CHEAP THRILLS is another film with a premise about doing 'dares' for hard cash. This low budget offering particularly reminded me of the rather good Thai film 13: GAME OF DEATH, in which a down on his luck office worker becomes involved in a game whereby he earns money for doing increasingly dangerous or disgusting tasks.CHEAP THRILLS is a film very much in the same style although it's lower key, more realistic, and not as outlandish (or entertaining) as the Thai movie. It's basically one of those films where you sit back and enjoy the spectacle, finding yourself variously shocked, surprised, or disgusted by what takes place on screen. A vein of black humour runs through the production which is added to by David Koechner's lively performance as the villain of the piece.The main problem with the film is the lack of sympathetic characters. Everyone in this film is in it for their own gain, so you don't really care what happens to any of them. Pat Healy's protagonist is a case in point and I never warmed to him despite his ordeals. In addition, the climax is obvious and the tasks that do play out are rather predictable; there are few, if any, genuine surprises in this one. It's watchable in a what-would-you-do type way, but overall it's a very superficial movie.

Whoah! Finally a movie that exceeded my expectations!If a movie really hits home with me I usually like it from the very first second. I'll admit that the first seconds of Cheap Thrills wasn't very thrilling, but I knew it was horror(ish) and I knew it has a rather good IMDb-rating, so I just stuck it out, and it got good pretty quickly.The main character (Pat Healy) is likable. The movie looks good(and on a shoestring budget! kudos). The second main character (Ethan Embry) is good too. And the third main character, whaddayouknow, he is good too! But he is played by David Koechner, so I'm not surprised.I didn't know much about the movie before I watched it (I like it that way) so I was constantly guessing and wondering what would happen next. The movie has a great atmosphere.Alright, let me speed this along. Cheap Thrills is a well paced, exciting, fun movie. It is a take on something you have seen before, but it is very well made. Entertaining and never boring with likable characters.

Cheap Thrills (2013) is an independent film based on the idea that people will do anything for money. The story follows two friends who haven't seen each other in five years fall into a game with an insanely wealthy man. The game, do what I say and I will give you money. The beginning of the film showed promise as did the premise of the film. I went in with a positive head on and for the first 20 minutes I was enjoying it. Then I started to notice something, had my curtains always been that colour? I got bored very quickly as the film seemed to repeat itself time and time again. It reminded me of Jackass meets Saw but with none of the humour of Jackass and none of the... well OK Saw was rubbish but you get my point. The acting was great; I could find no fault with the actors or their performances. It was the characters which annoyed me, OK you need money, we get it, we all need money, but I don't think I would cut my little finger off. Instead I would get down the job centre and find another job. Every dare got progressively violent and disgusting and we all knew how this was going to end, right from their first encounter. It was a slow slog to get there with a small twist at the end which admittedly provided a minor shock, but nothing good enough to save the film from itself. I've heard a lot of people praising this film, praising its insight and comedy factor and I can only assume they were watching a different film. There was no insight into this, no originality, yes it was a study of the human condition of what people would go through to get money, a comment on reality TV, but, like reality TV, I was bored, annoyed and utterly unimpressed. Apart from the performances, this film was terrible. It left me feeling depressed that I just spent a portion of time watching such rubbish while at the same time feeling relief on two accounts. One, at least its finished, and two, at least I didn't go to the cinema to see it. Rubbish on all levels, don't believe those people praising it, they're probably the film's PR team.

OK; who the hell came up with this script? A 5 year old... no seconds thoughts I take that back as that is an insult to children in general. Let's crack on with the review...I must admit I thought that the film started out quite strongly; we're introduced to Craig Daniels (Pat Healy) who is a nice and caring family man, he's in employment and seems like a decent guy. He then falls on hard times and ends up losing his job and decides to drown his sorrows. He then bumps into Vince (Ethan Embry) and the pair quickly strike up a conversation with husband and wife Colin and Violet (David Koechner and Sara Paxton). This wealthy couple seem like the ideal solution to Craig's financial situation, but how far will Craig and Vince go for money? The problem with this film is believability; Craig & Vince decide to go along with this ridiculous proposition betting scheme with the wealthy couple, but he'd only lost his job that day. For me, it just isn't believable that he would resort to such drastic measures without speaking to his wife first. Surely a normal person would have discussed their financial problems with their spouse first and then look at more drastic alternatives if they can't find a straight forward solution to their problems. We also never learn how Colin has amassed his vast fortune. I suppose it doesn't really matter in the context of the film, but it would have been nice to get a bit of insight on his behaviour/motivations. This isn't just a failure with his character, but with all the characters. We don't learn much about the characters which means that we won't care about them.Where this film really falls down is when it comes to these proposition bets; they started off as being reasonably believable (downing shots, getting slapped), but then they got more and more ridiculous and less and less believable the further on things progressed (cutting fingers off, pooing in someone's house because the dog pooed on their lawn - I honestly couldn't believe how ridiculous it all was). The turning point for me was when Craig sleeps with Violet (which Violet's husband gives him $4,500 for doing). This happens to be the exact amount that Craig needs to pay off his debts. Ironically, he's told that he needs to sleep with Violet in order to prove how much he loves his wife and therefore get the $4,500 that he needs. After this point, the film becomes more gratuitous and more disgusting (I can take most things, but seeing Craig and Vince eating a cooked dog was just revolting).I can take pretty much anything that any film throws at me, but for me this film didn't seem to have any point to it; was it supposed to act as a dark social commentary on the evils of greed? Who knows? The film seemed to revel so much in pointless gore that I ended up past the point of caring.I hated this film, I thought the plot (if you can even call it that) was probably the most stupid that I've come across in recent years. I thought that the film was pointlessly violent. I didn't like any of the characters and I also hated the way that the film ended. That final scene will stay with me for a long time (and I don't mean that in a good way).