Shockingly awful movie, the kind that isn't just bad, but makes you really mad that you wasted 2 hours of your life watching it.

This film reeks of what a socially privileged person, high up in a penthouse only looking down on the world, imagines what the poor and vulnerable might feel like. To those of us at the bottom, this imaginary tale just comes across as a pigeon pooping on us.

Maybe they meant well, maybe not, this still comes across as a piece of trash. It's more poverty porn and exploitation, than a clever, heartfelt exploration of the issues covered.

The plot is full of traumatic life experiences, but it never builds up or evolves into anything. It's just a series of unhappy events. Every 10 minutes or so, a new traumatic experience happens, which fills in the next 10 minutes, until the next bad thing to happen. It's like as if the writers spent a day watching chat shows using the events in each show to create 10 minutes of storyline. Eventually, instead of building a relationship with the characters, you end up being saturated by trauma and sadly feeling disconnected and losing all empathy - that's not a good feeling.

The film work is self-indulgent and feels like an attempt to replicate some of the techniques that make cinematography an art form. Mostly, it feels very amateur, but in one or two places, it's not too bad. It tries far too hard, and it misses the mark, and in any case, even if it was outstandingly filmed (which it isn't), the cliche riddled storyline is far too bad to give it a 2 star rating.

Lastly, transcending the storyline and writing, the acting is terrible. Like, really, really bad.

I detecting a nomination of at least one Golden Raspberry for this...

First of all the style and photography of this film are good. I really enjoyed the style and way it was shot.

The story is a sombre tale of a dysfunctional family which in itself is fine but it really lacks the emotional weight to carry this through.

Luke David Blumm was good but more focus should have been on him, he is the centrepiece of the story.

Instead the film focuses around Lola played by Nichola Peltz Beckham..I thought that was a strange decision then lo and behold i find out it was written and produced by Nichola...

Rather than focus on the story and key characters we focus on Nichola, Nichola with her brother ( the best bits ) , Nichola arguing with her mum ( not so great or believable), Virginia Madson does an ok job of being a toxic mum.

Nichola with her friend ( kind of fun ) Raven Goodwin is decent.

Nichola at the strip club.

Nichola with her, kind of boyfriend ?

Nichola staring blankly into the distance.

Nichola looking upset with a blank stare.

Nicholas make up never changing throughout, sleeping, baths, rape, tears and trauma.

Plaudits to the DoP on this film as its beautifully shot and while Nichola is a beautiful girl she gets tiresome and lacks the emotional weight to pull off the character.

This could have been a lot better if Nichola was able to step back more and create something that was not just a Nichola Pelz Beckham showreel.

I guess when you have a billionaire father and Millionaire husband anything is possible though.

5/10.

Was reading comments around the attempted proxy takeover of Nicola's grandfather, many citing her performance in The Last Airbender 2010 and her appearance in movies in general as nepotism, supposedly thanks to her grandfather.

She directed, "wrote" (let's be honest not the most original story, given also the Lola naming legacy which sort of seals certain tropes) and starred in it.

I liked the shots. Her acting doesn't seem like it's forced or that she's acting for the camera. I'd say she's employing Michael Caine's film school tactics where she doesn't seem to be acting for the camera but the moment/scene.

The long, steady shots remind of Tarantino or European cinema overall. It mostly reminded me of Jennifer Aniston's, The Good Girl 2002 which currently sits at 6.4. Very similar in tone.

And I think I prefer it over About Cherry 2012 with Ashley Hinshaw & Heather Graham currently sitting at 4.6.

She probably could've gone over-budget like Zach Braff or the HIMYM guy, Josh Radnor, but she stuck to film that didn't break her bank. Just goes to show she must've been raised right and has her head screwed on right despite the potential for opulence given her grandfather's background.

So given the film quality I doubt her grandfather had anything to do with her project unless he was the one restricting it by telling her low-budget or bust. In either case, it's a good project. I was engaged.

I'm not sure what she could do with a different cinematographer (seems like Madeline Leach has a good track record anyway) or crew, but here's hoping and a question only she can answer. I'd give it somewhere between a 5 and a 6.5. I've definitely seen 3 star low-budget movies and this one blows them out of the water. Little to no cringe except for the bf she kept around.