Bull: Hora da Vingança

Not bad for a movie that only cost $100,000 and was filmed in three weeks. Bull does not feature epic shootouts or fight scenes, but it does have a magnetic-intimidating lead performance from Neil Maskell and moments of sheer brutality. In my opinion, this is enough to recommend Bull to anyone interested in darker revenge movies. The film is over in less than ninety minutes and depending on your taste you will either love or loathe the ending.

Intense thriller, the story slowly unravels, in a violent way, unsympathetic characters that keep you on the tip of the chair nonetheless, with un unexpected ending.

This is one of the best last year's movies. A dark, gritty, violent British film that doesn't hold back. I suggest you don't read anything about this, there is a chance some reviewer gives you a spoil.

If you are in the mood for a really dark crime drama/thriller, you will enjoy this. Great actors, not a second wasted, this movie grabs you by the throat.

I stood in awe watching the end. I can understand the reasons why some people may dislike it. In any case, you are gonna enjoy the ride. For me, the ending made it even more exciting.

Saw this at the London Film Festival premiere last night. It's a well-made and engaging low-budget crime film, with excellent acting and music. Neil Maskell and David Hayman give dependably good performances. It's very much along the lines of Dead Man's Shoes and Kill List, although lacking the flair, originality and imagination of those classics. Hard geezer seeks revenge, with over-the-top violence and nasty, humourless working-class gangsters. A grim and dour tone. Some nicely choreographed stabbings and gunshots. It's nothing new, but it does it satisfactorily and holds your attention.

It's a great shame then that the film is almost fatally marred by a bizarre and poorly thought-through conclusion that had to make me wonder why not a single person on the team of this production said 'um, hang on a minute, are we really going with this ending..?'.

It's just wrong for the tone of the film.

I can see what they were aiming for, as it's been done before in one of the best crime films ever made, but here they mess it up by not setting it up correctly, and in the process almost wreck a perfectly workable film.

All in all, despite this flaw, this is worth a watch, as it is undeniably entertaining.

There's much to like about Bull. Neil Maskell, who you might recognize from Kill List puts in a great performance. David Hayman gives good support. For a budget production it looks OK too although much more akin to a TV movie than a cinematic release. It's a violent crime movie and most of the violence is with knives which is much more gruesome than simply shooting someone. My problem is the disjointed narrative. The eponymous Bull is a small time gangster working for a small time boss of a small time gang in Kent. He's double crossed by the gang only to appear from nowhere a decade later to get his revenge. But instead of a linear narrative the writer/director, Paul Andrew Williams mixes past and present in a ad hock fashion and despite the events occurring 10 years apart all the characters look exactly the same, the wardrobe is identical and the time of year, summer is also the same. There are no visual clues as to what is a flash back and what is present, like the flashback sequences being in black and white or being a bit hazy or even just being lit differently. It makes the narrative difficult to follow despite it not being a particularly complicated plot in the first place. The final payoff comes completely out of the blue and although it's quite a fun twist doesn't fit in with the tone of the movie at all.