Gripping in the repulsiveness of its main characters. Not inconceivable that this sort of thing really happens in Britain. Horrific if so. A sort of upper-set Lord Of The Flies.

As the wise man said, the English people seem to need their 'periodic fits of morality', and the producers of this film (HanWay/Blueprint Pictures) have provided a feature-length morality tale that is calculated to bring righteous indignation to the boil.At Oxford University, a long-established elite club is about to hold one of its notorious dinners, with all restraints thrown to the wind, and wholehearted debauchery expected of every member. The appeal of the film is that this micro-freemasonry of just ten young men is out to attack everyone who falls below its own (self-awarded) Premier Division status, and there is even some internal feuding, so the number of people wanting to empty a bucket over the spoilt brats could add up to quite a big audience.The opening sequence is a full-costume cameo of the club's 18th century origins, when blasphemy was a big part of the thrill. Today's equivalent is to slag-off socialism (the orthodox religion of college life), and the excoriating of prole and bourgeois fills-out much of the dialogue, duly spiced with offensive language. We are looking at the Cavalier spirit, all swagger and vandalism, supposedly made acceptable by the feudal habit of paying for damage cash-down.Knowing that Oxford's hotels and restaurants have long since banned them, they settle for a village pub, where a decent, popular manager Chris and his glamorous daughter (recognisable from Downton Abbey) reluctantly risk accommodating them in exchange for the financial inducement.The grand banquet is supposed to mirror all the seven sins and more, with an escort-girl summoned for a group-session under the table, which she refuses. One of the less-horrible characters sends for his girlfriend to relieve the all-male atmosphere, but by the time she arrives, they're all drunk and drugged, and she's offered £27,000 (instantly transferable by i-phone) to perform the act instead. "We've got the finest sperm in the country" she is reminded, but just turns on her heel, and never wants to speak to any of them again. Dissatisfied, they set about trashing the room, offering to pay Chris in the standard way. When he refuses their money, they beat him almost to death (just a bit too 18th-century, this touch). At the police inquiry, one of them agrees to take the blame, to enable the other nine to stay at the university. He is expelled, only to find himself eased into a job in London's square mile. The final image is of his self-satisfied smirk.You may or may not choose to accept "Debauchery raised to an art, almost spiritual" as their attempt to dignify the whole mess. This is simply a story of excessive entitlement, where it is the Oxford spires that set-off the anger, possibly the envy, and concentrate the blame. The Clermont Set of the 70's (Goldsmith, Lucan) was just as elitist, but caused amusement, rather than outrage. Soon afterwards, the Punk artists were trashing hotel-rooms as a mailed fist against capitalism; if you'd never trashed a room, you were nothing. Meanwhile many third-world dictators have sons of student-age who behave twenty times worse, without attracting the same venom.As usual with college films, the students are acted by people about ten years too old, and they struggle a bit to achieve the casual, disjointed speech of that particular age-group, often interrupted by random quiz-questions, as though they were on University Challenge. But one of them managed to sum-up their whole agenda in a few well-chosen words: "To eat at the full table of life."

A cracking film if you want to strengthen your hatred of upper class, privileged, rich idiots. I was expecting to hate this film but I actually enjoyed it despite walking away feeling unfulfilled. It is uncomfortable, unpleasant viewing, with many caricatures, but never quite realises the unsettling conclusion it obviously wants to convey. It is much like "The Beach" where it makes you feel dirty for watching but still leaves you unsatisfied.I went to Oxford University and not everyone is posh as sin. You do meet privileged, rich people who went to Eton, Harrow and Winchester but normally they're cleverer than this lot. Only the girls are depicted as being down to earth. My Oxford was not this debaucherous, lecherous or alcoholic. However, the tutorial with Sam West was quite representative as debates in tutorials can get heated at times. I felt the posing and posturing (e.g. during the photograph they take outside the pub) was depressingly unrepresentative of most Oxford Students.It doesn't have much plot and obviously wishes to convey the message that you can get away with anything if you're rich and scheme to the maximum but the quick ending to the movie doesn't justify the message. Alistair (Sam Claifin) ends up taking the fall and gets an offer of a nice job without having to finish university. He has obviously engineered the whole thing to his advantage but this is passed over too quickly at the end of the film to make enough impact.There are some excellent young actors here (e.g. Ben Schnetzer was fantastic in "Pride") but they're not really given the dialogue they deserve and they're so visually similar it's difficult to tell them apart at times. Tom Hollander is a fantastic addition as ex-Riot Club member, now 'fix it all' father and it's a shame he doesn't appear more. I was also impressed by Freddie Fox (who acts shallow, all about the fun President of the club very well) and Max Irons (for his distraught, lost it all through betrayal pain). The other young actors play nasty cowards very well.There are some beautiful shots of Oxford, which is a gorgeous city and well worth a visit. It's funny that they mix all the colleges together to make one, for example the dining room is Christ Church (I think) and the 'horrible' rooms shown are St John's - then again you would only know that if you knew the city. The volume changes were ridiculously annoying though, making it difficult to hear the dialogue when there are just two people and being stupidly over loud when there is a party.You're obviously meant to hate all the members of the Riot Club and you do. The emasculation, pay-off and eventual assault on the publican is extremely uncomfortable viewing. The attempted paid rape of Lauren post their "whore" rejecting them is repulsive. I don't know what I would have done with the offer of £27k, it's a lot of money but then again I've never given oral sex to a guy in my life. You really do applaud her for walking away and it just strengthens the expected hatred of upper class in favour of the state school student who gets in without having to pay for it.Overall I enjoyed this film but was unsatisfied with the conclusion. It could have been a lot more thriller than it ended up being.

It's hard to distinguish what's fact and what's fiction in The Riot Club. On one side secret societies will always have their debauchery and initiations, so a level of trouble-making's to be expected. On the other, TRC exaggerates the misbehavior of a notorious Oxford University group. It's a not so fine line between the two. One single dinner event escalates out of control, subjecting the divide between the rich and the working class. The Riot Club's an infuriating watch, with the majority of the club's members basking in their 'importance', looking down on those they believe to be beneath them. The performances are solid, especially from the club's newest members (Sam Claflin and Max Irons), but two thirds of this film is spent focusing on their petty squabbles than relatable facets.