Glorified violence not for me

Rating: 2/10 (20 August 2006)

I felt this movie was a) too contrived (wasn't it convenient that the bother law was the major) b) too unrealistic (come on really? soccer gangs??) and c) it tried too hard to make soccer violence cool- I'm sorry but i just wasn't buying anyone's tough bad guy role.
I didn't identify with this movie at all. Maybe if i was male or a soccer person I would've related to some parts but being a 20 something female I didn't get half the reasons for the character's actions. If this had've been a good movie I would've enjoyed it remotely despite not relating (ie. I loved usual suspects despite being a male and I know guys who loved devil wears prada despite being a movie about females) A movie has to be deemed a great movie in order to obtain fans that cannot relate to the superficial relations/actions/situations of the characters.
While people may dispute the purpose of movies...is it to entertain? educate? create social awareness? I found this movie had nothing. It didn't entertain me and it didn't show me the true world of soccer fans. It felt like it was trying to make English soccer fans cool and tough and glorified the violence they caused and yet it didn't provide any moral or reason. It was violent to Be "cool" and lacked any insight into the character's choices.