“How to Make a Killing” hit theatres on Feb. 20, becoming the first movie I went out of my way to see in theatres in 2026. It is rated a 6.7 (yes, actually) on IMDb, which is a rating I would strongly like to argue against.
“How to Make a Killing” is a thriller-comedy, following a young man trying to gain ownership of his family’s fortune, stopping at nothing to get the $28 billion that he would have been set to inherit if it weren’t for the seven family members set to inherit the fortune before him.
The film sets itself apart from many others of the same genre by telling us how the story will expectedly end right from the start. The main character, Beckett Redfellow, sits inside a jail cell as he tells a priest his life story just hours before he is set to die on death row. This, in fact, would become the least interesting part of the story. Although the audience knows exactly how the story is supposed to end, the entire story is filled with an incredible amount of twists and turns.
This is actually one thing I disliked about the movie, just the sheer amount of plot twists. A couple of plot twists are expected, but this movie seemed to just pack them in. Although I did really enjoy this movie, I think a movie should be able to stand on its own, plotwise, without relying on plot twist after plot twist. I’m not sure if this movie would have even had a plot without all of the included twists and turns, which made it a fun watch but perhaps a bit nonsensical.
The message of the movie was a bit questionable, with Beckett’s entire motive seemingly being to become rich by getting the family fortune. Although, the strange morals didn’t take away from the enjoyability of the movie. Beckett didn’t seem to be written as a main character that the audience is meant to get along with, instead he’s almost a cautionary tale. His being motivated by greed and stopping at nothing to get his inheritance. The inherent greed of his character made some audience members feel that he was a bad main character, but I more so view it as him having a clear motive (although not exactly a moral one).
On the technical side, the movie was pretty impressive. The lighting in different scenes tended to reflect the themes of the scene, giving the movie a further level of immersion. The movie tended to be a fan of warm lighting throughout most of the movie, reflecting Bennett’s state of mind. He spent most of the movie seeing little to no issue with the bad things he was doing to obtain his fortune. As it was a comedy, he upheld a positive or at least neutral attitude for most of the movie. When confronted with the morality of his situation he would try to reason with the audience that he knew was listening. In a way, I do feel like the lighting did reflect this. The strangely positive lighting throughout most of the movie contrasted the stark themes of the plot.
For these reasons I disagree with the 6.7 rating that IMBd gave the movie, in fact I would probably give it an 8/10. While the movie struggled in certain areas, overall it was a thrilling and attention keeping way to spend 105 minutes.
