This film has a pretty bad rating considering its not a particularly bad film. It certainly is not a masterpiece, it doesn't really make you think, the acting isn't fantastic and the plot is a bit hit and miss but you know what I've watched this film a couple of times, I bought it on DVD, would i recommend it, yeah, don't go out of your way to watch it but if it's on give it a go! i just feel the rating is far too low for a film that is actually pretty watchable, and at the end of the day if a film is watchable then it fulfils the minimum requirement that can be expected really. The premise of the film is pretty interesting in a post-apocalyptic-anarchic-society way and its a bit funny in parts, it's one of those films that is likely to be trashed by critics but is not particularly bad, not particularly good, but not bad either. Worth a watch, but again, don't go out of your way.

From the upstart, this film does not know what it wants to be.In one instant, it tries to be a Noel Clarke 'ghetto' type movie, and in the next, it wants to be some steam punk movie from the eighties.It fails on every level, but it demands to be watched until the very end, because of its random set pieces, and really uncomfortable comedy.Set in the future, or five tears away, there is a shortage of food, and people now freerun or ride bikes for transport.Rich people still eat sandwiches, but hey, this film is aimed at the white collar wearing sun readers of the future, and this is another chink in its armour, it doesn't know how to treat the demographic its aiming at.So instead of sending out a message, it treats us to everyone's favourite screen hoodie Adam Deacon vomiting and talking the lingo he does in every. Single. Film. He's. In.there's a random CGI segment thrown in, and an animated segment to try and make it a little more cool, but again, it fails.The film has tried too hard to be something different, and this is destined to become obscure very, very soon.

The film starts off with an eye grabbing first scene which sets up the chaotic nature of the story line and the rest of the film. I found the storyline and the concept of the film very intriguing and I believe this was one of it's high lights. People have criticized it as predictable but to be quite honest; I thought the death of Rager was ridiculously unpredictable. The ending is slightly predictable, but aren't most?I believe the script was the biggest let down for the film. The only decent scripting throughout the film is in our main character's (Junior) soliloquies type commentary in certain segments of the film. I believe the director did an excellent job. The film has a unique morbidity to it, and the editing and filming techniques are almost perfect for the type of film (excluding the fight scene which I thought was very poorly portrayed and edited). The soundtrack was great; with a grime feel. The film was also strongly criticized as a film that condoned and glamorized knife/gang violence but I think it did the opposite. Despite the fact there is a revenge message through out the film, we are also shown the desperateness and the corrupt nature of the setting (which may I mention is non-existent anyway), and that such violence is the norm there, not to mention the "move on" (anti-revenge) turn at the end. I enjoyed this film nearly as much as it's competitors Kidulthood and Adulthood and I feel it was too harshly criticized and is in fact; very underrated.

I watched this movie with Kidulthood, Adulthood in mind and its not quite on par with noel Clark's productions. I can honestly say i was a little disappointed with some of the characters mainly Kicks (adam deacon), i really enjoyed his performances in kidulthood, Adulthood. However he doesn't shine in this movie like he did in his previous performances. This isn't down to bad acting it was down to screen time he just seemed to be in the background. however Craze (Michael Socha) performance did make up for this in my eyes "bloody northern monkey". The cgi in the movie was poor to say the least, You could see what he was trying to do but the budget must of been way off what he wanted & looked more like something from the 80's. Obviously the writer didn't want to go the "usual" London gangster flick route. Instead it is set in the future (2015) Which for me didn't quite work. I would of much preferred a more real to life story. Be warned if you don't/cant understand London lingo then this will leave you trying to understand what is being said and will just sound like gobble de gook. Even with this in mind i am still going to give this movie a 6/10 just because i enjoy inner city gang films. So to sum up the casting & performances were good including the "New boy." The story was mediocre. the OST was good. My top 10 Gangster/London Flicks 1.Rise of The Footsoldier, 2.Kidulthood, 3.Bullet Boy, 4.Adulthood, 5.Rock 'n' Rolla, 6.Harry Brown, 7.Sugarhouse, 8.Shank, 9.Essex Boys, 10.CassNext review will be Bonded by Blood.Thx for reading, peace out.