Bullet Head (2017), written and directed by Paul Solet, is a gritty, claustrophobic crime thriller that traps viewers in a high-stakes game of survival. Starring Adrien Brody, John Malkovich, Rory Culkin, and Antonio Banderas, the film follows three criminals hiding in a derelict warehouse after a botched heist, only to face a ferocious guard dog and their own unraveling pasts. With its intense atmosphere, strong performances, and psychological depth, Bullet Head aims for a unique blend of noir and survival drama but stumbles with an uneven script and pacing issues. This review explores why Bullet Head is a compelling yet imperfect addition to the crime thriller genre.

Plot Summary: A ᴅᴇᴀᴅly Standoff in a Concrete Cage

Set in an unnamed city, Bullet Head centers on three criminals—Walker (John Malkovich), Stacy (Adrien Brody), and Gage (Rory Culkin)—who seek refuge in an abandoned warehouse after a heist goes south. Their plan to lay low is shattered when they encounter De Niro, a brutal guard dog trained for violence, who traps them inside. As they grapple with dwindling options, the trio’s internal conflicts and dark histories surface through tense dialogue and flashbacks. Meanwhile, a menacing crime lord, Blue (Antonio Banderas), closes in, raising the stakes.

The screenplay weaves parallel stories of survival, drawing connections between the criminals and the dog’s own brutal past. While the concept of man versus beast in a confined space is intriguing, the narrative’s reliance on heavy-handed monologues and convoluted backstories can feel forced, diluting the tension. Still, the film’s raw energy and psychological undercurrents keep viewers invested in the outcome.

Cinematography and Atmosphere: A Claustrophobic Nightmare

Bullet Head excels in creating a suffocating atmosphere, thanks to Zoran Popovic’s gritty cinematography. The warehouse setting—a decaying labyrinth of concrete and shadows—amplifies the sense of entrapment, with тιԍнт sH๏τs and dim lighting heightening the tension. The camera lingers on the actors’ faces, capturing their fear and desperation, while dynamic angles during confrontations with the dog add visceral intensity.

The film’s sound design, paired with a moody score by Ryan Franks and Scott Marcussen, enhances the suspense, with the dog’s growls and the criminals’ panicked whispers echoing through the space. However, some critics note that the film’s attempt to blend gritty realism with poetic interludes—such as flashbacks to the dog’s brutal training—disrupts the pacing, making the tone feel uneven at times.

Performances: A Powerhouse Cast Elevates the Material

The film’s greatest strength is its stellar cast. Adrien Brody delivers a nuanced performance as Stacy, a volatile yet introspective criminal haunted by his choices. His ability to convey both toughness and vulnerability makes Stacy the emotional core of the film. John Malkovich, as the weary veteran Walker, brings gravitas and dark humor, his philosophical musings adding depth to an otherwise thinly written character. Rory Culkin shines as Gage, the young, drug-addled member of the trio, infusing his role with raw fragility.

Antonio Banderas, as the cold-blooded Blue, is underutilized but chilling in his brief scenes, exuding menace with minimal screen time. The real surprise is De Niro, the guard dog, whose presence is both terrifying and sympathetic, thanks to careful direction and editing. While the performances are universally praised, critics argue that the script doesn’t give the actors enough to work with, leaving some character arcs underdeveloped.

Themes and Symbolism: Man, Beast, and Redemption

Bullet Head explores themes of survival, loyalty, and the cyclical nature of violence. The parallels between the criminals and the dog—both shaped by brutal circumstances—create a compelling, if heavy-handed, metaphor. The film questions who the real “bullet head” is: the dog trained to kill, or the men driven to crime by desperation. Flashbacks to the dog’s past and the criminals’ regrets aim to add depth, but their execution feels overly stylistic, occasionally pulling focus from the central conflict.

The film also touches on redemption, as Stacy grapples with guilt and Walker reflects on a life of crime. However, these themes are undermined by a script that prioritizes dialogue over action, leading to moments that feel more like a stage play than a cinematic thriller. Despite these flaws, the thematic ambition elevates Bullet Head above standard crime fare.

Pacing and Execution: A Mixed Bag

Bullet Head is a slow-burn thriller that leans heavily on dialogue and character dynamics, with bursts of intense action. The confined setting and 93-minute runtime keep the story taut, but the pacing falters in the second act, where lengthy monologues and flashbacks slow the momentum. Critics note that the film’s attempt to balance psychological drama with visceral thrills creates a tonal clash, making it feel like two movies sтιтched together.

The climactic confrontation delivers the expected intensity, but some viewers may find the resolution predictable or unsatisfying due to the script’s reliance on familiar tropes. While the film’s ambition is admirable, its execution doesn’t always match its vision.

Reception: A Cult Classic in the Making?

Bullet Head received mixed reviews upon release, with a 47% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes (based on 34 reviews) and a 51/100 on Metacritic, reflecting its divisive nature. Critics praise the cast and atmosphere but criticize the uneven script and pacing. IMDb users rate it 5.4/10, with some calling it a “hidden gem” for its intensity and others finding it “pretentious” and slow. The X post’s enthusiasm aligns with fans who appreciate its gritty vibe and stellar performances, though the broader consensus leans toward disappointment.

Where to Watch Bullet Head (2017)

As of May 2025, Bullet Head is available on streaming platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Tubi (check regional availability). It can also be rented or purchased on YouTube, Apple TV, and Fandango at Home.

Final Verdict: A Flawed but Gripping Thriller

Bullet Head (2017) is a tense, atmospheric crime thriller elevated by a stellar cast and a unique premise but held back by an uneven script and pacing issues. Adrien Brody, John Malkovich, and Rory Culkin deliver compelling performances, and the claustrophobic setting creates a palpable sense of dread. However, the film’s heavy-handed symbolism and tonal inconsistencies prevent it from reaching its full potential. Fans of gritty, character-driven thrillers may find it worth a watch, but those seeking polished action may be disappointed.

Rating: 6.8/10
Perfect for: Fans of Reservoir Dogs, The Grey, or psychological crime dramas.
Skip if: You prefer fast-paced action or a тιԍнтly structured plot.

Stream Bullet Head for a gritty, intense ride that, while flawed, delivers enough tension and star power to keep you locked in.

Keywords: Bullet Head 2017, Adrien Brody, John Malkovich, Antonio Banderas, Rory Culkin, crime thriller, neo-noir, psychological thriller, movie review 2025, claustrophobic thriller.

A Farmer’s Misplaced Hammer Led to the Largest Roman Treasure in Britain

---

November 16, 1992 was the day which changed Suffolk-resident Eric Lawes’ life in a huge way. What he thought would have been an innocent search for a hammer he had misplaced on his farm in Hoxne Village, Suffolk, England ended up bringing him much more than he had bargained for — namely, uncovering the hiding spot of a long-hidden treasure. Based on the Guardian’s coverage of the story, Eric Lawes had been previously gifted a metal detector upon his retirement as a parting token. He decided to put his retirement gift to good use in order to locate the hammer which he had had some trouble finding. According to a 2018 Smithsonian Magazine article, when the device started recording that there was a strong signal coming from the earth, he knew that he was about to discover something big. As he started digging, it soon became clear to him that he had unearthed a treasure trove.

The Guardian reports that, when Lawes saw that his preliminary digging had yielded a few gold coins and silver spoons, he immediately contacted both the local archaeological society and the police department. Archaeologists came to the property the following day and had the area of earth holding the treasure carefully sectioned-off and removed. Their hope was that at a later stage, in their laboratory, they could examined the items in order to identify both their age and how they were stored.

When all was said and done, close to 60 pounds of items made from silver and gold were found on the site. These included more than 15,000 Roman coins, 200 gold objects, and several silver spoons. For archaeologists, this find — which later became labeled as the Hoxne Hoard — was an incredible discovery. AP News reported that archaeologist Judith Plouviez was over-the-moon about the discovery, saying that it was “an incredibly exciting and amazing find.” What’s more, another archaeologist, Rachel Wilkinson, told Smithsonian Magazine that this discovery was “the largest and latest ever found in Britain.”

Ordinarily, archaeologists would use radiocarbon dating as a means of identifying the age of ancient relics. However, they couldn’t locate any suitable material from the haul. Consequently, they determined the age by examining writing on the coins, as well as the ruler carved into them, estimating that the treasure was probably buried in either 408 or 409 AD.

Roman-era archaeologist Peter Guest told Smithsonian Magazine that “if you look at them a little more carefully, then they should be dated to the period after the separation of Britain from the Roman Empire.” He offers as part of his evidence the fact that almost all of the coins found in the Hoxne Hoard were clipped – in other words, small chunks of their edges had been taken off. These clippings would have been used to create coins which were similar to the Roman coins of that era.

Guest has a logical reason for this, arguing that “The Roman Empire wasn’t supplying Britain with new gold and silver coins, and in light of that, the population tried to get over this sudden cutoff in the supply of their precious metals by making the existing supplies go further.”

Archaeologists also believe that the treasure belonged to a Romano-British family. During that time, considering that there was so much societal discord and upheaval, it was common for Romans who had settled in Britain to bury their most prized possessions.

That said, one archaeologist is of the belief that the hoard had a lot of sentimental value for the Romano-British family to whom it is believed to have belonged. In her book The Hoxne Late Roman Treasure: Gold Jewellery and Silver Plate, Catherine Johns claims that the manner in which the treasure was kept supported this claim. Some of the items which were recovered had been packaged in small, wooden boxes which were lined with leather. What’s more, pieces of wood, locks, and nails, among other things, surrounded the gold and silver pieces. This leads Catherine to assert that the package was carefully buried and not simply chucked away in a rush.

Interestingly enough, the items unearthed might shed some light on the identity of the family who owned them. They cite a gold bracelet bearing the inscription “UTERE FELIX DOMINA IULIANE,” which roughly translates to “use this happily Lady Juliane”. A second name “Aurelius Ursicinus” has also been discovered. This has consequently led some to believe that Juliane and Aurelius were the couple and the original owners of the treasure. That said, that has yet to be confirmed.

All in all, the discovery was a real treasure for archaeologists, and by extension, for Lawes. According to Smithsonian Magazine, in recognition of his discovery and willingness to contact authorities, the British government rewarded him with over £1.7 million, an amount which he shared with the farmer whose land was dug out in order to get the treasure. Funnily enough, apart from the treasure, Lawes also found his lost hammer — which now resides in the British Museum.