Rpgcatech Disapointment

Konterr Brilliant and touching

ChampDavSlim The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

englishm-3 I just watched this movie on Showtime. It was entitled D.O.A. (Dead). I had no idea what to expect, so I watched it with an open mind. The first thing that caught my attention was the voice of the lead character, Paris Campbell. It was resonant, clear and articulate. Even though I had never seen him act in anything else, I could tell immediately that this was a seasoned actor, and that drew me in initially. I am not a fan of excessive violence, but despite that, I was well entertained by the level of acting done by the two lead characters. The whole movie is told through flashbacks, and even flashbacks within flashbacks. I am not a gangster or a criminal, but I could find myself identifying with both of the lead characters, and actually cared what was happening to them as the story unfolded. I loved the camaraderie they displayed, and at no time did I feel like they were just "acting". Everything seemed so real, albeit gory at times. I couldn't step away from the screen until the movie was over, and that is a rarity for me. I was grossed out, but thoroughly entertained. It kept me on the edge of my seat, and just about the time I thought I knew what was going on, they would throw in another twist. 10 out of 10!

bexandbarn I'm writing this because as it stands it has been given a rating of 4.9 after less than 200 votes. This is absolutely unfair, as this is definitely above average, especially as there are no big names in it and the whole film has a very low budget feel to it. Film makers who clearly have a low budget should be applauded for making films of this quality when there is so much dross around which have millions of dollars spent on it.Of course, this won't be for everybody. For a start, it is very, very, very violent. The opening five minutes packs a rather nasty punch but should be enough for the viewer to know whether this film is for them or not. If you are put off by the violence, you will hate this movie. If you say 'wow' then you will not be disappointed by the rest of this movie.The two heavies this story revolves around play their roles superbly and at times, too convincingly. The viewer never knows what actually occurred with different versions of the truth being played out. It culminates in a fairly grizzly finale, but one which is plausible and pleasing (especially for the sick among us).It's funny, but all the reviews on IMDb are positive. So who are these people downgrading it? And for the record - I'm in no way affiliated with this film, as a lot of reviewers are on IMDb. Check out my other reviews to prove it. This is a tour de force of realistic violence with a good story and excellent acting. A must for gangster film buffs who like their violence grittily displayed.

piverba This is not a film to be forever written in the annals of cinematography but it is poignant tale of violence without glorification of the mob. If there is one distinctive character of this film it's it honesty. Yes, it's about cruelty, murder, vise of all kinds. It is suspenseful and unpredictable. All characters are killed, the assumptive protagonist is turned out to be a liar, similar to others, no better than the others, as it should and must be. He tells the story portraying him a reasonable person, even compassionate. Momentarily we may forget that he's an active participant of the mob, our minds are not ready to deal with complete negativity; we require a redeemer, someone positive, a counterweight to establish the equilibrium. Who triumphs? – yes, you guessed it – the boss - the most ruthless and unpretentious of them all. He's the arch-thug and does not make a secret of it. He can never be accused of being nice, he never thinks nice, nor acts nice, he does not need nor want anybody to think nice of him. He's honest. He rips out protagonist's tong because he would not tolerate lies and deceptions in his domain. This is fitting conclusion of a story of a mobster, who pretended to play the role of a 'good guy'.Often we are shown films, such as with Steven Seagal, where the protagonist, who demonstrates ruthlessness exceeding that of his opponents, somehow portraits as a positive character, avenging society. The reality is that this protagonist prevails because he was more ruthless than the 'bad guys'. We feel relieved that someone did this dirty job for us, or we feel, vicariously, to be this hero ourselves. Both feelings are deceptive – we are being manipulated to obtain inauthentic relief, like a junkie, offered a fix. Violence, if shown at all, need not to be cathartic, nor feel like pleasure, neither remembered as an agreeable experience. It should feels badly, for it is stupid and self-destructive activity, not to be indulged in.A better way to dispense with the story like this one is to pluck out the tong of the symbolic story tellers by not patronizing their films. In a way Jeff and Josh Crook did just that with regard to all this Mel Gibson's Hollywood trash. Their violence does not feel good – it feels ugly, pointless and dead; it has no future.

fallguy_jack I was surprised at how enjoyable this movie was. Clearly not a big budget film, it ended up being quality entertainment.The story keeps you interested and guessing, so that in itself makes for better than a lot of movies of any budget.The acting is actually pretty good, especially considering there are no high priced actors, I think we'll be seeing more from a lot of them with this on their reels.There's definitely some brutal stuff, and some funny stuff.All in all I don't see anyone who is not expecting an Oscar worthy film being disappointed with watching this.