I get what you mean and I did think that too. But my take is that they were just slimy men who wouldn't take no for an answer regardless. Granted it appeared they were in a brothel but the film wasn't meant to be some moral conundrum, just how this young woman's life changed dramatically by the needs of men.

I'm glad they didn't go down that route though and make it like the Sixth Sense with the dead guys meaning to help her to get justice rather than scare her. I don't know, just seemed like they deserved it.

On another note, the black dude love interest was an absolutely awful actor. Ruined every scene he was in with his wooden, unnatural delivery. Not sure if it was the script but he just came across as some creepy stalker with some cringey dialogue. Also should have died at the end!

@cpheonix said:

I get what you mean and I did think that too. But my take is that they were just slimy men who wouldn't take no for an answer regardless. Granted it appeared they were in a brothel but the film wasn't meant to be some moral conundrum, just how this young woman's life changed dramatically by the needs of men.

Well clearly they made sure not to get any young/handsome actors to play those guys, but if she was a prostitute then of course that would be the exact type of ugly/creepy guy that would be willing to pay to sleep with a pretty young woman, doesn't mean they deserve to die. It seemed liked they go to that nightclub, pay her pimp, then sleep with her. Not saying it's right or good, but if she was going along with it did the dudes really deserve to get knifed? Although it seemed after she killed her pimp she was inviting them up to kill them so I dunno exactly what was going on there, it was just a little too ambiguous for my tastes.

@cpheonix said:

On another note, the black dude love interest was an absolutely awful actor. Ruined every scene he was in with his wooden, unnatural delivery. Not sure if it was the script but he just came across as some creepy stalker with some cringey dialogue. Also should have died at the end!

YES. Not only that they made sure to get the goofiest nerdiest black dude they could find. Like, are there no decent looking black actors that could have gotten for that? I guess they wanted the most non-threatening guy they could get.

@cswood said:

Well clearly they made sure not to get any young/handsome actors to play those guys, but if she was a prostitute then of course that would be the exact type of ugly/creepy guy that would be willing to pay to sleep with a pretty young woman, doesn't mean they deserve to die. It seemed liked they go to that nightclub, pay her pimp, then sleep with her. Not saying it's right or good, but if she was going along with it did the dudes really deserve to get knifed? Although it seemed after she killed her pimp she was inviting them up to kill them so I dunno exactly what was going on there, it was just a little too ambiguous for my tastes.

Lol yeah the only "good looking" client was Sam Claflin but he was the undercover cop. I guess you're right, the types that need to go to prostitutes are likely to be older, less attractive men. Seems like I'm trying to justify her killings, I'm not! You're right, they didn't deserve to die...it was just a sad way for her life to end up all round.

YES. Not only that they made sure to get the goofiest nerdiest black dude they could find. Like, are there no decent looking black actors that could have gotten for that? I guess they wanted the most non-threatening guy they could get.

True, looking at the actor's credits he hasn't done much and I can totally see why. Not that race should play a part, the producers definitely seemed to have consciously chosen a black actor rather than a good actor. Could pick his role apart with all that was wrong with it.

@cpheonix said:

True, looking at the actor's credits he hasn't done much and I can totally see why. Not that race should play a part, the producers definitely seemed to have consciously chosen a black actor rather than a good actor. Could pick his role apart with all that was wrong with it.

I think they got a black actor for that role specifically for the bedroom scene. I could be reading into it but a black dude, being taken up to a white woman's apartment, and then she starts freaking out in a way that might suggest to an outside viewer that he's assaulting her. That's not only every guy's nightmare but it's _*especially *_a black guy's nightmare.

Although I will say that exchange of dialog where she is seeing the murder and says "Get off of her!" and he shouts "I'm not on her!" got the biggest laugh out of me and that perfect mix of comedy and horror I love. But yeah, if I were that guy I'd be ready to poop my pants in that situation.

@cswood said:

I think they got a black actor for that role specifically for the bedroom scene. I could be reading into it but a black dude, being taken up to a white woman's apartment, and then she starts freaking out in a way that might suggest to an outside viewer that he's assaulting her. That's not only every guy's nightmare but it's _*especially *_a black guy's nightmare.

Honestly, I'm not sure. The scene would've worked with any race because it was dark and he was in a Halloween costume. Also we're in the #metoo period and this kind of scenario doesn't discriminate, white or black.

I personally felt a black actor was chosen just to diversify the cast and give a more realistic representation of London today. I've got no problem with that. It's just how bad the acting was, on top of the poor chemistry.

Although I will say that exchange of dialog where she is seeing the murder and says "Get off of her!" and he shouts "I'm not on her!" got the biggest laugh out of me and that perfect mix of comedy and horror I love. But yeah, if I were that guy I'd be ready to poop my pants in that situation.

That was hilarious! Tbf he had some funny lines, like the North / South London joke.

The movie kind of wants to play it both ways at the end, the victims want retribution for being killed, but then we are meant to believe they deserved it?

I don't agree that it wants to play it both ways, I think it's intended to be open to interpretation. Why do you assume its not providing a definitive answer is a flaw, and why are you making assumptions about what the movie wants us to believe about who deserved what? Best I could tell, it depicted Jack as scum and Sandie as his victim, which makes her somewhat sympathetic in having killed him--but as for the others she killed, we simply aren't given enough information, and it's a perfectly plausible interpretation that she killed most of her clients indiscriminately, not in a defensive way or as moral justice against bad men. Ellie does seem to take her side in the end, but that doesn't automatically mean the movie is doing so. After all, the fact that she tries to kill Ellie and her boyfriend--and pretty cold-bloodedly too--suggests she's long inured herself to harming innocent people.

I was reminded a little of the movie Monster, about real-life serial killer Aileen Wuornos. In that film, Wuornos's first killing is shown to be essentially an act of self-defense, after one of her clients ties her up and rapes her, and is possibly going to kill her when she escapes and kills him. After that, she starts killing her clients indiscriminately under the belief that they're all scum and deserve it. Reading about the real Wuornos, I found that the story of her first killing was based on what she told police after she was caught, and the accuracy of the account is questionable, to say the least. Either way, Last Night in Soho seemed to be implying a similar pattern, and a similar perspective which allows us to be at least partially sympathetic to a female serial killer. But I don't think it definitively takes her side; it leaves it up to the audience to decide.

Honestly, I'm not sure. The scene would've worked with any race because it was dark and he was in a Halloween costume. Also we're in the #metoo period and this kind of scenario doesn't discriminate, white or black.

This reminds me of the discussions over the original Night of the Living Dead, where people have long read a racial subtext into the white characters' behavior toward the black protagonist, though Romero insisted that wasn't what was intended and that his casting of a black actor in the lead role (which was highly unusual at the time) was incidental to the story.

Now, with regard to this film, since race isn't ever mentioned explicitly, you could well read all its scenes in a colorblind way, if you like. The old woman might have freaked out at seeing a white boy in the apartment. A white boy might have said that line about having feelings of not belonging. But, given the social context, the fact that it's shown to be an overwhelmingly white area where there's considerable classism, I think the movie was trying to imply there was some racism in her reaction. It's a perfectly valid interpretation if you don't see it that way, but I believe it's what was intended.

@Kylopod said:

The movie kind of wants to play it both ways at the end, the victims want retribution for being killed, but then we are meant to believe they deserved it?

I don't agree that it wants to play it both ways, I think it's intended to be open to interpretation. Why do you assume its not providing a definitive answer is a flaw, and why are you making assumptions about what the movie wants us to believe about who deserved what?

The men were portrayed as sleezy dirtbags up until perhaps the very end. The movie presents all of the johns as old ugly/fat disgusting dudes. Also, when have men going to see a prostitute ever portrayed as anything other than scumbags? Men who pay for sex are always seen taking advantage of a vulnerable woman. The very end does give a bit of ambiguity but not much.

@Kylopod said:

I was reminded a little of the movie Monster, about real-life serial killer Aileen Wuornos. In that film, Wuornos's first killing is shown to be essentially an act of self-defense, after one of her clients ties her up and rapes her, and is possibly going to kill her when she escapes and kills him. After that, she starts killing her clients indiscriminately under the belief that they're all scum and deserve it. Reading about the real Wuornos, I found that the story of her first killing was based on what she told police after she was caught, and the accuracy of the account is questionable, to say the least. Either way, Last Night in Soho seemed to be implying a similar pattern, and a similar perspective which allows us to be at least partially sympathetic to a female serial killer. But I don't think it definitively takes her side; it leaves it up to the audience to decide.

In Monster they at least showed one guy who was just lonely who begged for his life before he was murdered. That guy we were meant to sympathize with and that was only because they gave us a clear-cut reason.

@Kylopod said:

Now, with regard to this film, since race isn't ever mentioned explicitly, you could well read all its scenes in a colorblind way, if you like.

That's almost impossible in this current climate where everyone pays attention to everyone's race, gender, and perceived sexuality.

The men were portrayed as sleezy dirtbags up until perhaps the very end. The movie presents all of the johns as old ugly/fat disgusting dudes.

So that means they're all deserving of being murdered?

In Monster they at least showed one guy who was just lonely who begged for his life before he was murdered. That guy we were meant to sympathize with and that was only because they gave us a clear-cut reason.

Well, first of all, that film was from Wuornos's perspective, whereas Soho isn't from Sandie's perspective; there's a lot from her experience that we don't see directly, we only infer through Ellie's clouded visions. But even putting that aside for the moment, her willingness to kill Ellie and the black kid at the end, and only pulling back after she realized it was over for her, definitely indicated that she was willing to harm innocents in order to protect herself (and she implied they weren't the first). This actually parallels Wuornos's murder of the bystander, a non-john whom she kills simply because he's a witness.

That's almost impossible in this current climate where everyone pays attention to everyone's race, gender, and perceived sexuality.

Yes and no. There's an increasing trend of films, TV shows, and plays that attempt to ignore the race of actors of color, so that they don't have to be limited to roles dealing with racism.