PodBill Just what I expected

Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Roel1973 Outlaw is a stupid revenge movie from hooligan filmmaker Nick Love. Ever since his successful debut feature The Football Factory Love likes to point his camera eagerly at male aggression. Such is also the case in Outlaw, in which the ever reliable Sean Bean plays a disillusioned war veteran who trains a group of vigilant citizens to wipe the scum off the streets, Bronson style.The problem with Outlaw is that the transformation of seemingly normal guys into merciless killers isn't anywhere near believable, especially the prosecutor who joins Bean's gang when his wife is murdered by a powerful mob boss. I mean, even Bronson in Death Wish started out with a sock of coins. These white collar guys have no problem handling automatic weapons. Also, it doesn't take them long to develop a taste for cold blooded murder.All this is very unconvincing and rather silly, but that doesn't stop Love from serving it all up with great solemness and false cowboy romanticism. And what are we to make from the development of office worker Gene (would-be tough guy Danny Dyer), who starts out getting kicked and beaten by some street punks and ends up a "real man" in the finale, ready to shoot someone in the head? It's as if Love really believes this crap about a rite of passage through bloody violence. It left a bad taste.

jpdhadfield i watched this on telly, but it was still good enough for me to not change channel, i like Danny Dyer films, as they usually have some fun in them. very few laughs in this one.problems with script spoiler alert!! 1.the raid where they steal the money from the drug dealers , is OK, except why didn't the cops follow them, at least with a helicopter, they would never have got away in the transit van in London.2.when Danny's mate tells him where manning is, its obviously a set up3.the barrister would be protected.4. the armed police wouldn't have shot Monroe when he gave up.5.Danny was shot in the neck, ,but later gets up and runs away.6.i wont go on, but its a bit like this all the way through.and yet i still enjoyed it, and would watch it again. but its no 'death wish'

Leofwine_draca When I saw the trailer for OUTLAW I knew I wanted to see it – Sean Bean is one of my favourite actors and I loved the look of the vigilante plot. But it was one of those films that slipped by until now, when I finally caught up with it on TV one night. I'm glad I didn't get to it sooner.The film is a crushing, no-budget disappointment, nothing like it's made out to be in the trailer. The plot is passable at best, and while it contains some intense, shocking moments (the attack on the barrister's wife is one of the most disturbing I've seen in some time), it never seems to go anywhere, and by the end turns into the usual good guys vs. arch villain type action flick. Some scenes are ludicrous, like the bit with the shoot-out with the police in the wood, and the characters are never likable as they should be. Take Sean Bean's lead for instance – he's a disturbed ex-soldier, yes, but we never learn a thing about his background or what makes him tick. Bean tries hard to make the best of the material, but his talents are wasted here.It's a shame, as the talents of other decent actors – such as Lennie James and Bob Hoskins – are also left unexploited to their full potential. The biggest problem of all lies in the director, Nick Love. For some stupid reason, he adopts a shaky cam in an attempt to give his film edge, but it's distracting at best and nauseating at worst. Paul Greengrass he certainly isn't – and the camera-work alone is enough to ruin what was potentially an interesting film that raises some important questions about crime and justice.

Steven Smith Overall I think this movie is...pretty good. It's not particularly ground breaking or original but for people who enjoyed the Football Factory and the Business this film will be quite entertaining. People have complained that the free-hand camera work is poor. I disagree. For the most part, this camera technique works well and gives the film a gritty, urban feel. I do think Nick Love went a little over the top with it though. It certainly wasn't necessary to use the free-hand camera so excessively and would've been more suited to the fight/action scenes only. There are moments when the free-hand camera movement can be quite off putting. Nick Love should've used this technique sparingly I believe.This film isn't a masterpiece or a genius piece of film making, let's get that clear. There are some problems I have with it. Firstly, having Gene (Danny Dyer's character)as being close friends with the Security Guard is nothing more than a lame attempt to tie in the characters so that eventually their paths would all cross. We have Bryant meeting the Security Guard and the Security Guard just so happens to be friends with the protagonist of the story whom we are introduced to in the very beginning of the film. That just doesn't work for me. Nick Love should've though this through more. It becomes glaringly obvious to the viewer that Gene and Bryrant's path will cross soon -- and for very, very unconvincing reasons as well. Another thing I don't like about the character development in this film is the fact the Security Guard just takes it upon himself to go around telling people he knows someone who can "help them" with their troubles. (That someone is Bryant, the soldier who he's only recently met). But why on earth does he do this? He's barely met the bloke (Bryant) and he's off telling Cedric (the guy whose wife was attacked)that he knows someone who can help him get revenge. He does the same thing with Gene when they are talking in the security room together. Why does the Security Guard assume that Bryant will willingly help these characters? I just don't get it. The Security Guard even refers to Bryant as a "mate of his" Why does he assume he's "mates" with him? When these characters first meet they hardly exchange any dialogue together. Bryant seems to only respond to be polite to the Security Guard. He doesn't show any signs at all that he considers the security guard a "mate" at all. I don't think Nick Love thought through this development properly. And why does Bryrant's character suddenly change from being this troubled, reserved character who want to keep himself to himself to someone who's being the arbiter of justice for people he's never met? I don't understand this at all. There are also some useless, unnecessary characters in this film as well. The guy who got attacked by three people and is left with scars on his face was a pointless character in my opinion. He could've easily been omitted from the film without it greatly affecting the story at all. Another useless character was Gene's work buddy who decides to tag along with the newly founded crew (For what reason, I have no idea). Again, this character could've been omitted without the overall story being affected (or altered). I could write more about some of the problems I have with this film but I think I'll leave it there. If you watch this film for what it is and forget some of the problematic story developments then you'll enjoy this movie. The story itself is pretty straight forward and there's plenty of action/fighting for the viewer to enjoy. This film isn't a masterpiece...but it's not absolutely terrible either. 6/10