Bullets, Blood & a Fistful of Ca$h (2006) User Reviews

Like Vengeance? Like Cash!

[Andrew-J · 6/10 · 7 June 2010]

To be honest, this writer nearly shut down the movie in the first three minutes. There is a lot of hand-held, jerky camera work, and that is a great turnoff.

Fortunately, the movie stayed on. The writing was not bad at all, and the direction was noticeably better than most films with a comparative budget. The character of Cash is one you almost want to hate... Except the actual villains are more despicable.

Basically, this movie is about a bad guy taking out worse guys in order to take his revenge on a purely evil guy. There's a lot of violence and a lot of swearing, but very little nudity.

This receives a six out of ten only because of the production quality, and the feeling that it could have attained even higher heights. Nevertheless, it is a great movie for the vengeance aficionado.

Nice Effort; But, No Thanks.

[Haynerator · 2/10 · 19 January 2009]

OK...So this film happened to be on Prime-Time TV on a Friday night. We weren't really in film mode - But as we are friends with one of the actors we decided to watch it, mostly for him.

Now lets see; I'll start from the beginning - I mean, the opening was great for the money, it was inventive and looked pretty captivating. After this it starts to fall apart bit by bit.

I started losing interest. There were only 3 good performances, count em, 3. They were; Jerry Lloyd, Phil Randoy and Rodrigo DeMedeiros. The rest felt like overacting and the rest just bad acting...Tom Doty looked right for the character he was playing, but his performance was often quite shallow and unconvincing. The story was quite convoluted, it felt as if there was too much going on and I couldn't really grasp what the characters were doing. All I managed to comprehend by the end of the film was Cash's vendetta for Hector, and why. But I didn't understand why Pablo screwed Cash over, Abe Shanks intentions towards the crime syndicate mish-mash, or why Hector did what he did to create Cash's vendetta towards him.

This is where I lost interest, I got confused - Why did I get confused? I didn't understand at all, if I was supposed to take this film seriously or not and I spent more time working that out then concentrating on the story. The violence was ridiculously over the top and often times quite funny, in no way realistic, but funny. Though because of the opening being so great it left me in an awkward position and it confused hell out of me.

I'll use 'Sin City' as a comparison here, because it's a similar genre. 'Sin City' had a perfect balance between the silly and the serious, you can identify immediately that the film is not taking itself seriously yet is balanced out by good acting and good writing. So you can watch it seriously and respect it for what it is. 'Bullets Blood, & a Fistful of Ca$h' was a horrid mess of silly and serious, it's almost as if you're laughing one moment and then wondering if you were supposed to the next...This sucked out any humour in dialogue that was intended to be funny.

Some of the cinematography wasn't too bad, there were some nice angles, and though the violence seemed silly; it was pretty impressive for the budget.

There were too many main characters, and only a handful were properly introduced. The rest popped up randomly claiming to have some involvement in the main plot, this takes you out of the story from what you've seen so far for you to practically go back to the beginning to learn something new...It shifts to much to concentrate on.

The editing process clearly had very little patience behind it, there were some horrible cuts and a lot of the audio was poorly inserted.

That's all I can remember off the top of my head - I'd take notes if I watched it again, but I don't really want to.

It was a nice effort with the budget, and I commend the people involved taking a stab at this - But it just didn't come together very well. Overall the film was pretty messy, and I think it would only be passable to fans of these genre of films. More time needed to be spent on the script so that it flowed well and made sense. It should also be decided from the off if you're going to want people to take the film seriously or if it's intended to be some form of parody. If you want to attempt both in one, some serious thought processes need to go into where you want the humorous performances to go to avoid some mess.

I don't really recommend this film...To anyone, to be perfectly honest. But I still commend the efforts and congratulate the makers for getting it on TV at such a perfect time slot. Better luck next time, but this one is probably something to bury.

Over hyped bad film

[nwfilmguy · 1/10 · 7 November 2006]

I must disagree this is by far one of the worst films I have ever seen. Yes its a true independent in-terms of the fact that it was shot on 50k.. and man you can tell. The sound is a joke! it clips, the Foley is not present. i mean take some time and do it right! They claim it was shoot on 16mm but i could swear it was shoot on digital, it just does not look like film ... or shoot by people that don't know how to use a camera at all and very bad lighting.

The more important thing to bring up is that as an independent you have to have a SOLID story that will drive people and introduce you to characters that will suck you and want you to love or hate them... the only people i hate are the filmmakers for making a movie with out a storyline. Hollywood crap like The Marine are more entertaining than this and thats sad. Its too long with childish writing that does not go anywhere. It has stage actors that over act of actors that have no idea how to act. Even the Exec Producer shows up in and is so bad its a joke. As a director you need to guild your actors, and help them craft their characters.. even if they characters are dry and one dimensional.

OK special effects again not bad for 50k BUT still it comes across as a cheap horror film, Troma makes better movies than this. The blood is thin and sprays out all over and does not look real. But not bad for the money... the guns that where all over this movie have very bad audio. The ADR work is a joke! You can tell where they are live on set and when they are totally in some bad sound studio because the audio is to deep.

Look this is not a good film, and just because they made it on so little does not mean we should glorify it. Who cares you can tell they made it on nothing, they took no time to make a story that flowed and entertained. The director is young and lacks the talent to make the characters talk. It is an insult to compare this movie to a Quentin Tarantino film! Next time stay in pre-production longer, get actors that can act... spend more money on sound. Suck me in, don't push me out.

I also would like to point out they turned down a 1.2million dollar distribution deal because they want full control and want to make 100million and actually think they will. Independent film makers need to learn if they want to make it in Hollywood your first film will not make you that much.. your second film will make you the money.. Its a business.

Oh and done give me that "your a sell out" if you do that. First this is not some amazing film that will change your life.. its a violent plot less, bad acting pile that uses the F word far to much to the point where it becomes a joke. So they are not selling out.

This film is good for one things... in school "what not to do when you make an independent film" Sorry guys, it is just that bad. Don't waste your time. It will get a cult following because its just so bad... it becomes funny... then boring because you just want it to end.

Don't waste your time. I gave it 1 star for effort... and because it is as low as i can go.

C rate movie

[shane73 · 1/10 · 7 January 2010]

Looks good for the low budget, but a terrible script and very very badly acted. I am sure some of the votes of 10 stars are from friends of the director or something. This looks like a well made student film. I know it was shot on film and some of it is shot very well. I am sure most of the budget was spent on the shoot not on getting a good script or good actors. The director does show promise, I would like to see what he does with a decent script. This is by no means on par with any thing like a Sexy Beast, or Tarantino flick. More like a very bad Steven Segal film or a Brian Bosworth film. A best this film is joke of an action film. If there cast were believable and said believable things it would be bearable.

Sit back and enjoy the cheese

[mgbp7 · 1/10 · 20 August 2010]

To appreciate this movie, you have to appreciate cheese. Because let's get one thing straight: this movie is *bad*. Make that Bad, with a capital B. The lower than low production values, horrid music, over-the-top acting, and shockingly bad sound quality are enough to make this look like a movie torn straight from the 80s. All that's missing are the cheesy mullets, jean jackets, and the classic 80s synth soundtrack. I was literally shocked when I came on here and saw that this was a 2006 movie.

Now, I actually loved this movie. It made me feel all warm inside. But that's because it was hella cheesy and I hadn't seen anything so purely cornball in years. Make no mistake… acting, camera work, story, effects… any way you look at it, this movie is not good.

Oh, you can see that the filmmakers had some ambition – that they were going for a Tarantinoesque coolness, with a cast of characters who all have their own separate agendas and end up coming together in the end in a big face-off – but it's so far off the mark that you just have to ignore whatever attempts there are at making a competent movie and enjoy the cheese.

One of the essential ingredients of a classic cheesy movie is that it takes itself seriously – it's trying to be cool, it thinks it's clever, but it's so far off the mark and that's what makes it funny. This movie certainly has that. But it's trying so hard that you get the feeling that the folks who made this movie really think they're on to something… it feels like they think this can grab a genuine cult audience.

Thankfully, the cheese factor is so high that the movie still stays in "so bad it's good" territory, despite its lofty ambitions.

I think viewers will fall into three categories:

• You expect a decent movie of passable quality and have no tolerance for poorly-executed movies. You don't understand the allure of cheese. For you, this movie sucks.

• You understand cheese but don't find this movie to have any redeeming value, even from that standpoint. It really is so bad it's bad. For you, this movie also sucks.

• You have a deep appreciation and love for (unintentionally) cheesy action and horror movies and see the 80s as the golden age of pure action cheese. For you, this movie is comedy gold. Priceless.

I feel like the overly positive (albeit surely fake) reviews and some of the negative reviews miss the point because they are taking this movie at face value and judging it against a baseline of what you can reasonably expect from a movie. It's not about that. You're either going to get a kick and a bunch of laughs out of the corniness of this thing or you're going to think it's a pure waste of time. There's no middle ground.

Just three more things: I can say that if you took the overall plot and ending of this movie (and I mean just the bare-bones on-paper plot and nothing else) and put it in *much* more capable hands, it could be a pretty awesome revenge movie.

Also, the white bald crooked cop… he was the best actor in this thing. He's the only one who engendered intentional humor.

Third, though the filmmakers have probably watched their share of Tarantino and were probably going for that kind of feel, not in a million moons could this ever compare to the *worst* of what Tarantino has put out. To compare this movie to Tarantino's work is a great insult and a joke. This is not a lower-budget Tarantino-style movie. It's pure cheese, take it or leave it.

Oh, and fourth: I get the feeling that the dudes who made this movie probably love movies and really wanted to make something hardcore and cool, so I feel kind of bad for slamming the film. It's not easy to make a good movie, and starting off with heavy budget constraints doesn't make things easier. Still, after reading the reviews, I just had to reply honestly.

Movie Highlights:

• All of the dialog; not just because it was so hammy, but because it literally sounds like it's been dubbed. The sound quality is that bad.

• Cash's shoot now, ask later philosophy: a big group of bad guys stand around in a parking lot staring at Cash with his shotgun. One of them makes a cheesy smartmouth comment with the kind of poorly-acted vigor that would make any random 80s bad guy thug proud. Cash says nothing but immediately proceeds to blast the guy with his shotgun, which sends him flying to kingdom come. *Hilarious*.

• Similar scenario, just from the trunk of a car instead.

• Same scenario, just in a warehouse instead.

• Three Asian gangsters get in the back of a car. A ridiculously blond*, obviously not Asian dude is sitting still as a stick in the front seat. The Asian gangstas proceed to yell at him in (what sounds to me like) Vietnamese, because they mistake said white man for a Vietnamese man -- their usual driver, I guess (I missed some of the prior scenes). Dude obviously has no idea what they're saying and is not Vietnamese. Gangsters still don't get it and keep yelling at him. Finally the dude turns around and reveals what we've known all along: he's not the Vietnamese guy they thought he was – he's a white man! So that's why he didn't respond to all their shouting! The only way this could have been funnier is if it had been a bald black man in the front seat who they were uselessly screaming at in Vietnamese. (*Of course there are Asian dudes out there with blond hair. But this cat was obviously white.)

Very cool movie, though misunderstood

[crisunity · 8/10 · 31 October 2007]

When I watched this film I had read all the hype about it though I still didn't expect much cause I knew the budget was low and its marketed as this sort of gritty action movie. I was really surprised. Reading the negative comments on the IMDb, I realize that these guys don't get it. It uses a lot of character and literary devices that you never see in these kinds of films. I really enjoyed the dialog - sometimes there's too much exposition, but the story forces you to stay on your toes. Its not a movie for lazy viewers like that one guy who said there was no continuity cause Cash gets stabbed in one scene and in the next there is no wound. There's no wound because it skips back earlier in the day before he got hurt. But it's hard to follow until three quarters of the way through the movie when all the stories come together and you realize what the filmmakers have been doing. Bullets is a different kind of action movie - the plot is pretty basic revenge story, but the way it's told is what makes it special. I agree that Bullets shouldn't be compared to Tarantino, but really its hard not to. It's got revolving story lines, jumps through time, and its chock full of blood and gore. But the blood and guts are supposed to be campy - thats what makes it fun. I think some people take the movie way to seriously, especially when the movie doesn't take itself that seriously. He kills a guy with his own broken bone, I mean come on people! It ain't the Shawshank Redemption! Maybe its not Tarantino - but its pretty damn cool.

Rather go sleep for two hours than spend them on this bad bad movie!

[anfilohije · 1/10 · 27 October 2007]

This is a horrible film. I ain't no movie maker or no pro, neither am I some movie goer film lover kissie type, I just like good movies that are entertaining. I have to agree with reviewer that said it is an insult to compare this poor movie with something Tarantino would do. Plot is ridiculous, and story isn't consistent. Not even scenes are consistent - even for such a careless viewer such as myself, I have had to notice when Cash gets a knife in his back - in the next scene in the bathroom, there is no wound in his back, etc. Even Great Disaster movies are less disastrous than this attempt of a film, plot is for 8-years old but movie is probably R rated for all the violence and potty mouths...

All in all, do not waste your time on this movie! Rather go sleep, that would make better two hours than spending them on this mediocre moving picture. At least, sleeping can be entertaining sometimes. This movie surely ain't even remotely entertaining.

Not over-hyped, badly marketed kick a$$ film!!!!

[wendell_payne · 10/10 · 1 November 2007]

Are you f%&&ing kidding me?? This movie kicks a$$!!! I saw BBFOC at a screening in Cannes - everybody there was blown away by this film! It's got a 4.2??? Wtf?! Maybe the cut I saw is not the same thing as the cut that got released or something but myself and many others there were SERIOUSLY impressed by this guy Sam Akina. And the guy who plays Cash is a freaking monster! People on this site are talking about hype - WTF?? Have you seen the poster?? There was a joke going around Cannes because BBFOC was advertised in magazines for almost a week, and the poster for it was so GOD AWFUL!! We had to go check it out because we'd been joking for days about it and thought it was going to be one of those movies like "Body Armor" that sucks so bad its funny. Not even close! What it was being "hyped" as and what it was were two totally different things. BBFOC is slick, smart, dark, super-violent and funny as hell! It knows exactly the kind of movie it is - whoever is making the posters and doing the press for it doesn't - and that's too bad. I really haven't had that much fun watching a movie in a LOOONG time. Hats off to these guys for making it, I'm really looking forward to seeing what Akina does in the future when he has some real money to work with.

PS - As far as the Tarantino comparison goes, I also saw Death Proof at Cannes. Sucked!!!! All you Tarantino fans who think he's some kind of incomparable god need to think again - the guy hasn't made a decent movie since Pulp Fiction, and thats a fact! He's been resting on his laurels ever since - if any body else had made Death Proof it would have been called a Tarantino rip-off, it was so bad. Nobody is calling BBFOC a Tarantino rip off - they are making straight comparisons to the filmmakers themselves. (and when Tarantino first started out, people made direct comparisons to Martin Scorsese and that was considered blasphemy as well - now Tarantino is his own institution) This guy Sam Akina is a massive talent - I know because I've seen it - and people who say he is the next Tarantino are totally justified to do so - for what he did with that budget and that story, he deserves a f#%@%$ing genius award!!!

Absolute crap

[thebogofeternalstench · 1/10 · 23 June 2011]

This was shot on film? It looks terrible. THey wasted half their budget on that??? The picture looks horrid, cheap and nasty, and not in a good way.

It falls into that cliché '$hitty boring student' type of film where the acting is contrived and wooden as you can get.

The sound was terrible. I don't understand why they have so many close ups in the movie either.

The dialogue is just....lame.

I thought this would be a cheesy, enjoyable movie but its a total waste of time.

And again, I cant believe they wasted half the budget on the terrible 16mm or whatever they used.

Great Bad Movie

[shawfr · 8/10 · 8 February 2009]

Not going to go in depth but it is a pretty good "bad" movie... If you watch close there are a lot of filming mistakes...like misspellings in the translations when the characters talk in foreign language or the telephone receiver is unplugged from the base when they are talking on it. This makes for entertaining viewing, worth seeing. Don't be expecting some high quality filming from expensive audio/video equipment. It could definitely be remade into a hit with some storyline editing and more money into the production. I would recommend it even with the lower quality filming. Pretty good for up and coming filmmakers to see how you can creatively film on a budget.

What an Unexpected Delight

[wamsam69 · 8/10 · 8 February 2009]

I totally stumbled upon this movie last night,DVR'd it for fun, and watched it AGAIN this morning! What a kick ass flick! I love the spaghetti western feel to this film, the spare gritty feel was a nice change from this overproduced CGI crap that keeps getting put in my face as "action". You'll either get it, or you won't. I agree it has an early Tarintino feel to it, but without all the verbal vomit Mr. T. has become so fond of putting in his movies. But, anyspray, Thom Doty was PERFECT as Ca$h!I knew I was in for some sweet revenge from the moment his bad ass hit the screen, and he delivered! Yes, the acting was a tad cheesariffic,the blood & brains were a'spurtin hard,and it jumps around the time line a bit, all to delicious perfection. Why hadn't I heard of this movie until now? If you like Botoxed anorexics shot through cheesecloth singing about the wind beneath their wings, this ain't your show. If you like a good story, this is worth checking out.

Blood and gutsy movie

[amysiebert · 10/10 · 31 August 2006]

"Bullets, Blood and Fistful of Ca$h" is a great movie! It's an excellent film for those who enjoy the gangster genre or just action/adventure movies in general. It is action packed with plot twists and realistic fight scenes throughout. Although it can be slightly confusing at times because there are a lot of different characters and rival gangs to remember, this is necessary for the plot to work. Plus the variety of characters (most of them "evil") keeps the viewer interested in how Ca$h (the main character) is going to win against them all. If you like movies in this genre "Bullets, Blood..." is a must see!

Bullets is incredible!

[voiceacrobat · 10/10 · 13 June 2006]

I've seen a lot of movies, I've seen a lot of action movies. I've seen Hollywood and Indie movies. I've seen good movies and horrible movies. Bullets is a great movie, for several reasons. First of all it is ENTERTAINING as hell! The bottom line, when you see a movie you want to feel like you got your money's worth, or in this case your cold hard CASH's worth. Minute for minute, punch for punch, shot for shot Bullets delivers entertainment! Big Time! Another reason Bullets straight up Rocks is that fact that it is a truly independent film. Akina Films, the film production company that made Bullets, calls it "The most ruthless independent film ever made!" That could be an arguable statement, I mean I haven't seen EVERY film ever made so who knows maybe there is another more ruthless indie out there, but not one that I've ever seen! But, how true Akina Films own take on their film may be, it is a TRUE independent film. You ever notice how there are all these "idependent films" out there that were made for like $25 million with a HUGE star attached? To me that's not REALLY independent, that's just a movie that wasn't made by a big studio. Bullet's on the other hand DEFINES the true meaning of the word "independent". If I had to guess just from what I saw on the screen, I would say the budget for Bullets was maybe $1-2 million but I heard it was more like less than $100 thousand! There are no Hollywood Stars in this movie, but I wouldn't be surprised if this movie helped make a star out of a few of the actors because the acting is, for the most part incredible. The cinematography is straight up DOPE, and the story is not only satisfying, but has some great twists. The bottom line is that if you are a Tarantino or a Guy Ritchie fan, you should not only SEE this movie in the theater, but when it's available on DVD you should flip some flow and add this to your collection! Bullet's, Blood and a Fistful of Ca$h, I give Two Fists Straight UP!

Oustanding

[light-rock · 10/10 · 9 April 2009]

What an amazing surprise and a joy to watch.

This is what happened to me, it started off like a B movie, and I enjoy B movies and watching talent develop, actors, directors, writers, etc., and at first the acting seemed cheesy, but it just kept getting better and better.

It got to the point where I was like "Wow, these guys are really going for an A in film school". AND THEN, then moments of sheer genius started popping up all over the place. The director and cinematographer seemed to really kick it in to high art gear.

By the time it was all over I was soul searching trying to figure out in my mind why this sort of classifies as a B movie in my mind but at the same time a desperate longing for my mind to classify it as a totally A list type of thing.

If Terantino's name were on it, it would have equaled the Grind Houses.

The main character is the most amazing bad a$$ to come along in a long time.

His silhouette coming at you from the perspective of the bad guys is as good an image as there has ever been.

Enjoy it on many many levels.

EPIC FILM! Top of my Action Movie List!!!

[hilldabeastprison · 10/10 · 26 May 2016]

This movie blew my balls off. I stumbled across it channel surfing at 2am one night, it was just beginning. After 10 minutes in, I was HOOKED! The action sequences and story line was GOLD! This Action flick has it all. Blood, Guts, Gunz, One-liners, humor, and Fight scenes that will have you shadow boxing. The music score is awesome! Killer guitar riffs, growling bass rolling along with other scenes of overcharged driving music. The multiple ending on DVD leave options... After it ended, I was jacked up and ready to watch it again. Unfortunately, I never caught the title of this flick that night, and it took my years of surfing the internet to track it down.

This movie now is in my collection! Seen it a dozen times. It Never gets old.

A sparkling gem.

[johnathonr78-821-708601 · 8/10 · 18 October 2013]

I must admit that when I read the description of the movie, I did not think the movie would be all that great. To my surprise, it was really good. The movie was made with a blend of two styles. The first style is A 80's action movie style that blends, violence, sex, revenge, and absurdity. Yes, I said Absurdity. It's a fact that most of the Action movies of the 80's were absurd. If you are unclear on what I mean by absurdity, then watch "Commando", "Rambo" (the original), "Missing in Action", etc. The more recent films, "Expendables", "Machete", and "Red" also have it. That absurdity is a large part of what made those movies so great to watch for those of us who grew up in the 80's. The second style is Flash Back story telling. At least that is what I call it. It's where the story is told in part by the use of flash backs.

This kind of movie isn't for everyone.

I've only ever been good at two things; killing people's one of 'em... I forget the other.

[Stoicorum88 · 8/10 · 13 April 2020]

This one was a complete surprise and a blind-buy from a thrift store.

Firstly let me get the negatives out of the way: there's a scene where the main character is hit by a car which was some of the worst CGI I've seen in probably a decade, there's some filming mistakes like a scene where a guy has a knife stabbed through his hand pinning it to a shelf but in the next scene you can see his hand (which is out of shot) slip down into the shot revealing no knife through it, and a few other flubs you might expect from a low budget independent film.

That stuff aside, this movie is a rollercoaster ride of brutality, practical effects, blood, gore, raining ammunition, 80's style tough guy one-liners, ruthless facial expressions and general bad assery. Bullets, Blood & a Fistful of Ca$h is basically The Punisher in all but name and I think Tom Doty (the titular character) would have definitely made a fantastic Frank Castle if he had been offered the role in the early-to-mid 2000's.

Tom Doty embodies the one-man army trope perfectly, like a combination of The Punisher and John Matrix with one of the most psychopathic faces in all of cinema history. Honestly it's shocking to me that this film isn't on more radars, especially the radars of those who crave trail-of-bodies revenge/action films.

It really sucks to see that Tom Doty hasn't done much since this movie and hasn't done another lead role at all since it in particular. This was the best $2 I've spent in years, highly recommended for anybody who just wants to sit back on the couch and watch a bullet-riddled bloodbath.

Deserves extra praise for the insane and creative ending.

OOPS. THIS THING HAS A HAIR TRIGGER.

[nogodnomasters · 10/10 · 14 September 2018]

Thom Doty stars as Cash in this improbable grindhouse. Cash, who was a "throw away baby" gets released from jail. His sole purpose in life is to get revenge on drug czar, club owner, and bad guy Hector Gonzales (Jerry Lloyd) who had double crossed him during a bank robbery. Meanwhile Gonzales is in a turf war with other syndicates.

Cash stops at nothing to get his revenge, killing and destroying everything in his way. The acting was typical grindhouse with the usual fun tough guy statements such as "What are you going to do? Kill us all?" The film includes plenty of killing, blood, and a decapitation. For those who like inane grindhouse action, this one has it. Doty has the toughness of Seagal, but the delivery of Austin. How tough? Check out his shoulder after he was stabbed and walked around with a knife in it. Looks like a small healed scar.

F-bomb, n-word, implied sex, no full nudity (dancers, g-strings, pasties).

Cheap ripoff, but not bad at that.

[muskratboy1 · 6 September 2010]

I'm guessing this guy saw "Sin City" and really, really liked it.

a cheap-as-dirt ripoff of sin city / any Tarantino movie... lots of blood and violence, satisfyingly gritty.

the main guy is basically a Marv stand-in, right down to the gruff voice over.

not a bad little movie, but not original in any way either. pretty good, in a grim, gritty sort of way.

the main guy makes a pretty convincing, if Michael Dudikoff-esquire, killing machine.

not bad, but pretty freaking standard. looks pretty much exactly like every other movie on Starz Action channel, but with slightly more blood.

This is an action film.

[srjblaze · 18 April 2010]

If you like Quentin Tarantino type action movies, IE Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill, then you are going to like this movie. Shot with the same kind of gritty camera work that made movies like Three Kings so interesting, this movie doesn't disappoint. The main character is who you want to be. He is THE man. The story is great, complicated, and confusing all at the same time. The characters are wonderfully cheesy, unique, and unforgettable. The fact that they made it with an uber low budget (50k????) is just remarkable. I've watched studio films that were not nearly as entertaining as this. Its like a soap opera, you have to keep watching to see what happens next! If your looking for an evening filled with lots of action, gunshots, gangsters, and plenty of gore, this film is your ticket!