Get ready to dive into a world where greed and family drama collide—because Glen Powell is about to show us just how far someone will go for a massive inheritance. But here’s where it gets controversial: in the trailer for How to Make a Killing, Powell’s character isn’t just after money—he’s willing to take out his own family to get it. Sounds extreme? Welcome to the latest addition to Hollywood’s growing obsession with satirizing the ultra-rich.
Over the past few years, we’ve seen a wave of films and shows that gleefully skewer the wealthy. From Parasite’s historic Best Picture win to the biting humor of The Menu, Triangle of Sadness, Glass Onion, Saltburn, and Death of a Unicorn, it’s clear that audiences can’t get enough of watching the 1% get their comeuppance. And let’s not forget TV hits like Succession, The White Lotus, and Squid Game, which have turned the struggles (and absurdities) of the rich into binge-worthy entertainment. And this is the part most people miss: these stories aren’t just about wealth—they’re about the moral decay that often comes with it.
How to Make a Killing, set to release in February, takes a slightly different angle. Instead of a revolutionary takedown or a darkly comedic critique, the film focuses on Becket Redfellow (played by Powell), who systematically targets his wealthy relatives to secure a staggering $28 billion inheritance. It’s less about exposing the flaws of the system and more about the lengths one man will go to for personal gain. Starring alongside Powell are Jessica Henwick, Bill Camp, Zach Woods, and Topher Grace, adding even more star power to this twisted family affair.
Here’s the bold question: Does this film lean too heavily into shock value, or does it offer a fresh perspective on our fascination with wealth and morality? While other satires often use the rich as a stand-in for broader societal critiques, How to Make a Killing seems more focused on individual greed. Is that a missed opportunity, or a clever twist on the genre? Let’s just say, this one’s bound to spark some heated debates. What do you think—is this film a step forward or a step sideways in the conversation about wealth and privilege? Sound off in the comments!
