IMDb RATING
5.5/10
7.7K
YOUR RATING
After surviving a gang rape and mugging, a businesswoman and her younger boyfriend plot to murder their attackers, but find themselves conflicted about carrying out their plans.After surviving a gang rape and mugging, a businesswoman and her younger boyfriend plot to murder their attackers, but find themselves conflicted about carrying out their plans.After surviving a gang rape and mugging, a businesswoman and her younger boyfriend plot to murder their attackers, but find themselves conflicted about carrying out their plans.
Antony Byrne
- Misha
- (as Anthony Byrne)
Kate Bunten
- Young Alice
- (uncredited)
Allan Gentleman
- Accountant
- (uncredited)
Chris Hipkiss
- Wealthy Partygoer
- (uncredited)
Michelle Jeffers
- Cocktail Party Guest
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I love these types of film. Where a man or woman gets horrifically abused and goes on a bloody warpath of revenge! I know the plot is usually thin, but it's often exciting and engrossing enough to carry a film. Just the anticipation of seeing the evil b******s get exactly what they deserve. It's often a feeling of satisfaction. But, it certainly isn't the case with "Straightheads". A film the lottery decided to fund for some bizarre reason! I mean I've written a film and I think it's way better than some of the things I've seen, but do I get any lottery funding? NO!
Rape, revenge is usually quite difficult to get wrong. Even if it does go a bit belly-up it's usually fun and entertaining at least. Actually, the majority of "Straightheads" is quite dull, slow and tedious which is unexpected for its surprisingly short running time of 75 minutes or so. That's about the length of "Inside" and "REC" just think about how much incredible excitement is experienced in those minutes! "Straightheads" sort of failed immediately by being not in the least bit plausible. Would you really ask your slacker camera fitter to go to a party with you? And why would the camera fitter not even question the idea? It starts off weirdly to say the least. When the nasty abuse occurs it's shot in the least effective way with too many clumsy close-ups and basically zero lighting to see what's going on! It also feels quite nasty for the sake of it and doesn't have anywhere near of the directional flair that say, "The Ordeal" expressed during a similar scene.
After this event, you might think that the characters would become a little more likable? They don't, in fact they become even less likable and don't get developed any further either. Am I supposed to like a man who's stoned out of his mind on the sofa, playing weird chav music with porn on his telly? It also doesn't help that Danny Dyer and Gillian Anderson's acting are more wooden than the forest. I felt zero chemistry between the two characters as well, the whole relationship thing was completely unbelievable. Though it wasn't as unbelievable as the pathetic reason given to why the rape occurred!
The film also seems as if it tries to divert from any possible exciting acting that could've actually been quite fun! There's a promising bit where Danny's hiding in the house and one of the men gets a glance at him on the top of the stairs, but nothing really that exciting comes from it! Similarly, there's a part where a daughter runs out the house shouting for her dog which is swiftly avoided with yet another embarrassing sex scene between Danny and Gillian, but don't worry the camera's so clumsy that you can't see a thing!
When the revenge finally does occur (after about an hour of no-suspense building up to it) it's so quick that it feels even more pointless. I don't know if that's what the director's trying to say, that revenge is pointless, but he did it in such a way that it made his whole film pointless! Has he not seen "7 Days" or "I Saw The Devil" which tries to convey the same message in such a gripping and emotional way? (well obviously not because this came out before those two but..) It's also done in a nasty way that just seems like it's trying to shock for the sake of it. It's cringe-worthy and not in a fun "Saw" way, but in a perverted and "why am I watching this?" way!
"Straightheads" does show effective use of direction in the very last minutes but by then it's far too late to care. "Straightheads" is a dull, nasty, implausible, badly written and atrociously directed thriller that thinks it's being way more effective than it is. If you're looking for rip-roaring, emotionally-charged revenge then I would suggest "Kill Bill", "Oldboy", "I Saw The Devil" and other Korean films. Even the remake of "I Spit On Your Grave" is much more intelligent and effective than this. I'd recommend giving this one a miss.
Rape, revenge is usually quite difficult to get wrong. Even if it does go a bit belly-up it's usually fun and entertaining at least. Actually, the majority of "Straightheads" is quite dull, slow and tedious which is unexpected for its surprisingly short running time of 75 minutes or so. That's about the length of "Inside" and "REC" just think about how much incredible excitement is experienced in those minutes! "Straightheads" sort of failed immediately by being not in the least bit plausible. Would you really ask your slacker camera fitter to go to a party with you? And why would the camera fitter not even question the idea? It starts off weirdly to say the least. When the nasty abuse occurs it's shot in the least effective way with too many clumsy close-ups and basically zero lighting to see what's going on! It also feels quite nasty for the sake of it and doesn't have anywhere near of the directional flair that say, "The Ordeal" expressed during a similar scene.
After this event, you might think that the characters would become a little more likable? They don't, in fact they become even less likable and don't get developed any further either. Am I supposed to like a man who's stoned out of his mind on the sofa, playing weird chav music with porn on his telly? It also doesn't help that Danny Dyer and Gillian Anderson's acting are more wooden than the forest. I felt zero chemistry between the two characters as well, the whole relationship thing was completely unbelievable. Though it wasn't as unbelievable as the pathetic reason given to why the rape occurred!
The film also seems as if it tries to divert from any possible exciting acting that could've actually been quite fun! There's a promising bit where Danny's hiding in the house and one of the men gets a glance at him on the top of the stairs, but nothing really that exciting comes from it! Similarly, there's a part where a daughter runs out the house shouting for her dog which is swiftly avoided with yet another embarrassing sex scene between Danny and Gillian, but don't worry the camera's so clumsy that you can't see a thing!
When the revenge finally does occur (after about an hour of no-suspense building up to it) it's so quick that it feels even more pointless. I don't know if that's what the director's trying to say, that revenge is pointless, but he did it in such a way that it made his whole film pointless! Has he not seen "7 Days" or "I Saw The Devil" which tries to convey the same message in such a gripping and emotional way? (well obviously not because this came out before those two but..) It's also done in a nasty way that just seems like it's trying to shock for the sake of it. It's cringe-worthy and not in a fun "Saw" way, but in a perverted and "why am I watching this?" way!
"Straightheads" does show effective use of direction in the very last minutes but by then it's far too late to care. "Straightheads" is a dull, nasty, implausible, badly written and atrociously directed thriller that thinks it's being way more effective than it is. If you're looking for rip-roaring, emotionally-charged revenge then I would suggest "Kill Bill", "Oldboy", "I Saw The Devil" and other Korean films. Even the remake of "I Spit On Your Grave" is much more intelligent and effective than this. I'd recommend giving this one a miss.
You were never really sure of the exact relationship between Alice (Gillian Anderson), the cougar businesswoman, and Adam (Danny Dyer), the 23-year-old security installer. Initially, it appeared they just met, but after he was beaten and she was gang raped, he acted like he had known her forever.
After the attack, he is struggling with his masculinity, and she is bent on revenge. Armed with daddy's weapons, she sets out to make the men pay for what they did.
Adam has a real problem. he is no good to her in her quest for revenge, and he is no good to her lying on top of her luscious body.
When Alice went to take revenge, she used Daddy's gun, but not in the way you would think. An eye for an eye; a rape for a rape. Once Adam was turned on to vengeance, she couldn't turn him off.
Good acting by Anderson in a thin movie.
After the attack, he is struggling with his masculinity, and she is bent on revenge. Armed with daddy's weapons, she sets out to make the men pay for what they did.
Adam has a real problem. he is no good to her in her quest for revenge, and he is no good to her lying on top of her luscious body.
When Alice went to take revenge, she used Daddy's gun, but not in the way you would think. An eye for an eye; a rape for a rape. Once Adam was turned on to vengeance, she couldn't turn him off.
Good acting by Anderson in a thin movie.
I thought this movie started out kind of slow because it was just random sex and nudity and then a brutal attack and nothing happened for like 30 minutes. But then it started to get better about 50 minutes into the movie because things start to happen that are relatively entertaining, but some of the scenes are really unnecessary at times. Altogether I give this a 6 out of 10 because it started slow but got a little better and it had a solid ending too. I wouldn't recommend it, but if u want to see a thriller and your bored, then go ahead and give it a chance because Gillian Anderson pulls off a pretty good performance as a victim out for revenge.
Saw a preview of this last night. Still not completely sure what I made of it to be honest. It's a very short film at only 1 hour and twenty minutes and despite this it still feels a little padded as though there wasn't enough story to make it long enough to be a feature film. The key scenes are graphic and harrowing enough and I definitely left with a bad taste in my mouth. Gillian Anderson was probably the best thing about the film but I don't really buy Danny Dyer playing opposite her and there were certain scenes that were unintentionally humorous because of this. Dyer has definitely been a little miscast here and it does make you wonder whether it could have been better with a different leading man. The other problem I have with a film of this type is that in order for you to care about the plight of characters I believe you need at least a little insight into their lives prior to what we are seeing on screen, we need to know about who they are in order to root for them and I never really felt this film gave us the big picture in this regard. Despite it's flaws it's still a watchable drama/thriller but with a few more original ideas and a little added characterisation it could have been a whole lot better.
A wealthy businesswoman (Gillian Anderson) and her newly acquired working class lover (Danny Dyer) are viciously attacked while on a drive the woods. Afterwards, the only thing the woman can think of is revenge, and she calculates a plan to fulfill that. This is an intriguing modern-day "rape/revenge" thriller that focuses more on psychology and gender (as well as other social constructs) instead of the violence and action sequences that typically go hand-in-hand with the subgenre. That said, rape/revenge fans most likely won't be disappointed with this one, as it's fairly brutal and shocking. It's a little short, clocking in just over 70 minutes, so by the end I thought to myself, "is that all there is?" Yet the film did have something of an impact on me, because I found myself thinking about it all the next day and recommending it to friends. Gillian Anderson is excellent and does things you would never in a million years think you'd see Gillian Anderson do on-screen. I'll leave it at that. Danny Dyer also gives a fantastic dramatic performance. I'm not sure why he gets such a bad rap in the UK. He isn't quite famous in the States yet, but he's great in the few films I've seen him in. Thumbs up on this thought-provoking thriller, though I can't help feeling there's a chunk of the film missing.
Did you know
- TriviaThe film became notorious for Gillian Anderson's frequently nude scenes.
- GoofsWhen the main characters are driving through the woods after the sex scene, they hit a deer which completely smashes the windscreen. Immediately afterward, there is an attack scene, where she is dragged from the car after the windscreen is entirely smashed through. In a shot of the car, the number plate is hanging off, blood is on the windows and the windscreen is shattered. In the next scene, Danny Dyer is seen turning the alarm in the car off with the number plate attached, no blood or dents on the car and a completely intact windscreen which is almost shinier than before.
- Crazy creditsThis film is dedicated to the memory of TOM GRAFTON 1973-2001
- SoundtracksImperial
by Lazyboy
- How long is Closure?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- £1,800,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $381,203
- Runtime
- 1h 20m(80 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content