Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

I have to confess I approached this film with very low expectations having read the one star reviews here on IMBb. I had a mixture of confirmation and surprise. Sure it doesn't have the production values of the Sean Bean film with a similar title but one star is a bit harsh. Sure it was filmed on camcorders with a very small budget but if you have Sean Bean I'm sure you can command a bigger one. Having said that I've always thought SB was a wooden, one dimension actor who adds very little to anything he's in.There are a couple of faces in Jesse Birdsall, who gives the best performance, and Ross Boatman from 'London's Burning' but special mention should go to Canadian actor Megan Lockhurst who also turned in a good believable performance.So if you are expecting something similar to the SB film then of course you will be disappointed but if want a slice of Essex, this is maybe not the only way.

To start off I am a big fan of all films old,new,bad and good....But this is just beyond belief. It is so bad I do not know where to start!!??. The acting is horrendous , camera work shocking and directing .. abysmal. I think, reading between the "lines" (lol) it was trying to be a Lock Stock Style film....but what a failure. The accents where a joke. Watch out for the amateur acting as if they are waiting for each others line and not sure whos next....poor director?The fight scenes are farcical...note the police one at the start in the yard. I have always looked at the rating scores here for films but now I seriously have grave doubts. Every review was about 1 or 2.....one critic put it at 5 stars!...yeh right! How the hell did it get its rating of 5.5+. Lot of false reviews here me thinks. AVOID please.

OK, so I noticed this film and got hooked in by the 5 star blah blah and the (at the time) IMDb rating of 7.0. Usually means it will be of a decent standard even if you don't like the premise or the movie itself. Oh how wrong. I couldn't literally believe how bad ALL of the acting was. Some people mention the performance of the lead actor; well they are clearly his friends because he was the best of a very bad bunch. The guy who played the character "Lee" was so miscast it is untrue. You will never hear an Essex "hard man" talk the way that he does. It was hard enough anyway but from the moment he entered the movie any ounce of seriousness I had had evaporated. Such a poor actor. I would go so far as to say it was a total embarrassment to the British film industry and I hope I never watch a movie as bad ever again. I lasted around 30 minutes and then my girlfriend and I watched "The Martian", then you can see what real actors can actually do. Do not waste your time. It won't be long until this film has a 3/4 rating on here, and even that would be extremely generous.

This is the second film I have now seen from director Steven M Smith. The first being the much commented and criticised Hooligans at War, North vs South. Where lets be honest, there is no direction at all, poorly led from start to finish and what I can only guess was done on a shoe string budget. Before watching this movie, my expectations were very low. However within the first 20 minutes of this film, the difference in improvement was clear to see. Yes, there are still lots of faults and quality issues. But the film flowed and the storyline had thought and meaning. The film was watchable and much better than others are saying in their reviews. I noticed that there was quite a few of familiar faces in this film. These faces are from Steven M Smiths HAW. I was pleased to see Chris Bell again playing a lead role (Danny) who puts in a well delivered performance and I must mention Ross Boatman (Franks) who as always was fantastic. On the less positive side James Hodcroft (Lee) was a poor choice for this type of film. I have never met anybody from Essex who talks with such a corrective pronouncing tongue. Seriously, who taught this guy to speak? Stop emphasising every word spoken. I couldn't take this guy seriously and lowered the overall quality of acting within the lead roles. I was also amazed to see that there were other actors used in HAW that we're used again in LOS. Josh played my Mark Windham (also Mickey in HAW) is just awful. A complete mumbling poor excuse for an actor that makes watching paint dry fun. There were several of the hooligans in the early fight scenes duplicated from both films that have no idea what a real fight is and just hoping to get there face on TV.Although the quality of this film could of been better and at times still appeared to be filmed on a low quality mobile phone, I enjoyed the film. As low budget movies go, the team should be very proud of the end product. Chris Bell and Steven M Smith have written this film very well and brought it from pen and paper to our TV screens. I look forward to seeing what these two come up with next. If they keep improving as they have done here and do without the poor actors and repeat hooligans, things will surely only get better? If you do insist on using the same actors in your films, keep hold of the good ones such as Pat Garner, Alan Lund, Darren Placid and Colin Vidler who can keep the believability of the characters real and perform to high levels. My eyes will peeled for what you two have for us next.Keep up the good work.