Tss5078 Craig Daniels (Pat Healy) is having a hell of a day. He's been fired on the very same day he's recieved an eviction notice on his front door. Content to drink his troubles away, Craig runs into an old friend from High School. Together they start catching up and run into a unique couple, a couple who starts offering them money simply for doing oddball things for their amusement. The duo agrees and even goes back to the couples house with them, and that's when things really start to get bizarre. I feel like I've seen something similar and far more serious before, but I can't place my finger on it. What I really liked about this film was that despite it's B-movie status, and obvious lack of quality writing, what goes down isn't as expected as you would think. A lot of it really was surprising and they do spare us the pain and torture of doing what is obvious. I also enjoyed Pat Healy as Craig, he's not the kind of character you'd expect to see in a movie like this, and he added an interesting dynamic to a cast that was otherwise pretty droll. Cheap Trills has a few funny and unexpected moments in it, and to be honest it was better than I thought it would be. It still however very much deserves it's B-movie status and reeks of inexperience.

Leofwine_draca CHEAP THRILLS is another film with a premise about doing 'dares' for hard cash. This low budget offering particularly reminded me of the rather good Thai film 13: GAME OF DEATH, in which a down on his luck office worker becomes involved in a game whereby he earns money for doing increasingly dangerous or disgusting tasks.CHEAP THRILLS is a film very much in the same style although it's lower key, more realistic, and not as outlandish (or entertaining) as the Thai movie. It's basically one of those films where you sit back and enjoy the spectacle, finding yourself variously shocked, surprised, or disgusted by what takes place on screen. A vein of black humour runs through the production which is added to by David Koechner's lively performance as the villain of the piece.The main problem with the film is the lack of sympathetic characters. Everyone in this film is in it for their own gain, so you don't really care what happens to any of them. Pat Healy's protagonist is a case in point and I never warmed to him despite his ordeals. In addition, the climax is obvious and the tasks that do play out are rather predictable; there are few, if any, genuine surprises in this one. It's watchable in a what-would-you-do type way, but overall it's a very superficial movie.

Maz Murdoch (asda-man) Cheap Thrills has the type of concept which could easily live up to its title. Two rich sickos torturing a couple of poor strangers by daring them to do progressively twisted tasks could result in an exploitative B-movie designed to shock the audience for the sake of it. Thankfully, Cheap Thrills manages to offer much more than a few cheap thrills. It's actually an intelligent, engaging and darkly humorous little film with a few hints of postmodernism not too dissimilar to Funny Games.Pat Healy and Sara Paxton made a terrifically witty duo in Ti West's limp, The Innkeepers and deserved to appear in a much better film. Cheap Thrills is that better film, and whilst Sara doesn't have particularly much to do, Pat puts on a similarly likable performance as the down on his luck protagonist, who we can all relate to. In fact, all of the characters manage to be engaging and interesting. I love how realistically the film progressed from a friendly encounter on a night out to a sick set of dares.For a film largely set in one location with just four characters, it's never boring. Quite the opposite, in fact I was left wanting more and I think it could've pushed the boundaries more, but that's probably just my twisted horror nut coming out! Where the film actually succeeds is that it doesn't make the dares the focus of the entire film. Instead it's much more concerned with the characters and how they develop, thus making for a much better quality and more involving piece of filmmaking.The comment it makes on society is quite heavy-handed but nevertheless an intelligent and relevant one. It's best to view the two rich psychos as symbols, rather than characters. They're obviously representative of the bourgeoisie and how they exploit the poor minority. However, the film also makes a subtle comment on the psychotic nature of audiences too. I thought that the ending kind of made out like the psychos were doing it all for us, the viewing public, thus adding another intelligent and postmodern layer to the film.Overall the film is a striking debut and this E.L Katz bloke looks like he has a promising future in the horror movie industry. His directing was consistently intense and he managed to build some massive amounts of tension. Cheap Thrills may falter on repeated viewings (due to the lack of a surprise factor) but for a first time viewing there's very little to complain about. Perhaps it could've been a little more twisted, but really I was surprised by how intelligent the screenplay actually was. Cheap Thrills offers a lot more than its title suggests. It's probably one of the best horror-comedies we've had in a while.

begob I loved the premise - you get it straight away, like a good short story, and settle in for the ride. The first half was amusing. The guy throwing the money around was played really well, and the two losers upped their mutual distrust into contempt at just the right pace.But no comedy for me in the rest of the film. It was tense, although I think they got the finger and the dog the wrong way round. Plus the dog story was daft - the choking on the finger didn't "go down" well.After the attempted robbery it lacked any real menace from the rich couple. The husband lost his lethal charm, the wife never seemed more than a nice girl having a wild night. They had to have an underlying weirdness, but in the end they seemed like the normal ones. Maybe that was the point, but if so I don't understand it - is being rich to be in the right? Maybe they're part of CNBS's dwindling audience.Good entertainment, but could have been crazier.