User reviews

I will keep this brief in hopes people find this useful. I am a 23 year old guy who loves twisted movies, but this movie just felt forced and inauthentic. There are much better movies that deliver more profound thrills and attachment with the characters. The components of the movie seem great, it's a crime/thriller with solid actors and potential for great plot development. The pitfalls lie with the incredibly tedious pacing mixed with the subtle hints that things will get more interesting, but they sadly don't. I found myself bored multiple times and ultimately disappointed with the conclusion. I honestly feel sad for the talent wasted in this film as most of the scenes are overlong and simply uninteresting. In the end it just feels like the movie was trying way too hard to be something it wasn't. I feel like I'm talking to myself with all of these positive reviews but this is my first review ever as I normally love most movies. This is just a tedious, uninteresting character study that seems to hint towards bigger things than it delivers.

**SPOILERS** You'd think a movie named Killer Joe would at least show ONE murder by him. All it showed was a woman dead in a car, and then he blows weed smoke on her ... but then he sets the car on fire. So what was the point? The fight scene with the bikers was also laughable and very disappointing. Killer Joe will never be watched by me again.

I honestly don't get what i just watched, the whole movie seemed pointless. I expected a lot more from this movie considering the cast it was dealt but it just failed, maybe my taste of movies isn't fit for such a dark twisted movie. Emile Hirsch and Matthew McConaughey were stand outs in the film and of course the director done a great job. but in all honesty not really my kind of movie. I won't spoil the movie for anyone but give it a watch, its a love it or hate it movie, when i first watched it i thought well that was alright but the more and more i think about it i think less of it. This is the first movie i have felt i needed to write a review about so give me some slack lol

Killer Joe is a mediocre movie with a decent storyline that definitely didn't deliver as well as it could have and a mostly average cast.There was definitely a good story here that could have made for an enjoyable crime thriller,but I think it made too many mistakes in order to do so.Matthew McConaughey is without a doubt the movies highlight and I would definitely have given this a lower rating if he wasn't in it,he delivers his lines in pure passion,and the last fifteen minutes was without a doubt some very professional acting from him,it's just a pity the rest of the cast couldn't deliver their dialogue with even half as much interest as McConaughey did.The best scenes are when we are reminded that this is a thriller,which there aren't enough of,but when we see it they are fairly intense and also quite gory,they definitely needed more of these parts because it was a bit too heavy on dialogue between characters that went on much longer than was really necessary.Killer Joe certainly has its moments and a very inspired performance from McConuaghey,but its mostly a mediocre ninety minutes that you would be better off avoiding.

A man hires a dangerous hit man to kill his mother in order to collect the insurance,but the situation is a lot more complicated that he originally thought.

Best Performance: Matthew McConaughey Worst Performance: Gina Gershon

This is something of an admission, but here goes: what the hell was that all about? Someone tell my because I haven't a clue. It's entertaining enough, in that it carries you along with it, and this viewer (who not an hour earlier gave up on a film after 30 minutes which was dire and had no sign of ever getting better) was with it to the end.

But I did expect something, some hint, as to - well, what? Maybe I should try it from some other angle: why did Tracy Letts write the play on which it is based and on which he based his screenplay, and what persuaded William Friedkin to direct it? That last comment sounds negative. It sounds that I think Killer Joe is in some way bad and that Friedkin should have left it well alone. I don't mean that, either.

There's the nub of the problem: what, exactly was the point of it all? I'm never one to provide a synopsis and try to palm it off as a review, but in this case a little background is, perhaps, necessary.

At the heart of it is a dysfunctional family, three of whom give stupidity a bad name. The fourth is also pretty dumb, but at least tries to be clever. Then there's McConaughey's Killer Joe, a cop who is also a freelance killer, hired to kill the first wife of the paterfamilias so the family can clean up on the woman's life insurance policy. In brief, it all goes haywire.

Elsewhere this has been called 'a black comedy', but I don't quite see it if it was intended as such. I suspect I might have picked up on that had that been the case. But if not a black comedy - well, what? In this instance I would urge the curious to give it a whirl and see whether they can make head or tail of the film. But be warned: there are scenes of graphic violence and some gruesome quasi sex. Good luck. I'm only giving this a five, because that is halfway between good and bad, and that seems the fairest judgment.

02/26/2019 Any actor associated with this garbage deserves to be in this film. Yesteryears has-been actors playing out the low lifes and seedy of society. Nothing about this movie was good.

KILLER JOE is a killer of a film: watching it makes you want to shower at movie's end just to get the slimy residue out of eyes and ears. It is difficult to believe that this was a stage play - the gore and brutality would be difficult to reproduce without CGI. But then it comes courtesy of William Friedkin who has never been know for subtlety.

The story is not terribly unique: a drug dealing kid Chris(Emile Hirsch) needs money to pay off a bad gambling losses and hires a hit man who happens to also be a cop and a detective and is known only by Joe (Matthew McConaughey) to kill his degenerate mother for her life insurance money which is to go to the woman's daughter Dottie (Juno Temple) who lives with Chris' and her dad (Thomas Haden Church) and her new sleaze bucket mother (Gina Gershon). Of course it all goes terrible wrong with beatings and broken promises and retainer deals, but the whole ugly family gets it in the end with a family dinner that is unlike any ever seen in film endings.

Oddly enough the cast is so fine that it makes the entire grisly mess watchable. All five leads give spot o n performances, so if it is acting skills for which you hunger, spend and evening with this showcase of talent who make these despicable rate characters just loony and foul enough to watch.

Grady Harp

As described by many, Killer Joe is a neo-noir set in Texas. For lovers of noir, it is a welcomed occurrence, because the genre is not popular. However, it definitely carries things very far. It breaks censorship's boundaries unimaginable in the 40's and pushes the limit very far even for 2012.

The plot revolves around a family of dim-witted red-necks plotting a murder to collect insurance money. The key word being dim-witted. Chris (played to perfection by Hirsch) is the son, a pathetic looser who sets the plot in motion due to his debt with a drug lord. Despite his many shortcomings, I could not help feeling sorry for Chris, also because of all the beating he takes.

Enter father Ansel and step-mum Sharla (some entrance she makes). They both agree with the plan to kill Chris's mum, a drunkard with an insurance policy and a boyfriend named Rex. The beneficiary of the policy is said to be daughter Dottie. Being the dumbest of the family, she is also the more dangerous, because her actions are completely unpredictable.

Chris hires Killer Joe and from then on the movie takes an even darker turn, as if planning to kill one's mother is not bad enough. Joe decides to keep Dottie as a retainer, since the family cannot pay in advance for his services. This upsets Chris, who is protective towards little sister Dottie, although in a disproportionate way. After mum's been disposed off, huge trouble erupts.

Without giving too much away, I would suggest keeping double indemnity in mind and not only as a reference to one of the best classic noirs ever made. Also, do not forget about Rex, those face remains unseen…For what concerns the notorious scene at the end, I never saw a drumstick used like Joe does and I hope never to see it again. As far as disturbing goes, that will be a scene difficult to top. Think about Blue Velvet/Rossellini/Hopper, but sicker.

Contrary to audiences in the US, nobody left the screening room in Brussels. However, considering the level of gore reached by horror movies, I wonder why part of the audience is squeamish only about some scenes but can watch bodies being dismembered without any problem…

The biggest surprise of the film was McConaughey playing cool and brutal cop/hired killer Joe. I am so used seeing him playing the bland boyfriend I did not think he could be convincing. I loved the scene of Joe arrival and the watch dog shutting up, after non-stop barking. It just sets the right atmosphere without any word being spoken.

So far I thought of McConaughey as an American Hugh Grant, but I honestly do not think Grant could manage anything of the sort. Hope McConaughey will continue trying interesting roles and drop the "boyfriend" route.

Really well done but would have been better with lesser known actors.

¨You ever hear of Joe Copper? He's a cop. A detective actually. He's got a little business on the side.¨

Director William Friedkin is mostly recognized for his work in the 70's in The Exorcist and The French Connection. He hasn't had another critically acclaimed movie since then although some of his movies have received a small fan base. Killer Joe is a neo-noir film with some excellent performances from the cast that critics have enjoyed and therefore put Friedkin on the map again. His film was adapted from Tracy Letts play of the same name. Letts worked with Friedkin in 2006 in the film Bug which didn't receive too much attention. Killer Joe has made the top ten list of many critics favorite film of 2012 and I can see why. It is a very dark film, with some sadistic violence and dark humor as well. Several scenes, especially the ending, will leave you shocked and disgusted. Most critics found this film to be well crafted, but it hasn't received as much love from audiences. As much as I wanted to like this movie, I was really disappointed with it. It was just too dark and sadistic for my taste. I don't have a problem with violent films, I am a huge Tarantino fan, but this film is just an example of how difficult it really is to mix dark humor with violence, and although Tarantino makes it look really easy, it isn't because Killer Joe is proof of that. I can see why many critics liked this movie, but I can't say that I agree with them. It just wasn't my taste. What I can agree on is the performance from the cast which is truly great, but I will get to that later.

The film takes place in a small Texas town where we meet a redneck family living in a trailer. Chris (Emile Hirsch), a drug dealer, has got in a fight with his mother after she stole his stash and now he is in a huge debt with some thugs. In order to pay off the debt he comes up with a plan that involves killing his mother and collecting her insurance money. Someone has told him that the insurance money would go to her younger sister, Dottie (Juno Temple) who lives with his father and step mother. Chris shows up at his father's house one night and shares the plan with him. Ansel (Thomas Haden Church) who's very naïve agrees to listen to the plan. Chris tells him about the insurance money and that he has heard of a contract killer named Joe (Matthew McConaughey) who he is planning on contacting. Together, Chris and Ansel meet up with Joe who happens to be a police detective during the day and a killer at night. He agrees to kill the mother as long as they pay him 25,000 thousand dollars up front. Since Chris doesn't have the money and can't pay him in advance, Joe decides to take innocent Dottie as his retainer. Chris and Ansel agree as well as Ansel's wife, Sharla (Gina Gershon). The family is completely dysfunctional and they make it really easy for you to believe they would accept and do such a thing. Well of course something goes wrong in the transaction and all hell breaks loose in this pulpy dark film.

As good as Thomas Haden Church, Gina Gershon, Emile Hirsch, and Juno Temple are in this movie they are outshined by Matthew McConaughey's performance as this sadistic but charming detective. He is that kind of guy who on one side seems really nice and charming but on the other you know he's dangerous and won't want to mess with him. This is perhaps one of his strongest performances although I really preferred his work in Magic Mike. There is no doubt this has been a great year for him as he has received a lot of recognition for his work in these films. It was good to see Gina Gershon back in a strong role as well as it had been a long time since she could prove her artistic talents. Emile Hirsh and Thomas Haden Church are always great and have found them pretty much dependable in everything. Juno Temple perhaps gets her best role here as well. The performances were my favorite part of this movie, but I really can't say I enjoyed the story. I was shocked by several scenes and really found some difficult to watch. This isn't one of those movies I would like to watch again and I definitely wouldn't recommend it to anyone. It will not be among my favorite films of the year, and I hope to forget all about it by tomorrow.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

"Killer Joe" unrated directors cut, is a difficult watch. True the performances are top notch. Unfortunately the direction by William Friedkin is self indulgent, and so over the top that any attempts at "black comedy" are swept away by his insistence to repulse the audience. There is absolutely no need to dwell on a chicken leg sucking episode. The nudity is another problem, as again the film simply seems to pile it on merely for shock purposes. Mathew McConaughey's performance might be described as an amped up Vince Vaughn's "Lester the Molester" from "Clay Pigeons". As a "dark comedy" "Killer Joe" is a total failure, because it is so mean spirited, and I mean ultra violent mean spirited. .......... MERK

McConaughey was very close to announcing a run for Texas governor this year. Maybe he should be thankful that he never came through, since the "drumstick" scene would've probably been unearthed as opposition research, and frankly, it would be pretty damning. Killer Joe was once an acclaimed play by Tracey Letts. Here, it is a vile and filthy exploitation film, really reminiscent of boundary pushing films from the early 70's like "The Last House on the Left" and "I Spit On Your Grave". William Friedkin is inexplicably seen directing here. He's no stranger to the exploitation genre (see Cruising), but this is such a stark departure from his glory days as a Hollywood giant. Evolving from The Exorcist to this is pretty jarring, but it's fascinating to imagine what he would have done with this material in his heyday. But what he does do with it here is well enough to leave an impact, and by that, I mean a foul stench that's hard to clean off of you after watching. Is it any good? I'm afraid that's a loaded question. Films like this can't be defined as good, or for that matter, bad. They just sort of exist.

Killer Joe has been on my list of "films I need to watch" for a long time.

Finally, in 2021 (10 years after it was released), I watched it.

I didn't know what to expect and where the story starts and meanders to, in it's conclusion, is certainly not what I expected.

There are some truly disturbing moments in this film.

It is a Friedkin film and has the hallmarks of the schlock films of the 70s. Nudity, sexual violence, awful human beings (something like Abel Ferreira's Bad lieutenant)....it's all on display.

It seems to have a reasonable cast, a seasoned director and yet parts of this film look like amateur dramatics.

Mcnaughey, at that moment in his career, was shaking off that romantic lead he'd been lumbered with and by God did he choose a role that is diametrically opposite to that.

So the best way to describe this is to say what American Pie does for gross out humour, this does (a passable job) for gross out drama.

It's 2011 not 1971! I'm sure there are other ways of putting across the point than that shown or portrayed in this film.

It's weird, the film will linger on beyond it's initial watching. It has that capacity.

Yet it is very disturbing and truly reprehensible in parts.

It is based on a play and adapted for the screen by the original playwright. You can't tell it's origins I don't think.

I honestly don't know what to say. Under the grossness, amateurish turns and unlikeable characters, there is an intriguing drama.

Just wish it had been told with a little more nuance rather than the hammer blow method it uses.

It is one of those films that will divide. Majority will agree it is way to sexualised and sexually violent (and the pointless nudity?!) but no one will sit on the fence with this one. You either hate it for the way it tells the story, as one of shock exploitation, or love it for exactly that reason in delivering an "art house" experience.

I'm sitting on the fence. I didn't like the execution but liked the underlying story.

If you are one who thinks they are probably going to be offended and not a big art house movie goer, I would avoid it. For those who have seen 70s exploitation films and liked them, well you'll probably enjoy this.

I finished watching this and just felt like it really had nothing to offer. It focuses on a bottom of the barrel white trash family that hate each other, then brings in a seriously twisted and corrupt detective. There was no one to like or root for in the entire film, other than possibly Dottie only because she's naive, but I wouldn't say necessarily innocent.

The point of a film or a play for that matter is to at least entertain or exhibit talent. I'll give credit to McConaughey for his acting as I think he is talented. But I did not find the story or characters at all entertaining, just disturbing.

William Friedkin has been around a long time, and has made some quality films for sure. With his expansive experience, 'Killer Joe' is well made and all, but I just don't see the point for reasons already stated.

Lastly, what kind of an ending is that? There are some ambiguous endings that work, this was not one of them.

If you are a McConaughey fan, but NOT into disturbing Fargo-esque story lines with characters spiraling out of control & their situations starting out bad then just getting worse & worse, then you should avoid this movie. I wanted to give it zero stars because I hate the story and characters, but gave it five because it was like a train wreck that we couldn't stop watching. But, I regret not turning it off because I will never see Matthew McConaughey the same way again after seeing him as the vile, demented Killer Joe.

Its an understatement to say it is dark. It is a psychopathic thriller featuring emotionless characters who have never heard of the concept of being ethical. It could have worked even if it was setup during the cavemen era for its barbarism. One thing to ponder though is how they roped in Matthew McConaughey and how he made this watchable.

Chris (Emile Hirsch) belongs to a dysfunctional family and is neck deep in debts with the wrong guy. He overhears that his mother has a fat insurance policy and the beneficiary is his young sister Dottie (Juno Temple). He convinces his father Ansel (Thomas Haden Church) of a plan to murder her mother by putting a hit on her. His father who has divorced and re-married Sharla (Gina Gershon) agrees to this and so does the rest of the family unanimously. Chris recommends Killer Joe (Matthew McConaughey) a reputed hit-man also a cop who has a strict advance pay policy. When the family could not meet that, Joe gives them another offer.

From the word go the tone is set to be sleazy and gory and the same continues for the rest of the movie. The actors with their limited talent gives in their best shot even if the script does not demand of it. The characters, their home is presented in different ways during different circumstances. For example when they start out all are scarcely dressed, drugs everywhere, spitting in the living room etc, rest of the scenes it is spic and span with all of them well dressed throughout. McConaughey who mostly plays the well-dressed lawyer or a boyish charmer takes the darker side this time as a sleazy, sadistic bad guy but not betraying his Texan accent. The final humiliation scene works well as a shocker. The movie knows its target audience and the selling points playing close to its strengths with hardly any deviation. It could have been lot worse but stays afloat with a director who has a presence of mind and a steady hand.

Mainstream thriller done with a solid business mind