उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

So I am full of hope, the Brits made another awesome hooligan movie.

What the hell, what is this? I have questions, millions of question.

1) Is that chubby lead actor very rich? Did he buy himself a role? It can not be he was casted. Surely? 2) Why, in the opening scene, show a woman with big boobs, and then the whole movie nothing, absolutely nothing? Did they know the movie was so bad that the only way people would sit through this was the promise of massive jugs? 3) Fighting scenes. In 1960 they knew how to make the scenes better.

This movie is an insult to all those great cult movies, is an insult to acting, actors and everything it stands for. Non of these actors should ever be allowed to be on the white-screen again. Isn't there some sort of police for this? I had to create an IMDb account, just to express my disbelieve.

I don't know where to begin... I was a huge fan of the original Essex Boys and Rise of the Foot Soldier movie, and then I watched Essex Boys: Retribution which was totally appalling. I always find it a shame when low budget movies are made only to try and ride on the coat tails of a decent original, so I'm a bit disappointed in myself for getting my hopes up when I saw Essex Boys: Law of Survival.

I found the whole movie very poor, right from the get go we are introduced to the absolutely dire narration. Apparently the fact that the intro was played and narrated by the real character is supposed to be something of a beacon for the movie, but unfortunately it just shows us what we have to put up with for the next hour and a half.

The acting throughout the movie is terrible, and it seems as if the "actors" are all reading the script for the first time on camera. It comes across as more of a cheap football hooligan type movie than a British gangster flick, with incredibly shocking fight scenes which don't give off a whiff of violence or aggression and are far too fluffy to even come close to convincing us that these are supposed to be feared "hard men" that are being depicted.

Won't go into the plot as I'm sure people will still want to watch the movie. At the most it's probably worth having on for the sake of a bit of background noise which you might give an occasional glance, but it certainly isn't worthy of complete concentration for the duration of the movie.

I cannot remember watching a movie with such bad acting. With an idiotic plot, this film is a complete embarrassment to the British film industry. Believe me when I say that it is probably the worst I have ever seen. I saw that it had a 7.1 IMDb rating, and thought it might be good. How wrong I was. Hard men who are not hard. Fights that look like they are taking place in a school playground. Blood as thick as ketchup. To sum it up. This is NOT how to make a movie. I find it difficult to believe that a review on this film has to be 10 lines long. There are not enough words to describe how bad it really is. One actor whom I remember from Londons Burning, had the lead bad guy role. He won't get employment in films again. There was also a bloke with a flat cap who was supposed to be hard. He looked totally out of place with his not hard posing. Then there was the bad dying. I thought actors learned how to die on screen. These guys must have been in the pub on the day that acting school was teaching the pupils how to die. Watching this film will make you despair at the waste of money and time used in churning out this complete drivel .

oh dear.. This is without doubt the worst movie I have ever had the misfortune to watch. The plot is both unbelievable and shockingly bad. The "acting", and I use that term very loosely, is embarrassing. I swear there was no script and people were simply free styling this drivel. I can only conclude someone has got a bunch of money for this drivel and must be killing themselves laughing. Do yourselves a favor and stay well clear. Don't even watch out of blind curiosity as it is one and half hours of your life you are never getting back. You will honestly thank me for it. Someone is fiddling with the IMDb rating if this is anything above a 1.

Shocking dialogue and acting, with no redeeming features whatsoever. The fight scenes are dreadful, the sound is dreadful, the plot is dreadful and the cast are dreadful. Gunfire sounds like firecrackers and the dialogue sounds as if the actors were making it up as they went along. Fight scenes are comedic, in that there is no rehearsed moves and sound effects, so all you get is a few grunts here and there and screwed up noses. The budget for this movie must have been around a hundred quid. Wardrobe looks limited to Sue Ryder, especially the bald 'heavy', who clearly drew the short-straw when it came to attire! It really boils down to a gangster war consisting of about ten people - 'very scary'. Nothing about this film is believable, from the ridiculous opening scenes, where we see two gangs of over the hill thugs, doing everything but FIGHT, despite being six feet apart - just enough room for the 5 or so extras, dressed as riot police to fit in (obviously a tight budget). Only then do we see some pathetic shoving about, resembling a fight in a Thursday morning Post Office pension queue. What is puzzling is that the rogue policeman, despite taking over the protection racket (consisting of one garage) and telling the owner he has to pay 'him' now, then inexplicably shoots him in virtually the next scene, thereby rendering the exercise pointless. It's safe to assume that I hated this movie - low-budget it may be but every single facet of this movie is appalling. With better direction, a better script and a few more quid spent, this might have been redeemable. As it is, it's simply amateurish and embarrassingly bad!

I have to confess I approached this film with very low expectations having read the one star reviews here on IMBb. I had a mixture of confirmation and surprise. Sure it doesn't have the production values of the Sean Bean film with a similar title but one star is a bit harsh. Sure it was filmed on camcorders with a very small budget but if you have Sean Bean I'm sure you can command a bigger one. Having said that I've always thought SB was a wooden, one dimension actor who adds very little to anything he's in.

There are a couple of faces in Jesse Birdsall, who gives the best performance, and Ross Boatman from 'London's Burning' but special mention should go to Canadian actor Megan Lockhurst who also turned in a good believable performance.

So if you are expecting something similar to the SB film then of course you will be disappointed but if want a slice of Essex, this is maybe not the only way.

Let's line up the bad points about this fiasco.

1. The worst fight scenes ever. I mean ever. Three year old kids playing army are more convincing.

2. A tenuous link to a true story. VERY tenuous.

3. Acting that would shame a town hall amateur dramatics group.

4. An American accent that makes Dick Van Dyke sound like a linguistics expert.

5. Camera work of the lowest quality. Poor framing and poorer lighting. I don't believe any of these idiots have ever held a camera.

6. 90 minutes to tell a ten minute story. This could've been a short and saved us all a lot of grief.

7. Blood. Ketchup might be cheaper than stage blood. Problem is, it looks like ketchup.

Now the good points.

1. It ended.

To start off I am a big fan of all films old,new,bad and good....But this is just beyond belief. It is so bad I do not know where to start!!??. The acting is horrendous , camera work shocking and directing .. abysmal. I think, reading between the "lines" (lol) it was trying to be a Lock Stock Style film....but what a failure. The accents where a joke. Watch out for the amateur acting as if they are waiting for each others line and not sure whos next....poor director?

The fight scenes are farcical...note the police one at the start in the yard. I have always looked at the rating scores here for films but now I seriously have grave doubts. Every review was about 1 or 2.....one critic put it at 5 stars!...yeh right! How the hell did it get its rating of 5.5+. Lot of false reviews here me thinks. AVOID please.

The majority of the acting was really bad but Chris Bell! He looked and did not act well before he ended up in the hospital, he has about as much acting ability as my goldfish, what an absolute waste of space.

There was no emotion from anyone, the lack of budget (or the look af lack of funds) really lets the film down, the acting is cardboard from start to finish.

OK, so I noticed this film and got hooked in by the 5 star blah blah and the (at the time) IMDb rating of 7.0. Usually means it will be of a decent standard even if you don't like the premise or the movie itself. Oh how wrong. I couldn't literally believe how bad ALL of the acting was. Some people mention the performance of the lead actor; well they are clearly his friends because he was the best of a very bad bunch. The guy who played the character "Lee" was so miscast it is untrue. You will never hear an Essex "hard man" talk the way that he does. It was hard enough anyway but from the moment he entered the movie any ounce of seriousness I had had evaporated. Such a poor actor. I would go so far as to say it was a total embarrassment to the British film industry and I hope I never watch a movie as bad ever again. I lasted around 30 minutes and then my girlfriend and I watched "The Martian", then you can see what real actors can actually do. Do not waste your time. It won't be long until this film has a 3/4 rating on here, and even that would be extremely generous.

It's hard to know where to start with this film. The title might lead you to think there is a connection with the original Essex Boys film from 2000. If there is a connection, it's very very tenuous, with Carlton Leach appearing as himself at the start of the film, and various random references to the Rettendon Murders. Other than that, the film is simply a confusing mess. No effort is made to explain who the main characters are or what their back story is. It is simply a badly made and terribly acted waste of time. The plot purports to be about an ex-crim having gone straight, having to seek revenge when first his girlfriend and later his friend are killed. It's not really clear why they were killed, nor do we really care at that point. The film then seems to try to pivot to make you think it's going to turn into a Taxi Driver clone, with the lead character meeting up with a black market firearms dealer on a farm (he is, for some reason not explained, American), who talks us through his various wares. Now suitably armed, the lead character begins a campaign of revenge, for about 10 minutes, before the plot pivots yet again. In short, it's totally incoherent stuff. But, worse than the dull, convoluted plot are the production values. The script is one-dimensional stuff, even by the standards of the current crop of Essex gangster films, with liberal C-words thrown around for no good reason. The camera work is amateur, often out of focus, and appears to have been edited together by someone who was in a rush. There were so many tight crops of the actors faces that I started to wonder if I had the picture settings on my TV set incorrectly and I was actually missing something. The few attempts at action set pieces are terrible, either shootings that just appear to have been done using joke shop quality fake blood, or fights that are are stilted and wooden. Most of the acting is woeful, with the exception of Ross Boatman who I can only imagine must be mortified at being associated with this dross.

In short, this is a terrible film, that has no connection whatsoever with the original Essex Boys film nor the Rettendon Murders. It's worth watching only to be astounded at how such a terrible film ever came into being. I'd highly recommend just watching the original Essex Boys again over ever watching this rubbish.

So badly written it's nearly a comedy. The acting is so bad it defies deactivate. If someone set out to make a truly awful film they would have to be supremely talented to make it this bad. Anyone associated with this film should gang their head in shame.

I thought I was going to get another boring, testosterone fuel gangster movie with pointless fights, silly shootouts and lots of cockney rhyming slang.

What I got was a film with a lot more heart than that.

Sure its not perfect, but on the budget it was never going to be, but the heavy focus on story and character was refreshing.

Some really nice performances across the board made film enjoyable.

The main cast was fantastic in most scenes, giving grounded performances that were nuanced rather than over the top.

CHRIS BELL was likable and believable for the most part as the reformed gangster seeking revenge and ABBIE STEEL created a character that you genuinely felt for as the story progressed.

MEGAN LOCKHURTS was brilliant and had more than a Few surprises up her sleeve.

Yes the camera work is dodgy every now and then and yes it doesn't look high budget but its a film made with obvious passion and the desire to re invigorate a genre that's been too samey for far too long.

The most criminal thing about this film is the acting, but the screenplay and direction are close competitors.

I couldn't get through the whole thing it was that bad.

It's hard to imagine that any self respecting actor would put this on their resume. It's far more likely that they'll have gone into witness protection and taken on new identities to avoid being associated with this rubbish.

I'd only recommend watching this garbage if the only other option was to staple your eyelids to an angry honey badgers scrotum and even then it'd be a close call.

Terrible film on all fronts, one to avoid.

This is the second film I have now seen from director Steven M Smith. The first being the much commented and criticised Hooligans at War, North vs South. Where lets be honest, there is no direction at all, poorly led from start to finish and what I can only guess was done on a shoe string budget. Before watching this movie, my expectations were very low. However within the first 20 minutes of this film, the difference in improvement was clear to see. Yes, there are still lots of faults and quality issues. But the film flowed and the storyline had thought and meaning. The film was watchable and much better than others are saying in their reviews.

I noticed that there was quite a few of familiar faces in this film. These faces are from Steven M Smiths HAW. I was pleased to see Chris Bell again playing a lead role (Danny) who puts in a well delivered performance and I must mention Ross Boatman (Franks) who as always was fantastic.

On the less positive side James Hodcroft (Lee) was a poor choice for this type of film. I have never met anybody from Essex who talks with such a corrective pronouncing tongue. Seriously, who taught this guy to speak? Stop emphasising every word spoken. I couldn't take this guy seriously and lowered the overall quality of acting within the lead roles. I was also amazed to see that there were other actors used in HAW that we're used again in LOS. Josh played my Mark Windham (also Mickey in HAW) is just awful. A complete mumbling poor excuse for an actor that makes watching paint dry fun. There were several of the hooligans in the early fight scenes duplicated from both films that have no idea what a real fight is and just hoping to get there face on TV.

Although the quality of this film could of been better and at times still appeared to be filmed on a low quality mobile phone, I enjoyed the film. As low budget movies go, the team should be very proud of the end product. Chris Bell and Steven M Smith have written this film very well and brought it from pen and paper to our TV screens. I look forward to seeing what these two come up with next. If they keep improving as they have done here and do without the poor actors and repeat hooligans, things will surely only get better? If you do insist on using the same actors in your films, keep hold of the good ones such as Pat Garner, Alan Lund, Darren Placid and Colin Vidler who can keep the believability of the characters real and perform to high levels.

My eyes will peeled for what you two have for us next.

Keep up the good work.

I've got to say the acting is appalling - very amateur with odd cuts between some scenes.

It actually could've been decent but well it's not

Why Carlton Leach would have anything to do with this garbage I will never know. Was the budget a grand or something. Terrible acting, plot and filming.

This "movie" is so bad i have no words!

The only thing worse than the movie was the acting, cardboard cut outs could act better. The storyline...i mean what storyline.

Please please please do not watch this "movie" self mutilation is a better option than watching this, it makes a mockery of the originals and does a disservice to how good they were.

And streaming company would be better removing it from their sites and destroying all evidence of it.