IMDb > Riot (2012/II) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Riot
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Riot More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 13 reviews in total 

12 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

An awful film that is badly written, directed, staged and acted

2/10
Author: robertasmith from london, england
24 January 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Cinema always takes liberties with the truth but this film is just awful. The depiction of the Met Police is so wildly inaccurate it is almost laughable. Where do I start? Berkoff is far too old to play the senior police officer and his acting is confused and unconvincing.

The police officers, supposedly in the same unit/division, have different shoulder flashes, one with CO and a number (which means commissioners office) and some with just a number. They seem to patrol huge swathes of the metropolis both as tactical support and ordinary beat bobbies. There is so much more that is badly researched and portrayed.

If you can ignore all these howlers, you still have to believe that a football thug, with a father in prison, is a police officer. You can do that except for the fact he still has his only friends in that social setting and still acts like a thug when he is in the pub and around them.

The final scene where he beats to death one of his old friends in front of another 10 or so, is just barking mad, as are the scenes where he gets people off, or gives prisoners a severe beating.

I am not naive. Some of these things no doubt happen on rare occasions, but to have one rogue police officer commit so many offences is just totally unbelievable.

The tragedy is, there is the germ of a good story here, but it is ruined by wooden acting, a poorly researched screenplay, jerky direction that lacks continuity or purpose and very poor production values.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

A film that is difficult to like or be drawn in by

2/10
Author: TheLittleSongbird from United Kingdom
1 June 2013

G.B.H wasn't entirely irredeemable, Nick Nevern did have a great brooding intensity that he brought to his lead character, and Kellie Shirley(whose acting has grown since her stint on EastEnders) is affecting. For me though, that's it for the saving graces. The rest of the acting is poor, Steven Berkoff for example doesn't seem to have a clue as to what to do and how to play his role. Though in all fairness they weren't helped at all by sketchily written characters that were largely sidelined throughout the film, the juiciest side character was Con O'Neill's but that is not saying very much. The dialogue resorts to a lot of clichéd banter, while the way G.B.H is shot looks cobbled together(like some of it was done in one stretch with a gap and then in another stretch after). And I do have to agree about the wildly inaccurate portrayal of the police force, it is not only inaccurate but completely unbelievable too. There was a good story in G.B.H somewhere, no matter how many times we've seen its plot points on other films and television shows, the structure was just so clumsy and disorganised with no tension that that potential didn't ever come out. It was also very difficult to be drawn in by, it was purposefully grim and bleak which is not a problem in any way, it was just dealt with in such a tedious and heavy-handed way that the tone was more wearying(and increasingly so) and overly-aggressive in alternative to tense and properly involving. Overall, apart from the leads I found it by difficult to be drawn in by G.B.H. 2/10 Bethany Cox

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Nothing Special! 2/10

2/10
Author: leonblackwood from United Kingdom
8 July 2013

Review: This is just your typical violent English movie with your usual dose of swearing, sex and violence. The acting in the movie was quite terrible for the leading actors, but the storyline wasn't too bad. I also though that the film looked pretty cheap and it just seemed to go round and round in circles. By the end of the film it just seemed like the director wanted to show how much policemen can get away with, which wasn't a smart way to portray the people who are supposed to protect public. Anyway, I wasn't that impressed with it.

Round-Up: I wasn't expecting that much from this movie so I wasn't that disappointed. Some of the scenes were pretty graphic, but there wasn't any real moral to the story. For a low budget movie, it does have a bit of substance but nothing worth watching again.

Budget: £1.5million Worldwide Gross: N/A

I recommend this movie to people who are into there violent British movies. 2/10

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 59 people found the following review useful:

Really, IMDb?

7/10
Author: Heislegend from United States
9 October 2012

As of this writing, this film is sitting at a sub-3 star rating. Seriously? Sure the film's got it's problems, but it's pretty well written, pretty well acted, and solidly put together. Maybe England is going through a rash of hooligan films that I'm not aware of and this was the straw that broke the camel's back? That...or people are just kind of idiots.

OK, maybe idiots is a harsh term as there's no accounting for taste, but this film actually works pretty well on most levels. It moves along at a good clip, the characters develop well, and the story is though out. My only real gripe is the way the film jumps around between certain scenes. There's a bit of that "three weeks earlier" crap that makes it a bit hard to follow at times. But on the whole I'd say it's at least worth a watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Yawn...

5/10
Author: Rich Wright
16 August 2014

Another movie designed to get the London Tourist Bureau running for the hills. it is supposedly set during the big riots we experienced three years ago. In reality though, only the final scenes touch upon that major incident. Instead, we follow the life of a former hooligan now turned cop, and his attempts to juggle his new job with his old loutish friends, who either see him as a sell out, or a person who they can extract favours from.

There are about as many surprises here as finding a plastic toy in a Kinder Egg, as our anti-hero experiences the predictable dual pressures of dealing with human trash on the beat, and even worse garbage in the form of his 'mates' off it. How any right minded person would want to spend five seconds in the company of his former buddies I don't know, but at least he's making a bit of an effort to get away from them.

They are many, many breaks in the action to inform us that one scene took place ONE WEEK AGO, ONE HOUR AGO etc. You can tell it's trying to pretend it's telling a complex story, but this mediocre script is clearly nothing of the sort. Delusions of grandeur, perhaps. It's watchable, it's efficient, but aside from a rather upsetting sequence involving a serious assault on a female officer, there's little here to stir the imagination.

Even the Downer Ending has been done to death in this genre. As soon as our rogue lawman gets that look in his eyes, there's only one possible conclusion. So... file under 'average'. 5/10

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

4.1 from members? 80% of reviews are fake?

Author: Alex Hearn from Phoenix, Mass
20 December 2013

This movie is kind of an enigma, if you read the review that is tagged by IMDb you'd think it was the next Academy award winner for best picture? But it only garners a 4.1 from members and it's dropping fast?

Then I remember hearing that Yahoo did a study, and even in it's own reviews 80% were fake, one way or the other... This movie is no Diff.

The real reviews are easy to pick out, as they are the ones SPOT ON, to quote that tagged review...

The acting here is somewhat less than stellar as is the directing, the budget is smaller than most movies, but I would still say was a wasted expense~they'll be no profits still~except for those already made... ;-)

Believable, No!

Good acting or direction, NO

AlxMac (me) gives this a 2.1 you may even give it less. Put it this way, if it was a EarthQuake on the CA coast, after being reported many people would say, "I never felt a thing"... Pun? For sure, you might feel something, but I doubt it will be anything but the feeling to find a commode chair ASAP and grab the for railings...

Was the above review useful to you?

More a social drama than a crime story

Author: GUENOT PHILIPPE (philippe.guenot@dbmail.com) from France
27 March 2016

I am not surprised that so many people are disappointed by this film. They expected a cop thriller, an action flick probably, and instead they watched a complex and also confused psychological drama about violence, hooligans and the tough reality to be a cop when you have yourself major family problems. I was myself confused by the editing. To speak truly, I was lost, although I got the whole thing. I think it is a too ambitious but not enough monitored script. But certainly not uninteresting at all. Some pricks who don't understand it will say that's a bad movie. Shame on them. This is just an editing issue that jeopardizes the whole stiff and makes it too complicated for most of the audiences. Some very disturbing sequences, such as the female cop rape, in the underground parking. This film is far better than the ones which Simon Philips usually plays in. In summary, don't expect any gunshots or gangsters, but only brutality, cops and hooligans. A typical British noir social drama from UK. A trade mark for this country.

Was the above review useful to you?

Riot-worthy

6/10
Author: kosmasp
26 June 2015

Not the rating here on IMDb at this moment. Though it's higher than the 3 points/stars that another reviewer mentioned I was surprised this being under 5 at the time of writing. But I guess people might get fed up with movies about hooligans (though to reduce this to just that would be unfair to the movie).

Maybe it's the time-line and the jumping around events that got people annoyed, it's tough to say. Though I have to admit the "german" title for the movie is pretty "simple" - London Pitbulls - I don't think it makes any difference in the rating here. The main actor might not always be up to the task (a bit over the top, not enough charisma to pull certain things off), but the story itself is still worth watching

Was the above review useful to you?

Not that bad

6/10
Author: marcusklingvall15 from Sweden
20 December 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well First, "Riot" may be a little misleading, cause the actual Riots isn't a major thing in the movie. Thats the story of Damien, how he grow up, how he tries to make a difference in his life. The acting and filming is OK, reinds a little of British series "The Bill"

It's not award winning material, but its not that bad. The storyline is interesting where u really get to understand Damien and why he reacts the way he does. But, as other has pointed out, the end is not that good, it feels like they just wanted to wrap it up and be finished with the film. There is a few loose ends, but overall, its a good movie..A fine "have nothing better to watch a rainy Sunday movie"

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Another graphic Paul Tanter film on police football violence

1/10
Author: paul david from United Kingdom
4 January 2014

There is absolutely nothing to commend about this film other than the main storyline which is not reflected by the title of the movie.

For me, the main story theme was not about riot at all but about the damage football violence had done to two families, Damien the cop and his girlfriend cop Louise. Louise lived with her physically and psychologically affected ex-cop Father and Damiens Father was in prison as a result of violence which had a football-related history, a middle aged thug who refused to let go of the past.

All the other bits of storyline within did not connect to that at all and the only riot was a bunch of hoodlums towards the end in a shopping mall, can hardly be called a riot on the scale portrayed in the opening clips of the movie.

The confrontation between characters played by both Nick Nevern and Peter Barrett has been a common theme in many of the Paul Tanter films. Though I understand he did not direct this movie, he did produce it and he did act in it.

Nick Nevern I feel needs to move on. He is a sort of passive Jason Statham and has the potential to step up.

Paul Tanter needs to move on too. Football violence in the UK has moved on since the 1990s, just as Northern Ireland has for different reasons, and the film could have been directed and produced in a different way for a much more receptive and appreciative audience.

Making a film on principle to include sex violence and bad language does not mean as a movie fan I always want salt and vinegar and dollups of tomato ketchup on my fish and chips!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history