The Devil's Business

A clear rip-off of Ben Wheatley's KILL LIST, THE DEVIL'S BUSINESS is a hopeless travesty of a film. Shot almost entirely in the dark with mainly just two actors on the screen, it sees a couple of hit-man - a seasoned professional and his rookie apprentice - visiting a house to carry out a hit. Once there they find the place deserted so they sit round for about an hour of screen time, waiting for him to show up.

The story is extraordinarily low budget so this needed a fantastic script to make up for it. Sadly there isn't one. The acting is hopeless, particularly on the part of the inexperienced younger guy, but it's the dialogue that crushes the life from this one. There's a ten minute monologue which is one of the dullest ever and has no real connection to the central story, as tenuous as that is. It appears somebody researched the life of Aleister Crowley and decided to do a modern-day version of the tale but the effort is entirely unsuccessful. Indeed THE DEVIL'S BUSINESS is the worst horror film I've seen in a long time, and that comes from somebody frequently exposed to the worst late-night excesses of The Horror Channel.

Two hit men arrive at a house under instruction to kill the guy who lives there. They sit around talking waiting for him to get home, one of 'em goes for a Pooh just as he gets back. Timing, eh?

The cast, all four of them, are very good, especially Billy Clarke as Pinner, the elder, experienced hit-man. His unblinking 10 minute monologue is flipping ace, a great, weighty centrepoint of the film. The majority of the runtime is the verbal exchange between the two hit men, there is gore and jump scares but they're not over used and the script will hold your attention as it creates a nice creeping tension.

The only weak point is the very end of the film, without giving anything away, it gets, we thought, a little silly. It's a let-down, but a forgivable one as the hour leading up to it was so enjoyable and well made.

Well worth a purchase/rental!

The Devil's Business just came across as an extremely low budget made-for-TV movie. It was heavily dependent on the conversation between just 2 people for the majority of the movie duration. In order to carry that sort of setup off you're going to need some top quality acting and while the acting was occasionally decent in this movie, it was also sometimes below average.

Both Billy Clarke and Jonathan Hansler gave decent performances for the most part but Jack Gordon couldn't really match them for most of his on-screen time, although there was one scene where he demonstrated his true capability and that just about saved his credibility. Perhaps the scripting for his character was part of the problem. All the actors showed promise but they really needed more time and more takes to film the scenes perfectly. I assume either the budget didn't allow them to do this, or the director didn't spot the potential for improvement.

The writing overall was good and could even be considered the stand-out feature, it's just a shame that the budget couldn't be stretched considerably to make this into a real film and bring out the writing with cut-scenes and great cinematography. Instead, nearly all the action takes place in a darkly-lit small house somewhere in England. As a result, the visual imagery is just dull and boring for most of the movie and it gets tiresome rather quickly.

The production value was just a notch above the sort of movie a student might make at college or university, it was just so low that it was almost filmed like an episode of some British television show from the 80's, just sadly not with the same sort of entertainment value.

All the actors had some passion to their work, the writing was decent, the direction, while flawed, showed promise. But as a complete package, a fairly terrible movie that I just can't recommend. Maybe with a bigger budget it could have been a totally different story..

I had read several very positive reviews of this movie so I was excited to watch it...I was very disappointed. The ending was incredibly cheesy and silly, the sound effects were way overdone (there is a part with a baby where they play a crying baby sound as if you couldn't tell it was a baby...come on) and the music was this ever-present "typical horror movie" soundtrack. I was a bit put off at first because the plot summary sounded so much like the (far superior) Kill List, and it really is pretty similar...if you took the great cinematography, the unflinching brutality and the budget away from Kill List and then put the music from an 80s episode of Unsolved Mysteries over the entire thing, you might get something resembling this movie. It's only 69 minutes but it felt way too long and was very predictable and obvious. The lead actor did a really good job and the actor playing Kist was effectively creepy and without them this would be firmly in Syfy Channel B-movie territory. I still wouldn't recommend it; this is one that is not worth the hype. Just go watch Kill List again and save yourself the trouble.

...and I'm saying that as an obsessive fan of Kill List--as in, watched it dozens of times. Another reviewer here claims that if "rips off Kill List" and that is simply wrong. True, it features two hit men, one English, one Irish. They run into trouble on the job and the subgenres switch from crime drama to folk horror, but the dynamic between the two principals are completely different, plot doesn't come close to resembling Kill List and, while it can be argued that it's not as good as Kill List, it isn't a bad film by any means. Performances were impressive, especially Billy Clarke's Pinner, the plot was fairly original, and while it isn't terrifying, there are a couple of nice creepy moments.

To be honest, I might have been disappointed if I paid full-price at a theater, but to watch it I Shudder while recovering from a bug wasn't a bad way to kill 90 min or so.