Matrixston Wow! Such a good movie.

Freaktana A Major Disappointment

Bumpy Chip It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Steve Mcmillan Shocking dialogue and acting, with no redeeming features whatsoever. The fight scenes are dreadful, the sound is dreadful, the plot is dreadful and the cast are dreadful. Gunfire sounds like firecrackers and the dialogue sounds as if the actors were making it up as they went along. Fight scenes are comedic, in that there is no rehearsed moves and sound effects, so all you get is a few grunts here and there and screwed up noses. The budget for this movie must have been around a hundred quid. Wardrobe looks limited to Sue Ryder, especially the bald 'heavy', who clearly drew the short-straw when it came to attire! It really boils down to a gangster war consisting of about ten people - 'very scary'. Nothing about this film is believable, from the ridiculous opening scenes, where we see two gangs of over the hill thugs, doing everything but FIGHT, despite being six feet apart - just enough room for the 5 or so extras, dressed as riot police to fit in (obviously a tight budget). Only then do we see some pathetic shoving about, resembling a fight in a Thursday morning Post Office pension queue. What is puzzling is that the rogue policeman, despite taking over the protection racket (consisting of one garage) and telling the owner he has to pay 'him' now, then inexplicably shoots him in virtually the next scene, thereby rendering the exercise pointless. It's safe to assume that I hated this movie - low-budget it may be but every single facet of this movie is appalling. With better direction, a better script and a few more quid spent, this might have been redeemable. As it is, it's simply amateurish and embarrassingly bad!

James Taff OK, so I noticed this film and got hooked in by the 5 star blah blah and the (at the time) IMDb rating of 7.0. Usually means it will be of a decent standard even if you don't like the premise or the movie itself. Oh how wrong. I couldn't literally believe how bad ALL of the acting was. Some people mention the performance of the lead actor; well they are clearly his friends because he was the best of a very bad bunch. The guy who played the character "Lee" was so miscast it is untrue. You will never hear an Essex "hard man" talk the way that he does. It was hard enough anyway but from the moment he entered the movie any ounce of seriousness I had had evaporated. Such a poor actor. I would go so far as to say it was a total embarrassment to the British film industry and I hope I never watch a movie as bad ever again. I lasted around 30 minutes and then my girlfriend and I watched "The Martian", then you can see what real actors can actually do. Do not waste your time. It won't be long until this film has a 3/4 rating on here, and even that would be extremely generous.

Gus Macduff I don't know where to begin... I was a huge fan of the original Essex Boys and Rise of the Foot Soldier movie, and then I watched Essex Boys: Retribution which was totally appalling. I always find it a shame when low budget movies are made only to try and ride on the coat tails of a decent original, so I'm a bit disappointed in myself for getting my hopes up when I saw Essex Boys: Law of Survival.I found the whole movie very poor, right from the get go we are introduced to the absolutely dire narration. Apparently the fact that the intro was played and narrated by the real character is supposed to be something of a beacon for the movie, but unfortunately it just shows us what we have to put up with for the next hour and a half. The acting throughout the movie is terrible, and it seems as if the "actors" are all reading the script for the first time on camera. It comes across as more of a cheap football hooligan type movie than a British gangster flick, with incredibly shocking fight scenes which don't give off a whiff of violence or aggression and are far too fluffy to even come close to convincing us that these are supposed to be feared "hard men" that are being depicted.Won't go into the plot as I'm sure people will still want to watch the movie. At the most it's probably worth having on for the sake of a bit of background noise which you might give an occasional glance, but it certainly isn't worthy of complete concentration for the duration of the movie.

moviemixupup This is the second film I have now seen from director Steven M Smith. The first being the much commented and criticised Hooligans at War, North vs South. Where lets be honest, there is no direction at all, poorly led from start to finish and what I can only guess was done on a shoe string budget. Before watching this movie, my expectations were very low. However within the first 20 minutes of this film, the difference in improvement was clear to see. Yes, there are still lots of faults and quality issues. But the film flowed and the storyline had thought and meaning. The film was watchable and much better than others are saying in their reviews. I noticed that there was quite a few of familiar faces in this film. These faces are from Steven M Smiths HAW. I was pleased to see Chris Bell again playing a lead role (Danny) who puts in a well delivered performance and I must mention Ross Boatman (Franks) who as always was fantastic. On the less positive side James Hodcroft (Lee) was a poor choice for this type of film. I have never met anybody from Essex who talks with such a corrective pronouncing tongue. Seriously, who taught this guy to speak? Stop emphasising every word spoken. I couldn't take this guy seriously and lowered the overall quality of acting within the lead roles. I was also amazed to see that there were other actors used in HAW that we're used again in LOS. Josh played my Mark Windham (also Mickey in HAW) is just awful. A complete mumbling poor excuse for an actor that makes watching paint dry fun. There were several of the hooligans in the early fight scenes duplicated from both films that have no idea what a real fight is and just hoping to get there face on TV.Although the quality of this film could of been better and at times still appeared to be filmed on a low quality mobile phone, I enjoyed the film. As low budget movies go, the team should be very proud of the end product. Chris Bell and Steven M Smith have written this film very well and brought it from pen and paper to our TV screens. I look forward to seeing what these two come up with next. If they keep improving as they have done here and do without the poor actors and repeat hooligans, things will surely only get better? If you do insist on using the same actors in your films, keep hold of the good ones such as Pat Garner, Alan Lund, Darren Placid and Colin Vidler who can keep the believability of the characters real and perform to high levels. My eyes will peeled for what you two have for us next.Keep up the good work.