Watching this film, from the very beginning, I was troubled by a very big moral dilemma..one that I would like to sound out from you, ye faithful pilgrims on IMDb. Is it wrong to kill bullies (all types, including the PC police and the progressives/liberals these days) and those who makes your blood boil and those who do you wrong? Who would NOT want to kill the people killed by the lead (Since KILL is in the title- I hope it is not going to count as a spoiler!). I mean who amongst us was not (internally) screaming with delight when the first prick gets hit by a car (and meets his maker, one hopes)? Come on..be honest.
Similarly, who did not want the cinema cellphone idiot killed? The fat woman in the elevator? Or the fat guy driving the puny Ford while speaking on the phone? Why are they all fat by the way? Such prejudice..hahha!!
While thinking about it, and relishing the fate of these vermin (it ain't a crime yet- but give the coastal types a chance, it will be!) I came up with a bigger moral conundrum..if you catch your spouse cheating with another, who would you kill? The Spouse? Or the other? Both? Neither? Which one first?
This movie, I caught only per chance, and I am glad I did. It is a well made film, backed by some terrific performances by the lead and the 'enabler', the best friend of the lead. It was ruined somewhat by the Armand Assante trying to do Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now (someone please tell him he ain't no Marlon Brando- actually he is more like a nobody!) and some poor editing. It is rated as a thriller/black comedy but probably best described as a black comedy. The premise is simple, the execution mostly flawless although the presence of Armand Assante does ruin it a bit. It feels as if the director has a man crush on Assante or owes Assante's agent a favor for letting him sleep on his couch when he was struggling ..or something like that. I mean his knee high socks is supposed to make it OK for us?
The movie is carried superbly by the acting of the two less known (I never heard of them) actors, the lead and his best friend Stan..at times it descends to farce but intentionally. The lead guy is so terrific that I am sure we will see a lot more of him. The plot is predictable, the pace just right and the direction, for most part- superb. Dialogs are taut, with very little redundant save the entire lines for Armand Assante who would have been more of a comic relief he was rendered deaf-mute by a half effective poison dart, but I digress.
One additional criticism is not so much of the film or the director, but who picked the lead character's daughter? I mean, how dark you want your dark comedy to be if you hire a 5000 year old mummy and make them speak through a ventriloquist? Or maybe the director owes her agent for a ..or something.
But my moral conundrum is still not answered..readers, please help.
Similarly, who did not want the cinema cellphone idiot killed? The fat woman in the elevator? Or the fat guy driving the puny Ford while speaking on the phone? Why are they all fat by the way? Such prejudice..hahha!!
While thinking about it, and relishing the fate of these vermin (it ain't a crime yet- but give the coastal types a chance, it will be!) I came up with a bigger moral conundrum..if you catch your spouse cheating with another, who would you kill? The Spouse? Or the other? Both? Neither? Which one first?
This movie, I caught only per chance, and I am glad I did. It is a well made film, backed by some terrific performances by the lead and the 'enabler', the best friend of the lead. It was ruined somewhat by the Armand Assante trying to do Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now (someone please tell him he ain't no Marlon Brando- actually he is more like a nobody!) and some poor editing. It is rated as a thriller/black comedy but probably best described as a black comedy. The premise is simple, the execution mostly flawless although the presence of Armand Assante does ruin it a bit. It feels as if the director has a man crush on Assante or owes Assante's agent a favor for letting him sleep on his couch when he was struggling ..or something like that. I mean his knee high socks is supposed to make it OK for us?
The movie is carried superbly by the acting of the two less known (I never heard of them) actors, the lead and his best friend Stan..at times it descends to farce but intentionally. The lead guy is so terrific that I am sure we will see a lot more of him. The plot is predictable, the pace just right and the direction, for most part- superb. Dialogs are taut, with very little redundant save the entire lines for Armand Assante who would have been more of a comic relief he was rendered deaf-mute by a half effective poison dart, but I digress.
One additional criticism is not so much of the film or the director, but who picked the lead character's daughter? I mean, how dark you want your dark comedy to be if you hire a 5000 year old mummy and make them speak through a ventriloquist? Or maybe the director owes her agent for a ..or something.
But my moral conundrum is still not answered..readers, please help.