‘How to Make a Killing’ review: Glen Powell stars in A24’s eat-the-rich comedy

Parasite. Salt burn. Ready or Not. Triangle of sadness. The Menu. Send help. The last few years have treated moviegoers to a feast of wild and compelling comedies to eat the rich. However, the latest A24, How to make a killing, should not be counted among them.

This film’s predecessors featured raunchy social commentary, outrageous plot twists, disgusting gags or gag-worthy gore, and dark humor so dark you might choke on laughter. How to make a killing, however, it is tame in comparison.

In all respects, writer/director John Patton Ford (Emily the criminal) has blunted the very edge of the premise, creating a dark comedy that feels less like a punchline and more like a defeated shrug.

How to make a killing has a video game premise.

Glen Powell plays Becket Redfellow, the eldest son of a balanced New York socialite, who should have been able to grant him all the privileges – no matter how obscene – of the ultra-rich.

However, because Becket was conceived out of wedlock, his mother was disowned, forced to raise him not in the family’s luxurious mansion in Huntington, Long Island, but in the working-class setting of Bellevue, New Jersey.

In flashbacks, a young Becket is schooled by his mother in the pastimes of the pastime elite, such as archery, and is told that it is still in the will, so one day the Redfellow fortune could be his. So, naturally, when his childhood crush resurfaces in the form of a femme fatale (Margaret Qualley), tempting him to join high society whatever the cost, Becket sets out to shed his former parents.

It first seems like a video game, where he tracks a Wall Street broker (Raff Law) to his yacht, then a Bushwick trustafarian (Zach Woods) to his rooftop darkroom, then a two-faced televangelist (Topher Grace) to the office of his megachurch. With each successful murder, Becket grows closer to the big boss, his obnoxious grandfather Whitelaw Redfellow (Ed Harris, bringing Love lies, bleeding threat to a higher social class).

Don’t miss our latest news: add Mashable as a trusted news source in Google.

However, where Qualley’s seductress Waspy is the devil on her shoulder, an angel appears in Jessica Henwick, who plays an aspiring high school teacher named Ruth, who takes pride in her “little dreams.” Which woman – and therefore which path – will Becket choose? It’s not as fun as it should be to find out.

Glen Powell is miscast How to make a killing.

As in Edgar Wright’s The running man remake, this strong-jawed, straight-toothed, gleamingly white leading man is presented as an ordinary working-class man, played by a wealthy ruling class who laugh at his suffering. However, Powell doesn’t look working class, no matter how he wears his hair.

Becket was supposedly born into a life of privilege, so you could say the point is to look the part. ALL RIGHT. But the other problem is that Powell just isn’t as funny as the players supporting him. The law channels The Wolf of Wall Street burlesque as the financial brother without self-awareness. Woods is decidedly comical as a major photographer with more money than vision. Grace, who looks shocking with a deep tan and a multitude of tattoos, is incredibly funny as a modern pastor whose real passion is scamming. Add to that Bill Camp (Dolls to go) as the self-loathing uncle and Qualley as the over-the-top vampire, and you have a stellar supporting cast that primes Powell for the punchlines. And he can’t land one. (No offense to Henwick. She was cast as a one-note good girl, so she doesn’t get any jokes.)

Powell plays an outsider, but he has the suavity of a leading man. And as Ford’s thriller plods toward its climactic confrontation, I was frustrated to realize that I didn’t feel invested in Becket’s journey because it didn’t feel real at all. While everyone else had constructed characters that were wacky, daring and – even if barely written – defined, Powell’s vengeful killer seemed bland to me, despite his killing spree.

How to make a killing is not shocking, surprising or amusing.

Ford devises unexpected ways to kill the two first cousins. However, for those looking for a gruesome spectacle, as is often the case with eat-the-rich comedies, you will be disappointed by how often deaths occur out of frame. There is nothing more earth-shattering than the climax of Parasiteparty, or as disgusting as Triangle of sadnessthe vomit fest, or as satisfying as the gloppy explosions in Ready or Not. And Ford certainly doesn’t change genres as effectively as Sam Raimi did with Send help.

For those hoping for a thrilling game of cat and mouse with the FBI agents who swoop in after the second murder, you’ll be frustrated by the way the authorities are portrayed as both shockingly incompetent and, abruptly, incredibly competent, depending on the needs of the plot.

How to make a killing isn’t shocking in its violence, but it is bold in its gaping plot holes. For a film so obsessed with how its anti-hero aims to escape murder, it’s crazy to ignore typical evidence, like DNA, as a plot element.

But the most frustrating thing is knowing how How to make a killing offers neither political satire nor thrills, delivering a tedious and edifying tale about the quest for money at all costs. All the other comedies I’ve mentioned use their twisted stories not only to entertain, but also to make their audiences think about the impact of class conflict and wealth inequality on them and their world. How to make a killing offers a story that seems tied to the conventions of the Hays Code, antiquated guidelines for Hollywood films meant to keep them from being too subversive or controversial. While this code went out of fashion in the 1960s, it is alarming to see in 2026 a film of A24the revolutionary studio behind cinema as superb as Lady Bird, Clair de Lune, The Florida Project, And Everything everywhere at the same time, delivering such a tame eat-the-rich comedy.

How to make a killing opens in theaters February 20.