steven is forced to admit is better at the job than him.

The police are also knocking on the door, with DC Woodham (Hall) assigned to the case, but Steven is able to manipulate him due to his desire to be a professional musician, but as the clues mount up, along with the pressure from Parker and the realisation that his secretary (King) knows that he killed Roger, Steven is forced to take matters further.


So is it original or is it the blatant rip off of “American Psycho” that I thought it would be?

“Kill Your Friends” is not so much as a blatant rip off of “American Psycho” as it is a seemingly glorified love letter to Hollywood, with the intention being that it would convince studios to allow Owen Harris to direct the rumoured remake of the Christian Bale masterpiece if it gets made. There are plot points that are outright stolen from not only the film, but also the Brett Easton Ellis novel that it’s based on, such examples include;

  • Long, drawn-0ut monologues.
  • Long, drawn-out monologues about taste in music.
  • A psychopatic professional that murders someone who is progressing faster than him, and then trying to cover it up.
  • The cop that investigates it treats that character as if he’s a friend, even ignoring blatant clues that the murdered is sat in front of him.
  • Sexual tension between the professional and his secretary.

The list could go on.

I couldn’t enjoy “Kill Your Friends” for two reasons. One is the aforementioned similarities to a far superior film, and that it’s a bit pointless. There’s not actually a point to the film. There isn’t a moral message. There is just no substance to it whatsoever and I was sat for 100 or so minutes just waiting to feel like the film was actually worth the effort that everyone concerned had put in….but it never came to it.

There is a growing trend in the film industry these days for movies to just be there, and to quote Agent Smith from the Matrix franchise….”it is without meaning or purpose”.


The acting is fine from everyone concerned, no-one actually puts in a bad step at any point, and it was fun seeing Georgia King again after her role as a teenage bully in Tormented. Nicholas Hoult, as the star, is arguably the person playing their role to their biggest capabilities, but the presence of James Corden is yet again pointless. He plays the same character he plays in pretty much every film or TV show he does, the fat waster (the characters, not him).

And for those of you that liked “Deadpool” and were potentially excited to see Ed Skrien again, don’t get too excited because his character is barely in the film. He is in it for maybe four/five minutes at most, and much like the aforementioned Marvel film, he has precisely zero character development, or even that much of a character. Much like the film, he is just sort of there.

I’ve done some maths and based on the average life span you will live for around 377,395 or 408,844 lots of 100 minutes in your life (depending on your gender). Being transgender I can only assume that I will fall somewhere in between those numbers, but even then I am questioning why I spent even just one of those lots on this film, regardless of how many I get.

It’s not an awful film by any stretch, but it’s also not that great and the current rating of 6.1/10 on IMDB is probably about right. It is bang average.



Whilst maybe not a blatant rip off of “American Psycho”, it is definitely inspired by that film, without ever even coming close to similar levels of entertainment. The lack of a compelling central character makes this a far inferior film to the one that it is obviously trying to pay homage to.

“Kill Your Friends” isn’t a fun movie, it’s barely even close to being enjoyable. It’s not awful by any stretch, but there are far, far better ways to 100 or so minutes of your life.