User reviews

When you start throwing names around in the film's trailer - Janusz Kaminski, award winning long time cinematographer to Steven Spielberg, you expect to see something, well... worth watching. This was not the case here.

Kaminski, as producer and director for this film, was horrible as a director. Way too many random still shots, unnecessarily long or too short scenes, and scenes popping out of nowhere and ending abruptly as well as outdated slow-mo shots. The editing was just as bad. Seasoned cinematographer Keith Dunkerley's photography was the worst I've seen in a long time, and perhaps Kaminski should have stuck to what he's good at. The washed out yellow tinge colors made the film feel like it was the late 80's or early 90's - very unappealing and not gangster motif. It may have worked, had the new model Audi not made an appearance. The score was typical B-film - loud, overbearing, and unfitting for the most part. The screenplay by novice writers Duncan Brantley and Mark Wheaton had way too many plot and technical issues, many that could've easily been fixed had the screenplay been proofread by a seasoned writer. The story concept has been done many times before, much better, and this was a tacky attempt that failed miserably. It had me shaking my head asking "but why?" and many "huh?" 's. The casting and performances were adequate, with Agnieszka Grochowska being the only convincing character that seemed to know how to really act.

I get that this was a low budget film, but the amateur errors are no excuse, and didn't need more funding to avoid. It's a generous 5/10 from me

Not sure why, but I wanted to like this movie. Starts off decently although no one is winning any acting awards for this one

But once the premise is set up, the whole structure falls apart and the story strains credulity. You end up loosing all respect for the protagonists because the react so stupidly as the movie descends into the farcical. Kind of a shame really.

In the end, it's a dud.

The acting wasn't bad. The story needed improvement. People want to see the underdog succeed. Build up the suspense, but have an outcome the audience can be content with. Take lessons from The Equalizer. So disappointed.

Pair his cringe acting with the first time director, Janusz Kaminski and it's no surprise this is terrible. Loads of plot holes, people loaning nearly a million dollars on a handshake deal and then balking at a 7k finders fee.

Then add in pointless flashbacks and scenes of the guys running around town on skateboards and it's just a bizarre film all the way through.

If a film is rated 1 or 2 stars, then not only is it bad, it shouldn't have been made in the first place and that's exactly what this is.

A small waste of time but still a waste. "American Dream" never gets close to the dream, it only shows the nightmarish way hard-working people have to go through in order to built something valuable and iomportant in their lives, in this case two friends (Michiel Huisman and Luke Bracey) who have to make a business with the Russian mob and the bad guy played by Nick Stahl in order to have their project working. Spielberg's regular cinematographer Janusz Kaminski signs this as a director and producer, and what a disjointed wreck this is. I wonder what happened to him in opting for making this - and it gets weirder that the film took ten years to finally get a release.

While the actors are all enjoyable and good to watch (specially Stahl as he always delivers good villains, "Bully" and "Sin City" to mention a few), but the inconsistent, dumb and painful screenplay doesn't help anyway in coming up with something memorable or worth seeing. The two friends and their girlfriends go through a lenghty and violent scenario where Stahl gives them a time to collect his money on a certain deadline but instead of waiting for it he and his henchmen keep on threatning them every hour. He's worst than a bank calling every ten minutes wanting to know if the debt was paid or when.

And was there a point in opening the film with a tough situation by one of the women back in Russia, to later on return to that scenario in the middlwe of the movie, explain what the situation ended and still we don't get any resolution? I figured out it was a way to say that the girlfriends (one of them, at least) were far more brave and cold-blooded than those good-looking wimpy guys.

It's heavily cliched, annoying and jumpy, has been done before and better. 4/10.

A bit surprised by this film, its a lovely revenge thrillerdrama, involving criminal elements from russia, somewhere southern parts of california, even upfront the norwegian seamens church theyve chosen to shoot a pretty violent scene.

its all about money, where small entrepeneurs go dire straits because the bank wont lend money for running expences, and pretty coincidentally they get in touch with people with money when attending a marriage, but they are gangsters that turns the gun at you almost immediatly.

even though its good there are lots of storystrains that vanish out in the sand, and faces that you think will be important thats never shown or used again. also hard to nail the timeline here. so it could be better plotted and the story could have been made more visual.

but acting is fairly good and the final revenge tastes blood, also with a female caracter that can blow the wheel wrench more than just once to underline her true feelings( usually women beats once and then runs to be caught and killed in almost every western killer thrillers, except the superhero dames) so its a film to watch when it arrives in your local cinema theater.its a 7 and a recommend from the grumpy old man

Only 10 for nick stahls performance. I enjoyed the movie, but I went into thinking it was gonna be as bad as what I herd about it. Pleasantly surprised it was better than I thought.