Dead Fish (2005) User Reviews

Wasn't THAT bad...

[mean_girl_xoxo · 6/10 · 3 August 2008]

The main reason I got this movie was to see Gary Oldman do his thing. I think he is a great actor. This movie was one of his poorer film choices, but he did his best with the screenplay. There were somethings in this movie that made me blush a few times because of him, and I'm not talking about the sexual content. Its just how strong Lynch's feelings are and Gary Oldman really portrays that.

But the character that really made me laugh was Robert Carlyle's Danny Divine. He was really the clown of the movie. He his constantly angry and just hilarious in all.

So, I'd give this film a 6 just because of the acting. Great acting, bad script.

Smells like dead fish too...

[Ryu_Darkwood · 6/10 · 20 June 2007]

Sometimes it's a miracle how they can transform a potential good movie in a complete piece of crap. Dead Fish has everything in it to become a nice gangster-comedy, but fails miserably. You can't blame the casting, though. There are some excellent casted actors in roles that suit them fine. Robert Carlyle is superbly casted as greedy loan shark. Gary Oldman plays the role of messed up hit-man with verve. Terence Stamp has that eerie aura that makes his presence worth gold.

But still, despite of all those good actors casted in suitable roles, the movie just doesn't surpass any mediocrity. It feels as if its writers just grabbed a couple of elements from other gangster flicks and threw it in an inspiration-less mixer. It doesn't help that some of the plot lines are just too unfunny for words. I was thoroughly annoyed by the conversations between Drakan and his English host. It just felt as an endless repeating of the same joke that wasn't funny the first time you heard it.

Dead Fish has its moments, but lacks too much.

Works best as parody

[milosz_b · 4/10 · 12 August 2008]

I must admit I quite enjoyed this film. I think it works best as an over-the-top parody of such movies as "Lock, stock..." or "Snatch". The plot makes no sense, rhyme or reason. If you're after a cohesive plot, you'd better look elsewhere. The characters are at times funny and at the same time verging on annoying (think the character played by Brad Pitt in "Snatch", only stretched to the entire cast and entire duration of the film). Absolutely no way for suspension of disbelief here. So, again, if getting immersed in an action film is your thing, look elsewhere. All in all: noisy, clumsy, over-the-top, silly, but for some unknown reason the overall experience for me was actually not so terrible.

Painfully embarrassing

[preb1 · 2/10 · 21 February 2006]

Don't be fooled by gifted actors like Gary Oldman or Robert Carlyle. They simply can't save this movie. It really tries hard to be cool, but fails in every way, and then it tries some more.The story is very confusing, and in the middle of it, you just don't care anymore. Many of the scenes are way too long, with lines that tries hard to be funny,and doesn't make it..but still the scenes move on still trying. The editor must have lost the entire movie in a blender, and then stapled it together. The acting between Billy Zane and Karel Roden makes me crumble into my rear end. This is just a pathetic attempt to make a hit like Lock Stock and two Smoking Barrels. Charley Stadler...sober up!

Charlie Stadler is no Guy Richie, but this film is not a flop

[BeneCumb · 7/10 · 11 December 2012]

Dead Fish is one of the films the Brits are famous for where a small event triggers a sequence of violent and fatal events. Such films contain plenty of mixing ups, peculiar characters, betrayals, and desire for money both by "good" (petty scamps, debtors, idlers) and "evil" (killers, mobsters, robbers) characters. And those are played by good or great actors: here the most outstanding are Gary Oldman, Robert Carlyle and Karel Roden whose performance does smoothen several shortcomings or immoderate scenes in the plot. As for the latter, the first half is stronger and more interesting, the remaining has lingerings and ends with trivial culmination. Nevertheless, it is pleasant to watch (especially due to the actors mentioned above) plus several scenes are really witty and amusing. 7 points for sure from me!

What a waste of good actors!

[merlinwilliams · 3/10 · 24 January 2009]

The sole redeeming feature in this movie is Robert Carlyle's over the top loan shark - and even that gets overworked in this Lock, Stock/Pulp Fiction wannabe.

The dialogue was frequently unintelligible, scenes were overly long and the ending forced.

I like quirky English films...but quirky English films with plot and good character development.

And Gary Oldman's character singing for no apparent reason? That was worse than the infamous shark jumping episode of Oz, where the prisoners sing. At least JK Simmons can actually sing.

I spent the princely sum of $5 Canadian on this, and wish it was a rental fee instead of a purchase price.

This could have been a good movie. It almost seems like the breakdown in communication the film attempted to portray actually did happen...but between the screenwriter, the director and the editor.

My Review

[joemamaohio · 7/10 · 25 July 2008]

Hit-man Lynch (Gary Oldman) is the best at his game, until one fateful day he runs into Mimi (Elena Anaya) while a thief is stealing her boyfriend Abe's (Andrew Lee Potts) phone. He falls head over heels in love at first sight, and can't get her out of his mind.

Meanwhile, Mimi just confronted Abe by telling him she's pregnant with his baby, and he's having some issues dealing with this new discovery.

Danny Devine (Robert Carlyle), a loan shark, is out to get the money that he loaned people - including money he loaned to Abe and his friend Sal (Jimi Mistry).

After his encounter with Mimi, Lynch realizes she gave him the wrong phone, and Abe also realizes this mistake when he receives a call for Lynch. Abe finds Lynch's money and takes it, and Lynch goes in search of it.

Finally there's Virgil (Billy Zane), who is hired to follow Lynch (although it's actually Abe after they switched phones) because Lynch seems different. They enlist the help of assassin Dragan (Karel Roden) to help with the search.

All of these interlocking stories connect with one man - Samuel Fish (Terence Stamp). What is all their connections? Sure, this isn't as good as say "Snatch" or "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels," but it was a humorous mobster action flick. You follow the interlocking stories until its stunning climax, all the while laughing at the pure acting ability of the spectacular actors who are in it.

Falls flat like... a dead fish

[jan-vonk · 4/10 · 12 August 2010]

If the DVD-cover states that a movie is in the style of certain others you should already be warned! Generally it's a dead giveaway for cheap imitations or failed attempts to contribute to the genre. 'Dead Fish' is a clear example of the latter, with a great cast and good production standards but yet it still fails miserably.

The reason is simply because it's all a bit too improbable and over-the-top. We have Gary Oldman as the hired gun falling into love on first glance with a girl using exactly the same phone? Jimi Mistry as a pothead whose behaviour should have killed him long ago? Billy Zane whose character is the most unlikely secret agent you'll ever see? The coming back to life of Terence Stamp?

And the list could be longer still, handy you're a locksmith if you carry a hit mans' phone who gets his orders from station lockers! On the positive side there's Robert Carlyle as the foul mouthed loan shark and gorgeous Elena Anaya as the love interest. But even they cannot save a movie that's just trying too hard.

Confusing, but fun.

[Tor__martin · 6/10 · 6 February 2006]

Starts out with a cellphone exchange between the hit-man and the innocent bystander. The bystander suddenly gets a call from the hit-man's boss, and the game is on.

It was to me a good movie gone "bad". Robert Carlyle did a great part of saving the movie but it wasn't enough to capture me to the standards i hoped after the great trailer.

To sum it up in shortness; Salvador gets the hit-man's phone. The hit-man(Lynch) falls in love with Mimi(Salvadors girlfriend). Then the madness starts. Lynch wants Salvador dead, Danny Devine wants money from Salvador, Dragan wants to kill Salvador because he thinks he is Lynch.

Well, as you can see from my writing. This movie made me confused, and i don't want to advice you to see it any later then 8PM.

I like it

[am_buglet_82 · 27 June 2008]

I don't know why there are so many people hating on this movie. There are a few things I don't like about it either (the language being the main one), but that doesn't mean I find it all around "a waste of time". I think this movie is hilarious and fast paced. I like Gary Oldman and Robert Carlyle, and this movie did not lower my opinion of either. Those who let a simple movie lower their opinions of certain actors need to look at the bigger picture. They're ACTORS. Just because you don't like a character they play doesn't mean you have to stop liking them. In fact, to do that is just immature. There are bigger problems in this world than that.

That said, I like this movie. I know it's not the best movie out there, but it's not the crap so many other people think it is.

Oldman and Carlyle rock!

-Amanda

what a waste of time

[indexofrefraction · 1/10 · 17 February 2006]

this pretty much sums it up:

Bad acting, bad directing, bad casting, crappy movie score, bad pacing, uninteresting storytelling, bad plot, rehashed script, crappy dialog, not funny at all. Boring, in fact very boring.

Should be nominated for "worst movie 2004"

What puzzles me the most is how they managed to get names like Oldman and Carlyle to go along with this.

If you're looking for something like "Lock Stock" or "Boondock Saints", this doesn't even come close.

Waste of talent, your time and money.

I can't wait until this film comes to English cinemas nationwide!

[katiehark · 10/10 · 24 April 2006]

I have been fortunate enough to watch 'Dead Fish' a number of times and like any other characteristically well observed film - it becomes more & more alluring (the more and more you watch it). The clarity of the roles and personalities transform to characterise the essential quirk which formalises the fundamental and key element of this unique & eccentric English film.

A storyline set around 'one day' - based on the concept of the switching of two mobile phones. A simple film in terms of storyline adaptation - nevertheless, a wholeheartedly character driven, well observed, well styled, well directed and well edited piece of spirited modern day film making.

'Dead Fish' doesn't fit into a particular genre or category - in the same way it doesn't promise to be anything other than what it is. This is a light-hearted film with creative license, therefore, if you are open minded or like the appeal of non-mainstream creativity, you will enjoy what this film has to offer.

An entertaining cast retains the pace and characteristics of the film as a generous and consistent dose of subliminal hilarity throughout. Andrew Lee Potts plays an American young male working as a safe-breaker and key-cutter in London, (unassuming) his life is just about to get a whole lot worse as his mobile phone accidentally gets switched with that of a hit man, and as you can imagine leads to chaos and confusion. Needless to say Gary Oldman is the deranged hit man, Robert Carlyle an aggressive debt-collector, Terrance Stamp one of the hit man's targets, and Billy Zane plays a rather convincing goofy local informative (reminiscent of the alluring George Cole character in the St. Trinian's films).

The styling & costume cohesion is distinctive, watch out for the drug-induced light bulbs in Sal's flat, Rosenheim's contemporary white establishment, the seedy strip joint known as the 'Parrot Club' and the burgundy uniform which transforms Robert Carlyle into a time warped 60's Mod with matching obsessive 'same colour' VW Camper van.

There is no denying this is a tremendously well-observed character driven film. The roles formalise into snippets of vulnerability and tension as personalities are pursued. Unsuspecting rivals unite becoming embroiled in bizarre circumstances and the film circulates into a cycle of someone chasing someone else.

Look for the good in this film and you will not be disappointed. The pace and fury fluctuate as scenes are rhythmically punctuated by the excellent and contemporary 'Groove Armada' soundtrack.

In this day and age people often liken new creative film directors (or a new film) to cult inspirational movie makers like; Tarantino, Guy Ritchie or The Coen brothers. 'Dead Fish' is without doubt a cult movie, watch it ten times (I dare you) and love the bones of it like I do!

dead fish

[ren-vassilliou · 7/10 · 8 June 2011]

this is another of those films where i spent 5 days filming , i remember it was probably one of the best jobs i did , i had to sit at a table drinking beer watching all these Girls around me prancing around Naked , it was fantastic , i had one girl above going up and down too and fro on this giant Bannana , great great great .. give me more, what else can i tell you , i think the film had a good story line great cast but it needed a little more with the direction .. i think the film was rushed to be finished and i got the feeling that is the reason it flopped in the box office due to the fact it needed that little more extra mileage ..

Wow....

[angry-man · 3/10 · 9 April 2008]

...Self indulgent, pointless, meaningless... Why, how and what on earth enabled this train wreck to ever get made? Even the likes of Gary Oldman, Robert Carlyle, Billy Zane and Terence Stamp aren't sufficient to turn this mess around, rather they are mostly dragged down with it, with the possible slight exception of Carlyle, who's performance offers at least a little entertainment when he comes on the screen. The two young leads that hold the "plot" together are utterly weak and are putting me to sleep as I write this. Half way in and it's still just painful!!! I mean all the hallmarks of poor film-making: self conscious direction, miserable attempts at clever plot devices and witless attempts at humour. One of the worst, most agonizingly annoying scores imaginable. And what the hell is up with all the stupid CGI hearts?! If you value your time even a little bit, do not waste it on this... I am officially pulling the plug now...45 minutes in.

Crap, crap, crap!

[florisgek · 1/10 · 14 December 2006]

This movie was so bad, even the good actors started to irritate my eyes. And my ears. And my brain.

This movie doesn't just leave you indifferent to the characters. It left me positively hostile.

Hard to keep watching that way. I stomached 40 minutes before turning it off, and sitting myself down to write this review.

As said before: How did this happen? Great actors, obviously a big budget. The Groove Armada are no small fish, either (lame pun, sorry) yet their music was intrusive, out of pace, and sloppily mixed.

The romantic interest was a joke. As far as fish go, this Stinks Rotten! And could someone PLEASE shoot that annoying hippie pothead?

Snatch with a love story !

[elshikh4 · 7 December 2009]

Crime comedy. Seems like a follow up to (Snatch - 2000). Actually, since that particular movie, the whole decade became so influenced with its style. Every year we have one wacky movie a la snatch where the crime, the black comedy, the video clip style, the time games and the twists all are tied up together, like: (Crime Spree - 2003), (Dead Fish - 2004), (Revolver - 2005), (Smokin' Aces - 2006), and (RocknRolla - 2008).

I believe the hectic life, the violent world that we live, along with one movie I hate named (Pulp Fiction - 1994), led to these movies. Or maybe this is the best way to spoof all of that, and exploit it commercially. Anyway, it's a popcorn movie, full of harsh violence and twisted sense of humor, where the liquidation is always bloody, the gangsters are multinational, and the good guys are the less evil.

This one was so good in the start, because after that, it kind of lost its way a bit. For instance, the storyline of the Russian killer seemed wholly extra. The movie just didn't utilize that to produce comedy or action, therefore it was blocking the main, real hot, storyline of the hit-man and the kid. Moreover, the twist at the end was weak and so unbelievable. They didn't even have the time to explain it; so it looked stupid too!

On the other hand, I loved the sequence of "drive this car to crash the wall in front of you, unless you'll get a bullet between your eyes" as an outrageous escaping scene. Or the one in which (Gary Oldman) was offering the flower to the girl. And, to top it all, the whole first sequence in the train station where 2 lovers stand on the edge of breaking up, one guy falls in love at first sight, one girl goes in different direction away from 2 guys who love her desperately; that was undoubtedly the most solid, romantic and effective sequence in here.

Still the best about this movie is its drama. Yes, the story at its core is nothing but a boy who discovers that he loves his girl more than himself, earning her in the hard way through a journey in totally insane world that takes place in just one day. The character of the hit-man as helpless lover was nice "opponent" also. Generally it can be one of the weirdest romantic comedies ever!

The cast did it pretty good. (Oldman) was a memorable hit-man. Surprisingly (Andrew Lee Potts) was equal actor in front of him. And (Elena Anaya) was great. She has talent and cuteness, looking like (Julia Ormond)'s younger sister. Well, sweeter sister. But I pitied the efforts of (Billy Zane) since his role was wasted.

Despite its shortcomings, and its harsh violence and twisted sense of humor which I don't love, this movie keeps itself together as a watchable love story. Because when it comes to this matter, it's the smartest point at all. This is what gives this "snatch" flick something to be remembered with. Love stories live longer than crime comedies.

At any rate, it's one of the movies that can give a colorful feeling for days after watching it.

Gary Oldman waltzes through a strange, strange film

[NateWatchesCoolMovies · 6/10 · 28 May 2016]

There's a minefield of British gangster flicks out there, riding the colourful wake of Guy Ritchie's output, and similar fare. Some are solid, and some blow up in your face with mediocrity when you come across them. Dead Fish falls somewhat in between those two reactions. On the one hand, it's slick, visually adept, well casted and for the most part acted and knows how to set up a stylized scene. On the other hand, parts of it are silly, incongruent to the piece as a whole and kind of.. crappy. It's both a good bad movie and a bad good movie, and I know that doesn't give much of a concise picture or really tell you whether to watch it or not, but too bad, that was my conflicted reaction. Gary Oldman, in one of his last loopy performances before he reigned it in, plays Lynch, a lively assassin with an unstable personality. He jumps from contract to contract, until a beautiful girl (Elena Anaya) catches his eye, and he's struck with alarming and slightly creepy lovesickness for her. She's got an American boyfriend (Andrew Lee Potts, who almost brings the film toppling down with his shoddy acting) who is on the run from violent loan shark Danny Devine (Robert Carlyle, frothing at the mouth like a pissy little windup toy). Lynch collides with them all including Pott's stoner buddy (Jimi Mistry always looks like he needs to pee really bad and he's waiting for them to say "cut"). It's not super clear what Oldman's character objective is besides going off on a freaky bi-polar tangent as he pursues his perceived dream girl and seems ready to forsake the high paying hit-man job he seems so comfortable in. Nevertheless it's fun to see him run around shooting people and being a mental head, and no one can do that like our Gary. The plot thickens, or rather becomes unintelligible, when two secret spy operatives are brought in by some agency to.. do...man I don't even know. Billy Zane is a weird loony toons caricature as Virgil, a stuffy old spook with a plummy upper crust accent and some... wardrobe issues. He's paired with Eastern European psycho Dragan (the always excellent Karel Roden) and the two literally spend their portion of the film bickering, cat fighting and squabbling, having actually no real interaction or function with the plot. Oh well, they're amusing if nothing else. There's also a brief appearance from Terence Stamp, who classes up the affair as Samuel Fish, a shady businessman with a vaguely coherent part to play in the madness. It's all very strange and seems assured that it knows what it's doing and where it's going, even if at times the audience has not a clue. On the plus side, this is the only film I can think of where you can behold Gary Oldman break out into a musical number whilst tied down by a 250 pound S&M hooker. Yikes. Keep your ears peeled for a sonic little score from Groove Armada as well.

Unbearable, poorest copy work in years!

[pwils · 2/10 · 1 January 2007]

How is this possible! Such good examples (Lock Stock, Snatch, Trainspotting) aplenty, plus some top actors on the roll and then this crap is the result... If Lock Stock etc. wouldn't have existed, this movie would be quarter-way viewable, but *having seen* the good examples in this genre, the movie has become unbearable. All the copy work, so many examples to choose from, aarghh.

Moreso, if this film would have existed *before* Lock Stock, Snatch etcetera, it still would have damaged the genre to an extend that people may have had hesitations to go and watch Lock Stock etc. as 'not again, please' still ringing in their heads, only to discover after 10 minutes that it *is* possible to make something brilliant of a Cockney Caper Comedy, as Guy Ritchie has proved - luckily.

Avoid, avoid, and watch the good examples instead!!

Painful

[kazuobeluga · 1/10 · 16 August 2006]

I haven't seen anything more boring and less inspired in years. Wooden dialogs without any content, flat characters, pretentiousness all the way through. The cast is promising - the film is not. If anybody dares to compare this to a Guy Ritchie piece - forget about it. It's a wannabe. Production design is very lame (esp. Abe's van), although there's an apparent try to get a cool look - the guys who made this movie just aren't - cool, I mean. Stadler's directing is uninspired and foul. He should have stayed with commercials instead of wasting (other people's time and money). Oldman hasn't been that bad in centuries. If you think about watching this piece of crap - ask yourself first, why it wasn't released throughout the last two years (besides the premiere and a couple of DVD's with Finnish subtitles.

the first poster was right

[expatinasia · 1/10 · 1 May 2006]

This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life, easily surpassing the extraordinarily atrocious "Revolver". According to the packaging, the movie is as clever and funny as "Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels". It isn't. A killer comedy (there are killers in this comedy), the real crime is perpetrated on the audience.

There are many things that indicate a bad movie: bad acting, bad dialog, bad editing, bad music. How about "bad credits"? At the end of the movie, the musical production credits for "Don't Go Leaving Me Now" go to Andy cato. The following song, "Did I Dream", was produced by "Andy Cato". Nothing says "craptacular" as a movie that misspells the credits.

"Fortunately", I bought the DVD in China, spending about $1USD. Generally, I wouldn't consider stealing intellectual property but, referring to this movie as "intellectual" is a misnomer.

Unique Vision

[kersus · 9/10 · 16 October 2008]

It seemed like someone took the brown acid when they wrote this. It's a crazy wacky ride with a unique vision. If you want to see tremendous performances by Gary Oldman, Billy Zane and the rest of the cast - tune in. If you like something different and off the wall - tune in. If you sometimes laugh when others don't get it - tune in. If you only like mainstream movies - tune out. This is not a movie in the normal Hollywood box and indeed has little to do with the U.S. This is a must own - for those who collect brand new visions. Note for parents: brief topless scenes.

To summarize - A mix-up leads to many lives connecting. It sounds like you've heard it before, but not like this. A Dynamic cast nails their parts seamlessly, and while the movie has moments of mediocrity it stands out as a movie to beat in excellence. This will not be for everyone. Steer clear if you only watch Hollywood blockbusters and dislike festival movies or unique screenplays. I must repeat that Billy Zane and Gary Oldman really show off their dynamic talent.

It's boring - do not waste your time on it

[robertmaron · 1/10 · 2 July 2006]

It's boring, waste of your valuable time, and _not funny_.

There was about 50 people watching the movie. Nobody was laughing, except one guy - and he was drunk...

At least I hope he was.

I believe, that the guy who made the movie saw Snatch. Moreover - he enjoyed watching it. But I will not compare those two movies.

OK - if I have to say something positive - there were good actors in the movie, and they did their work well. But on the other hand, why not watching another movie with good acting?

You want something with Gary Oldman? Go and see 5th Element. Already did so? Do it again - it's worth it. Do you like Robert Carlyle? You can watch him in Full Monty. Terence Stamp? Priscilla was a terrific movie, and Hugo Weaving was there as well (no - Hugo was not playing in the Deaf Dish movie).

Please, do not say you have not been warned...

It seems you either loved this or hated it.

[r-studholme · 1/10 · 13 September 2006]

I did the latter. I went with a friend. We both looked at the cast list and thought it must be good; look at the obvious talent. After the film ended, when we compared notes, our thoughts had gone:

After five minutes: It must get better.

After ten minutes: I don't think it's going to.

After fifteen minutes: I don't care about any of these people or what happens to them.

After twenty minutes: This film has no redeeming features. It isn't even bad enough to be worth watching to the end to tell friends about.

After 30 minutes: Should we both just leave and get something to eat? I think we made it to 30 minutes because we were both concerned that the other was enjoying it.

I concur with most of the above. Don't bother.

Incredebly bad movie

[rwouter · 2/10 · 10 January 2007]

I should have known that it was about to suck when i read the words "A Movie just like snatch and lock, stock" on the DVD cover.

The movie starts of funny (The first scene) but then slides worse and worse. It is a mix of badly thought up jokes and pointless killing (although i usually like that).

The fact that the movie is all about a telephone switch.... Why not switch briefcases or so. (Never been done before) And could someone plz do something about the pot-smoking hippie. He is so annoying.

We skipped chapters on the DVD, and still the movie was easy to follow. We missed the end (skipped one character too many and didn't even bother to go back).

Save yourself the money and even more important the time and irritation.

Don't watch.

Avoid. at. all. costs

[Spaceygirl · 1/10 · 30 April 2007]

Absa-bloody-lutely awful!! Gary Oldman. What *were* you thinking? Robert Carlyle. What were you thinking? Terence Stamp. What were you thinking? Seen this mess? What were you thinking???

It's the biggest pile of junk I have ever seen.How they managed to sign on these three relatively big names is beyond me. The script is abysmal, The camera work choppy, the editing slopping and the acting....well, lets not even go there.

Robert Carlyle screams his lines as if he was in a hurry to get off the lot. Well, Mr Carlyle, I don't blame you for not wanting to be seen in the company of these idiots. I don't know who the script writer is but he needs a bullet in the brain and whoever green-lighted this needs to go for shock therapy.