KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

Colibel Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Senteur As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

MBunge This attempt by Swedish filmmakers to create an American-style mystery/thriller is about as poorly put together as your average piece of IKEA furniture. It's functional, but you're always going to want something better.The plot of this thing is as well-worn and familiar as an old pair of slippers. A guy down on his luck is reunited with his old flame. She's trapped in an abusive marriage with her evil husband. The two former lovers fall back into bed and eventually plot to solve their problems by killing the husband. It all goes wrong and the guy ends up on the run from the cops. There's absolutely nothing in this story you haven't seen before and seen done better. And after coming up with a tale that hasn't one original moment in it, these filmmakers desperately employ flashbacks, music video-style editing and fancy camera tricks to try and slap a stylish veneer on this moldering script. They fail.The acting in Rancid is the sort of bland, shallow stuff you get when okay actors are given nothing to work with. Matthew Settle is acceptable as Jayson Hayson, one of those incredibly handsome and physically fit writers who only exist in movies. Fay Masterson as Jason's old love Monica is hampered by the fact that her character's only purpose is to serve the Almighty Plot Hammer, but even that can't take away from the fact Masterson's the sort of woman who looks better and better the more you see her. Currie Graham is tries to bring a little something to the two-dimensional character of the evil husband. It's almost as though he's trying to pull off the "I'm in my own movie" thing that Val Kilmer did in Tombstone but he can't quite do it. The only member of the cast that's noticeably sub par is chinless wonder Patrik Ersgard as the cop who happens to be Jason Hayson's old friend. The role is a muddled mess, yet Ersgard somehow manages to be even worse. It's like trying to watch a drunk Danny Devito play Sherlock Holmes.The writing isn't egregiously bad. The script is just poorly constructed. Some scenes go on too long while others are too short. The movie wastes time with scenes that are unnecessary and then skips over important steps in the plot. There are waaaaay too many characters. The story only needs one cop character, it has four. Jason doesn't have one old love in the script, he's got two. The film's love triangle turns into a rectangle. There's an amazingly tone deaf moment when the movie tries to make a statement about anti-Asian prejudice. It's like the Ersgards never wrote more than the first draft of this screenplay because they were so stunned by their own brilliance. They were mistaken.This isn't an awful film. I suppose you might enjoy it if you were drunk, zonked out on cough medicine or otherwise impaired. If you're clean and sober, this is one of those movies that is never bad enough to make you stop watching. By the time you get to the end, though, you realize that it was simply a waste of your time.

tonopah6 I am tired of seeing cutie-pie-guys who never comb their hair and have a see-thru beard. Matthew Settle (leading actor): of course is also a slob: with a messy apartment, dirty dishes, and who drinks instant coffee. But the teenyboppers will love him.Now you've got to amplify his character by making him a loser (and with bad dialogue; trying to make good on sentences like: puke on the floor, and, hole in the head). He's a goof who has previously expressed to people that he desires to be a writer, but when his past friends inquire about his progress, (6 years later), he covers up about still being on page one.Page one!Yes … page one is revealed by a former girlfriend, now extramarital affair partner, making this viewer wonder if he is … who knows … maybe a chronic masturbator because of his lack of writing?This movie could be considered as a learning film for the young just to show them an imbecile adult. With a good example being when he destroys valuable glass figurines from a mantle in a playful way; probably in order to put the blame on someone else for his own ineptness. Although he does accept blame when he and his former girlfriend talk about the abortion that he failed to do correctly several years before, resulting in her inability to have children in future attempts. Nevertheless, they deem their screw-ups as minor compared to the millionaire husband, who gets condemned for just making some illegal business ventures, and for slapping his unfaithful conniving wife.So now we've got an immature woman involved, only caring about money, revenge, and participating in the two (yes two) affairs she's involved with. And you will see Mr. Inept parking right in front of the house he wants to enter to commit murder, along with seeing him mosey to an entrance while security guards are patrolling the grounds.Lots more take place; which includes detectives: one of which is an old buddy of the inept writer, and who has a great deal of problems himself. That detective (Patrik Ersgard) was sort of okay. I did like the millionaire, Currie Graham. And if you can manage to gruel out Mr. inept writer's disposition, you can actually see a decent story take place - WITH A FEW UNEXPECTED TURN OF EVENTS.

Lawrence Griffin This movie reminds me of one of those plastic hamster wheels. It goes pretty fast, and gets pretty intense, but in the end, you're left in exactly the same place that you started. It starts out pretty slowly, and at first I wasn't inclined to like it too much. There is no noticeable soundtrack to this one, so it's devoid of a good atmosphere (which a good suspense/thriller needs), and this gives the whole package a very 'hollow' feel, like it's a low budget movie. The directing is lackluster in the respect that those damn camera zoom-ins get really irritating by the end of the film. I've never seen a movie that overused aerial shots like this, and that's probably because it's a bad idea. But despite all that, I enjoyed this movie.The plot is rich and leaves a lot for you to ponder over while the cameras are rolling, and the characters all give off very memorable and believable performances. This is a very dark and gritty film, reminding me of what A Killer Within should've been, but wasn't exactly. The plot twists at the end are unexpected, and maybe they weren't executed as well as they could've been, but it's all fine and dandy with me. While most of the movie is a bit slower and building things up, with the romantic tension and such, the last half hour or so is very intense and bloody, and I'm left very satisfied with this film overall. While the rather open-ended ending left me feeling empty (that whole hamster wheel analogy), this film manages to build up a crescendo of surprising energy that left this movie as quite a good offering of crime/thriller action. Recommended to fans of the genre.

gotland Went to the cinema to see this since a friend is in the movie, for about 3 seconds. Didn't expect anything from it, but it was OK. The story about the struggling writer that get caught up in a mess is OK, even if it's a bit simple for a movie. And there is at least 10 other movies with the same plot.What really separates Rancid from being a good movie, is the tempo. Every ten minutes there are long helicopter-shots over Manhattan and almost every scene is too long and too slow. If it would lose some of the 'fly over Manhattan while playing really loud music'-scenes and cut faster and with a tempo it wouldn't be that boring.The sound was bad, no effort in making everyday sounds come from the right angle, and some obvious errors, like a NYC cop not wearing a vest while on a mission.A better script, more focus on the details and a faster pace, and this could have been a great movie.