"In Chile, a group of travellers who are in an underground nightclub when a massive earthquake hits quickly learn that reaching the surface is just the beginning of their nightmare."
I've been struggling with this movie review for so long that it isn't even funny. But finally, after several glasses of Teacher's and Coke, I'm biting the bullet and writing the first things that come into my head just to get the damned thing out of the way.
The first problem I've been having with "Aftershock" is that it isn't really a horror movie. It's a mean-spirited disaster movie with horror elements. The second problem is, of course, because I'm hardly the biggest fan of Eli Roth. Actually, I'll go further than that, I can't stand his "Hostel" and "Cabin Fever" movies. The weird thing, though, is that I've actually started to like Eli Roth as an actor based on his performance here.
Okay, so Eli Roth is obviously channelling a lot of David Schwimmer and that type into his "Gringo" character, and he comes across as a total wussypants, but he's kind of likeable with it. When the bad things start happening, it's Eli Roth who you're rooting for the most, and I never thought I'd write those words in the same sentence.
Huge spoilers coming!
What happens in Chile stays in Chile!
As the majority of the action in this movie is a series of darkly comedic gags which make as much use of the "no good deed goes unpunished" cliché as possible, it's not worth worrying about the plot too much. Some people have described "Aftershock" as "Hostel with an earthquake" and that's about as deep as it gets. Basically, a bunch of not very worldy-wise tourists in Chile end up dying unpleasantly at the hands of Mother Nature, escaped convicts, or a combination of both.
Eyecandy is provided by Andrea Osvárt (as Monica), Natasha Yarovenko (as Irina), and Lorenzo Izzo (as Kylie). The latter is also in Eli Roth's remake of "The Green Inferno" which I know you're all looking forward to as much as I'm not. These girls really go through it. If it's not bad enough to be shook up by an earthquake and have huge chunks of rock fall on you, they end up getting chased by criminals, one gets raped and then shot, and after making the wrong choice about who to trust, well, not to put too fine a point on it, they all die horribly. The final scene with the "final girl" is hilarious for those of us who are sick of the trope.
The guys along with Eli Roth don't fare any better. Ariel Levy (who keeps his own first name) and Nicolás Martínez (as Pollo) are a very likeable pair whose antics endear you to them even when they are being assholes. They don't make it out of this movie alive either, and nor does our Eli. In fact, Eli Roth's death in this movie is one of the nastiest things I've seen in a long time, not because of the effects, but because of the sadistic and unneccesary nature of it.
Bloody good!
Since "Aftershock" is a disaster movie, it's very frugal with the spectacular effects or people running around in chaos, but it's not too sparse, and there's more than enough to create the right atmosphere. It's $2,000,000 budget was only double that of a movie by The Asylum, so consider the coat cut according to the cloth. It's certainly not disappointing for gore!
I liked "Aftershock" so much that I'm going to put it in "The Vault". It's not the best disaster movie I've ever seen, but it's the best disaster-horror hybrid movie I've seen this year other than "Sharknado".
"A psychological-thriller in the haunting tradition of films like Taxi Driver and Monster, The Grief Tourist takes us into the chilling labyrinth of a man's dark hobby and his even darker mind."
Not a review today but a recommendation. Apparently it's "Labor Day" or something in America, so I'm going to celebrate it by doing as little as possible. Writing a blog post is obviously such hard work!
Anyway, it may interest you to know that Suri Krishnamma's "Dark Tourist", formerly known as "The Grief Tourist" (presumably to differentiate it from Dom Joly's book about the weird hobby rather than the same subject matter), has a limited theatrical release at City Cinemas Village East Cinema, New York. Check it out if you live within range. [It's also available via VOD and iTunes for anybody else.]
As a film noir-ish hybrid of "Chained" (2012) and "Taxi Driver" (1976), "Dark Tourist" might not appeal to everyone unless they are into serial killers or stories about maniacs becoming that way, but if you're reading this blog, it's highly likely that you are the target audience. Even though I'm more into fantasy than real life murders, I think that "Dark Tourist" is a very good movie indeed. It's well written, nicely shot, and has an off-beat, gritty, character-driven feel to it like "Edmond" (2005).
Aside from Michael Cudlitz's outstanding performance which I'm sure is being raved about from one side of the internet to the other, it's also extremely nice to see Melanie Griffith in something on the big screen again. She's still much the same as before except older, wiser, and a better actress than I remember her to be. The scenes involving Jim (Michael Cuditz) and Betsy (Melanie Griffith) are great.
My only minor criticism is that "Dark Tourist" should've been longer. For that reason, the story seems to have some unnecessary additional information near the end which doesn't quite fit in. I won't spoil it for you, but suffice it to say that Suzanne Quast as Iris the prostitute is definitely all woman!
"Dark Tourist" is the kind of bleak and brutal stuff which I'm always willing to recommend. It's not going to make me take up grief tourism—"the act of travelling with the intent to visit places of tragedy or disaster"—as a hobby though. I'm already morbid enough as it is.
"A search and recovery team heads into the haunted swamp to pick up the pieces and Marybeth learns the secret to ending the voodoo curse that has left Victor Crowley haunting and terrorizing Honey Island Swamp for decades."
Gore, gore, gore, gore, gore, and even more gore! Yes, "Hatchet III" delivers what everyone has been craving for a very long time!
Three years after the instantly forgettable "Hatchet II", where Adam Green failed, BJ McDonnell's debut as a director breathes new life into a series which most of us had written off. Having said that, this is still Adam Green's baby and, unfortunately, there are places where it shows.
The thing is, you shouldn't be able to go wrong with a slasher film anyway. All you need is a group of people and a monster with supernatural strength to hack them to pieces in the most painful-looking and bloodiest ways possible. Who cares if "Hatchet III" has a thin and formulaic plot? The practical effects are absolutely lush with brutal dismemberments and blood gushing everywhere.
Where the previous "Hatchet" movies went wrong is that they had too much humour and none of it was funny. "Hatchet III" isn't perfect either although the balance is much better this time. It's still meant to be a "fun movie" rather than something to be taken seriously, but at least it is actually fun rather than a chore to sit through.
This is not a SyFy channel movie!
Not to spoil the big surprises for you, but all the usual convention circuit suspects apart from Tony Todd appear again. As Victor Crowley, Kane Hodder proves that he can still do a lot more than sign his autograph, which is nice.
Zach Galligan makes a decent attempt at playing a sheriff, Parry Shen turns up as a paramedic primarily to deliver an anti-racism jibe, and Derek Mears adds the visual in-joke of two former Jasons fighting it out for anyone who cares about remakes. The confrontation between Hodder and Mears could also be taken as "Victor Crowley is better than the new Jason" which, in this case, he really is. In many ways, "Hatchet III" is what the "Friday the 13th" remake should have been.
Even the acting is better this time although I doubt that the target audience of teenagers and "Friday the 13th" nostalgists will notice or care about such subleties. I noticed, particularly in the case of Danielle Harris whose scenes would lag if she wasn't so good in them, and I'm grateful for it.
Now approaching middle-age, Danielle Harris looks really good in this movie too apart from showing her huge, disfiguring tattoos in a hosing-down/shower scene which would be moderately erotic otherwise. At first, I thought she had some terrible wound inflicted on her by Victor Crowley, but then I realised what she'd done and it threw me right out of lust with her. What a shame. I'm sure she'll recover though.
Probably best if you keep your tracksuit on in future, babe.
I'm not going to go into further detail because I know that you'll want to see "Hatchet III" for yourself. I highly recommend that you do so as soon as possible before the usual negativity hits whatever message boards and Facebook pages you're subscribed to. "Hatchet III" is easily this Summer's best horror movie no matter what the "negative Nancies" might have to say about it.
It's taken three attempts, but we finally have a "Hatchet" movie which lives up to the original's tagline of "Old School American Horror". The third time really is the charm.
"A writer who is brutalized during her cabin retreat seeks revenge on her attackers, who left her for dead."
As you know, I've seen a lot of nasty stuff in my time both in horror films and in real life, but it still didn't quite prepare me for how brutal the "I Spit on Your Grave" remake was going to be. If you've ever seen the original 1978 version, you'll already know exactly what I'm going to say, but honest to God, the remake makes that film look very dated and tame in comparison.
There are several things which I dislike seeing depicted in horror films and rape is one of them. The problem with any rape scene is that it's either going to be so nasty that you feel sick or so titillating that it makes you (if you are male) aroused for all the wrong reasons. "I Spit on Your Grave" does both. At the end of the day, it's only acting to achieve an emotional response from the viewer. "I Spit on Your Grave" certainly achieved that.
I'm not going to get into any of those arguments about how the film depicts attitudes towards women, feminism or any of that other gibberish which essay writers and serious film critics worry themselves to death about because, for me, "I Spit on Your Grave" did exactly what it set out to do. It shocked me and it entertained me. It even horrified me on more than one occasion. The only thing which "I Spit on Your Grave" didn't do was scare me, but it wasn't designed to.
The problem is, as with any exploitation movie, that the inclusion of an attractive girl makes all the difference. Sarah Butler who played Jennifer is undeniably gorgeous, and it changes the way you look at her character. If she had been a much plainer actress the rape would have been far more awful to watch even though it was pretty damned terrible and disgusting as it was. Of course, it makes you feel like a voyeur, but technically, we are all guilty of that anyway. Did "I Spit on Your Grave" make me feel like a pervert for watching? Yes it did. But do I care? No.
The rape in "I Spit on Your Grave" is right up there with the one in "Irreversible" (2002) for nastiness, and totally eclipses the original version in every way. It's far more gritty and realistic, and you really do feel Jennifer's pain and hopelessness in the situation. It doesn't matter if you are male or female (or what your sexual orientation is), you'll feel angry at what is being done. But, at the same time, it's impossible to watch this without feeling morally dirty. You really don't want to see this, but it's just too compelling to turn away.
Last night, I heard quite a well known internet podcast go into a lot of depth about "I Spit on your Grave" which is all well and good except that I think the host is a bit of jerk who hates new movies just for the sake of having something to talk about. His whole opinion of "I Spit on Your Grave" was negative. Although I'll agree with him that there was no artistic value to remaking "I Spit on Your Grave" (or any other remake for that matter), I don't care about any of that. I deal with each film based on its own merits and whether or not it actually works. I also don't care about reading anything political or otherwise into a horror movie either as, to me, none of them are artistic in the more common sense of the word for it to even matter to anyone.
"I Spit on Your Grave", like all movies, is a product designed to entertain and be so entertaining that you are willing to part with your money to see it. It isn't a piece of propaganda to indoctrinate or even educate its audience any more than a fairy tale would. As such a product, the film works perfectly as it is very entertaining. What kind of entertainment can be derived from it is, however, still down to the audience on a purely individual and subjective level.
"When Brent turns down his classmate Lola's invitation to the prom, she concocts a wildly violent plan for revenge."
I have to admit that I'd never even heard of "The Loved Ones" until my Australian friend started posting things about it. In my defence, I don't think Australia has ever been known for a producing a lot of horror films and even Wikipedia only lists forty-four of them (some of which aren't really horror at all). When Australia does horror it can either be very bad or very good unlike Canadian horror, for instance, which dips and rises just around the average level every time. If you've never seen an Australian horror film before in your life then, firstly, shame on you, and, secondly, prepare yourself to either love it or hate it as there really is no inbetween. Aussies, in general, have a similar sick sense of humour to Brits which is often quite a brutal surprise to Americans. I also don't think I've ever seen an Australian movie of any kind yet which conforms to Hollywood derived formulas.
The only recent movie that I can think of which has a similar look and feel to it as "The Loved Ones" is the British "Mum & Dad" (2008). Both were funded with some kind of arts grant and so you can be sure that the creativity involved far outweighs the budget. Even so, neither of these films suffer from the piss-poor shaky-cams of low-budget American independents and have very high production values. Basically, "The Loved Ones" is all about having a good story with lots of tension and decent practical effects. Yeah, old school horror movie making at its best.
The only thing which "The Loved Ones" shares with the American nasties is that you won't have heard of anyone involved in it. Unless you are a Twihard then Xavier Samuel, who plays the lead here, won't even be familiar to you as Riley from "Eclipse". In fact he looks so completely different that you won't even think it was the same actor anyway. The rest of the cast have all been around the Australian TV circuit including the soaps, so you won't know who any of them are either. I find all this anonymity very refreshing, but I don't think Robin McLeavy, who plays Lola, will stay hidden away for much longer. She's fantastic.
The acting is incredibly well done overall. Although all of the characters are either a bit quirky or just downright demented, I didn't spot a weak performance anywhere. It's all played reasonably straight even if there are quite a few intentionally amusing moments and the whole thing is a very black comedy anyway. "The Loved Ones" has a slightly lighter feel to it than "Mum & Dad", but it's still pretty gruesome and twisted. It really is difficult to place into a niche as it isn't as ridiculous as any of Peter Jackson's stuff (and, yes, I do know he's a Kiwi), but it's not as mean-spirited as Sam Raimi's earlier work either. Some scenes do homage both these directors, although it really is an homage and not a blatant rip-off.
I'm sure there'll be a few people who will claim "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" inspired a lot of the scenes too and I can agree with them to a point. If you are going to have any kind of twisted murderous family set-up in a movie then obviously there will be similarities to others in the same subgenre. But just as "Mum & Dad" had more in common with the real life serial killers Fred and Rosemary West than "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" so, too, "The Loved Ones" has undoubtedly been inspired by some of the even more incredible true crimes that have been revealed in the last few years. Abduction and torture are nothing new to the horror genre anyway. No matter how much "torture porn" you've seen, "The Loved Ones" is still something a little bit different.
Before I give away the plot even more than the trailer already does, I need to mention a couple of specific things that stood out for me. The first is the sex scene between Xavier Samuel and Victoria Thaine. If you've already seen "The Loved Ones" then you'll understand exactly where I'm coming from with this. All I'm going to say is "moles" and "razor blade round his neck". To those of you who haven't seen this yet but have seen a certain "Austin Powers" movie, just have a nice long twig at the ready. Yes, I found this scene very distracting but not in the way it was probably intended. If the words, "Bite it off!" escape your lips at any point then you are coming with me straight to Hell, okay?
Second, although I can almost tie up the subplot with Richard Wilson and hot goth chick Jessica McNamee as a kind of nicer parallel to the more horrific events that were going on, I wanted all the characters to come together at the end and I was waiting for something that never happened. The more I think about it, the cleverer it all gets because the story didn't take that too predictable route but maybe it should have done. If there is a flaw then that is it but without the subplot there wouldn't have been some important details filled in either. I'm still undecided on whether it really worked or not.
Anyway, I actually think that "The Loved Ones" is one of the best Australian horror movies that I've seen for a long time. Don't even try to compare it to the crap that was "Wolf Creek" because you don't have to wait until the film is almost over for the action to kick-off here. When things start happening they don't really let up. The "torture porn" elements are far more brutal than anything in the "Hostel" movies, even if most of the real grisliness occurs off camera.
I'm happy to rate "The Loved Ones" as a definite 8 out of 10 based on nothing but the sheer pleasure it gave me to watch it. I always feel that it's a bit of a cop out when people say things like, "Yeah, it was bad but very entertaining" and rate an utterly worthless film higher than it should be just because they have no taste or discernment. "The Loved Ones" is not in that category at all, even if it is a teeny bit superficial. "The Loved Ones" is a film that horror fans will really enjoy because it's actually good, is very well made, and is a quality product all round.
Incidentally, God only knows how Bloody-Disgusting got a mention on the trailer as "The Loved Ones" is a good film, has nothing to do with Platinum Dunes, and doesn't deserve that kiss of death at all. If you've started to ignore recent releases because of biased internet reviewers then stick with everyone in the Horror Blogger Alliance. None of us are paid to review horror movies, we just do it because it's our passion.
I can't honestly say that "The Loved Ones" is particularly scary, and I must admit that I fancied Robin McLeavy a lot more than I really should have but, for the sheer harrowing and inventive brutality, I absolutely loved it. It's not going to make me scared of visiting Australia (the enormous deadly spiders they have there is already enough!) in the way that the "Hostel" films tried to make everyone xenophobic about Europe, but it's certainly going to make me keep an eye on the Australian horror movie scene in case another gem like this ever pops up in the future.
(AKA Män som hatar kvinnor - "Men Who Hate Women")
"A journalist is aided in his search for a woman who has been missing - or dead - for forty years by a young female hacker."
Since I'm in a defending Swedish movies mood, I decided to watch all three of the "Millennium Trilogy" DVDs, based on the novels by Stieg Larsson, back to back. Sadly, just like "Let the Right One In", there are remakes on the horizon which nobody sane should ever want to watch so I advise you to pick these titles up now before all the confusion and online fighting sets in.
I know I'm a bit late reviewing "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo", but to be perfectly honest (as I always am), from the description on the IMDb, it didn't sound like something I would be interested in. The funny thing was that every time I went to post an Amazon link to this blog, "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" kept popping up first in the affiliate link iframe so eventually it wore me down enough to give it a try. I added it to my Netflix queue, fell asleep watching it online, and then decided to get the DVD because it was actually very good. I just couldn't be bothered with all that "buffering" nonsense from the Netflix stream and wanted to watch this on the big telly anyway.
I also acquired the two "made for TV" sequels starring the same actors but with a change of director and screenwriter. The less said about them the better really as, although they were entertaining enough in their own way, they lacked the freshness and brutality of the first film.
So who is the "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo"? Her name is Lisbeth Salander and she is played by a very skinny/athletic looking actress called Noomi Rapace. Never heard of her? No, nor me either. Her character is a hacker who has recently been released from a mental asylum for reasons which will become more obvious and important as the story progresses and she has a massive dragon tattoo on her back for no reason which is ever explained. It's interesting to note that the dragon tattoo is only a little one on her shoulder on the book covers but a massive big beast all over her back for the film even though it has no significance whatsoever to the story. I have a feeling that it was going to be explained sooner or later but the author died before completing the ten volumes he was planning to write so the trilogy leaves a lot of things unanswered.
Anyway, the film begins with a middle-aged reporter named Blomkvist getting convicted of libel and facing a jail sentence for a piece he wrote about a crooked businessman. None of that is overly important as it just provides a convenient way for him to leave the Millennium magazine which he writes for to do some freelance private detective work for an old rich guy whose daughter went missing forty years ago. This is the main story but because of how badass Lisbeth Salander is introduced it becomes far less interesting than her life. It's like having two main stories running at the same time which throw up hints and clues to the other story. Yes, it's hard to explain but pretty easy to follow even though the missing girl story becomes little more than a cipher to get Blomkvist and Lisbeth bonded together.
All three films have the same structure so I would hazard a guess, having never read the books, that the main story is only ever used to focus on the two leads. The second film brings up "human trafficking" and then doesn't really go anywhere with it once Lisbeth's story comes to the fore again. I don't see this as a flaw though. It's just a different way of doing things and can really only work when you have interesting characters like her in the first place.
The acting in all three films, though particularly "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo", is really good and has to be since everything in them dispels the myths that Sweden is full of tall, beautiful blondes. The actors are ordinary looking to say the least and wouldn't be out of place in a British soap opera such as "Eastenders". It's all about pimples, skin pores, acne scars and wrinkles rather than the plastic beauty of Hollywood. These people have lived-in faces and it makes the whole thing a lot more realistic even if some of the coincidences in the plot strain credibility to the maximum along the way.
Of course the most memorable moments from "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" either involve sex scenes, brutal violence, or a mixture of the two. If you've seen "Eastern Promises" then think along those lines. When something happens, it's so not what you are expecting considering the almost "CSI" nature of the rest of it. One thing is for certain, you won't see this uncut on American television any time soon. To say any more would give too much away but suffice it to say that what happens in the first film continues into the second and third parts as well.
The missing girl story of "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" actually becomes a quite convoluted tale about a serial killer with a bit of a twist at the end. I've been trying to think if I'd ever seen anything like it before and I have to admit that it seems to be original. I'm sure it has been done before somewhere especially as all these films have an element of Greek mythology about them which is even mentioned, but I can't remember where. Again, to start trying to make parallels to similar plots in other films would ruin it for you so I won't.
Things you will notice because they are glaringly obvious is the amount of product placement for lots of Apple, Sony and Nokia electronic equipment along the way. Maybe I'm nit-picking a bit but would a hacker really use an Apple computer rather than a PC? I've always thought of them as being computers for people who can't really use a computer, but I may be wrong. Since I'm one of those people who uses Ubuntu for everything, I'm in no position to criticize their choice of operating systems anyway even if they do seem to be easily hackable.
But I digressed. "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" is an amazing, classy, iconic and quite powerful film in places let down by a made for TV feel and a few plotholes that were better left unfilled by its definitely made for TV sequels. You don't have to watch the sequels, "The Girl Who Played with Fire" and "The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest", if you don't want to because "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" works as a complete standalone movie in itself. I watched all three and was a little bit disappointed, but I got addicted and had to see how the story turned out. After watching the "Bourne" and "Matrix" trilogies, I should have known better really.
I'm going to give "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" an 8 out of 10. I haven't given a numerical score to a film for ages so think of it as a novelty. The only reason it loses marks is because it didn't really go far enough with the serial killing angle and went too far in other ways without a satisfying conclusion. I rate both the sequels as 6 out of 10 because they felt like the first and second parts of a miniseries rather than separate films and were certainly long enough to be so.
"In Europe, a group of American college athletes unknowingly board a train that will become one deadly ride."
Well, I'm nearly at the end of my series of torture movies which I'm sure is a relief to everyone not least of all me. There's only one more to go after this (excluding the "Saw" franchise which I'll probably never review) but it's a good one and I can take my time over it.
I'm not going to spend very long reviewing "Train" though because it just isn't worth the effort. It's not a remake of "Terror Train" thankfully but it's yet another ripoff of "Hostel" with all the xenophobia about Eastern Europe and all that other nonsense.
The best way of describing this film is to rename it as "Turistas on a Train". That's all it is but with the gorgeous Melissa George replaced by a really butch looking Thora Birch.
There were some really nasty torture scenes as usual with varying levels of ridiculousness and the story was entertaining enough if you don't think about it too hard but, honestly, it's so far beyond unoriginal that it's actually boring to watch.
I'll just do a brief recap of the main points of the film. A team of American wrestlers (I kid you not, this is supposed to be a sport!) go out partying and miss the train to their next event. Knowing no Russian, their coach shouts his mouth off about nobody being able to speak English and an older yet still attractive Russian woman helps him out by telling him which train they should all take.
From then on it just gets silly. When asked for their passports, they all happily surrender them for "safe keeping" to two lecherous train staff even though everyone on the planet knows that you never give your passport to anybody when you are abroad ever.
Next the team members start disappearing one by one and find themselves being taken to the back of the train where they are cut up for their various organs without anaesthetic, realism, suspense, or any acting ability whatsoever. It's all so horribly derivative that it just makes you want to laugh no matter what vileness is depicted on screen. There's everything from a "Wolf Creek" head-on-a-stick moment to various scenes of ripping out eyes, castration and all manner of mutilations in between.
During all this Thora Birch manages to avoid capture by the Russian woman (who turns out to be a doctor) and her lumbering assistants. Honestly, you won't know whether to laugh or cry, switch it off or kick your TV screen in. If you've actually bought this DVD then I think you'll probably want to do all of those things to some extent.
The funny thing is that even though everything in "Train" is so mediocre apart from the gore, there's still enough there to make you want to watch it all the way to the end just to see what happens. It's completely predictable though and not at all memorable. It even has an epilogue where you are supposed to think about how "badass" Thora Birch will be after surviving all this horror. That's nothing compared to how badass, or maybe just plain bad, you will feel if you endure this entire movie yourself.
It obviously had a pretty good budget but it still looks all grainy and cheap like the "Saw" sequels, "Captivity" and others of that ilk. There's nothing you can say about the acting really because nobody does any worth perking up for. The Russians are actually Bulgarians so they don't even need to fake their accents and everyone else just does as much as the script allows them to but no more. There is actually such a complete disregard for characterisation that it's impossible to care about anybody or what happens to them. I didn't think there could ever be a film like this which would be poorer than "Hostel" but now I know.
The bottom line is that if you want to see a complete ripoff of every other torture porn movie that has gone before with the events all taking place on a train then this is for you. If you are tired of seeing people being tied up, hung from chains and meathooks, screaming as big chunks of their bodies get ripped or sliced off, then give it a miss. Actually, I'll probably never get completely tired of seeing any of those things but it's all to do with context.
If you know someone who has never seen a horror movie before then slip them this and prepare to laugh when they tell you how it was the most horrible and disgusting thing that they've ever watched. For those of us who have seen the same thing done better many times before, it will still be the most horrible thing we've ever watched too but for completely different reasons.
I watched "Bully" originally on FilmFour and thought, "What a great film! How did I not hear anything about this when it was released in 2001?" It seems it is a kind of follow up to the controversial "Kids" (by the same director) but it is a 100 percent better film technically.
IMDb says: "Based on a true story. Naive teenagers plot to murder one of their own, who has been too much of a bully to them."
I enjoyed this almost as much as "Scum". There's just something about movies that show really messed up kids that sums up exactly what we all think and, dare I say it, fear about them. Yes some kids today are really quite frightening.
Now this lot were a mixture of pure evil and drugged-up stupidness - which of course makes for compulsive viewing. They got nude a lot too so it was even better! And, before you think I am some kind of sicko, most of the actors are older than the parts they played.
All the actors did a fantastic job though. It was a nice surprise to see that Rachel Miner (with the nice eyebrows) from "Cult" can actually act. One bit of circling camerawork made me feel a bit seasick, but apart from that it all looks good too.
It's all set in Florida and filmed in the actual locations that the real crime was committed. I think there has been a bit of artistic licence used with the characterisation as, by all accounts, the kids involved were all middle class from good homes rather than the "white trash" they are shown to be here. I never heard about this murder when it happened though so it all seems very realistic and plausible to me.
If you haven't seen this yet, I really think you should. If you couple it with "Mysterious Skin" for a double bill, you'll be pretty horrified at what the MySpace generation really get up to. I'm not sure if I would count this as a horror film, but it's certainly very disturbing.
