I feel that, like most people, I have begun to rely on user reviews much more than so called "critic" reviews. Before the internet, we were all kind of beholden to what the experts said and many times the reviews were misleading. Large blockbusters were typically panned, and slow indie dramas were universally acclaimed. The reviews were filled with fancy and unnecessary adjectives and never really told us what type of audience would enjoy the movie. And for the most part, user reviews and ratings are much more accurate for whatever reason. So I was a little surprised at the great reviews and nearly a 7 rating this movie has been getting. I think a 5 / 10 is much more appropriate.
For me, this movie was much closer to an amateur film, than an indie film. The other reviews and rating led me to believe that the film would be closer the Guvnors, We Still Kill the Old Way, the Sweeny or Football Factory. Violent films of the British underworld that are solid and have respectable acting, but never get to the "classic" level of Lock, Stock or Snatch. These movies are entertaining and keep you engaged, but never achieve the level of your favorites.
Anti-social did not deliver based on the other user reviews and its high rating. I try to give films the benefit of the doubt and maybe I am being harsh because of what I expected, but for me this movie would be a pass. The acting is rather stilted and contrived. I have not researched the actors who play the two main brothers, but I have to believe that they are not seasoned actors. The actions scenes were not nearly gritty enough and cut away right when the actual hit would take place. And the ending left me unsatisfied, although I kept hoping for a realistic close.
I feel as though the movie suffered from a very small budget and was annoyed the reviews did not prepare me for this. If you do give this movie a try, expect more of a low budget made for TV film, rather than a B movie on teenage gangsters.
