Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
A Slice of Terror (2004 Video)
1/10
just plain awful
1 October 2005
Warning: Spoilers
In my defense, it wasn't my choice to rent this, it was my boyfriend's. That being said, I watched it (most of it) and I must say that this may be the worst movie I have ever seen. This film trumps itself as being a gay satire of horror films but it is most definitely not. See, satire is supposed to be funny. Actually satire is supposed to be--as defined--irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit used to attack or expose folly, vice, or stupidity. This film contained no irony, no sarcasm, nor did it contain any wit (caustic or otherwise) but it did contain plenty of folly, vice, and oodles of stupidity. It's just stupid, stupid, stupid. Filmed with the lowest possible quality (which perhaps was done to match the quality of the writing, acting, cinematography, editing and directing) video. I didn't even think they still sold VHS camcorders, and perhaps that's not what it was filmed on, but it certainly looks like it (it could be the worst possible DV transfer ever however). The cinematography is just awful, whoever was behind the camera must have seen that there was an FX button on the side and pushed it at the most odd and random moments, incorporating such FX as negative, wide, and stretch...which would detract from the scene if there was anything worth watching in the first place (and in the case of the scene shot in negative, we see that the writer/director doesn't brush his teeth). And so we move on to the writing. The story is about a 'gay nerd' who delivers pizza's, he's one day beaten down by a group of teens for simply bumping into one of them. To get revenge he hypnotizes a counselor so that he'll hypnotize the students who are forced to see the counselor so that the 'gay nerd' (Zaffo) can teach them what it's like to be humiliated. And of course that means making them get it on in a huge simulated sex orgy at the end of the film. It sounds funny (and possibly could be if it was written by someone more talented, like a group of retarded monkeys), but its attempts at humor is painfully unfunny. And the writer (who stars as Zaffo AND serves as director) seems to really love the word 'humiliate(d)' seeing how it is said in seemingly every other line of the script. The cast is probably made up of the local high school gay pride club. None of them are believable, and I'd especially like to point out that the Bobby Trendy cameo has him at one point looking off to the side as though he was trying to find the nearest exit. And since I hate this movie more then I hate mushrooms (and I really hate mushrooms) I'm going to sum up the rest of the review by saying: It's also edited by an epileptic mole (seeing how mole's are blind) with a large amount of two second scenes that seem like they're simply trimmings from what should have been a longer scene.

This is a movie that is worse then porn, actually...if it had been a real porn it might have been funny. But it wasn't porn, it wasn't funny. It didn't have the courage to actually have sex scenes, just simulated sex scenes, and a few shots of penises. If it were a porn I could understand the crappy production value. But it wasn't. It was a 'gay satire of horror films' (as it says on the cover). And I only wish that I could personally destroy every single copy. And it was everything I could do to not rip my eyeballs from their sockets and step on them with my own feet to make the pain stop.

Don't watch this movie, and if you have to at least make a drinking game out of it, everyone drink anytime someone says the words 'humiliate', or 'humiliated' and hopefully you will pass out 20 minutes into it's near two hour running time.

I scored this movie as a 1 out of ten, because they don't let you rate a film with a ZERO!!!!
13 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
So much worse then 'awful'
27 June 2004
I just watched this film...no kidding I mean I JUST watched it. The credits rolled less then a minute ago before I stopped the DVD and ran to my computer. This film is absolutely dreadful, awful. No, it's worse then that. 'Awful' is a good description of a bad film. But this movie is deserving of some other word and I don't know what it is. It isn't just bad, while watching the film I found myself grinding my teeth and hurling obscenities in rage and frustration. From the very beginning with the 9 minute handgliding sequence which amounts to...NOTHING, this film had me...p*ssed. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. How can anything on Earth be so horrible on so many levels? This film blatantly abuses the slo-mo sequence, especially in places that don't need to be slo-mo'd. In fact, I wager that if you played all the slo-mo footage at normal speed along with the rest of the film...the film would run about 30 minutes. The main story is about a (sometimes naked) reporter and her faithful lapdog--er...cameraman. But for some reason 80% of the flick revolves around 8 or 9 groups of people in 'bird peril', WHY?????????????? I'm not exactly sure how to express my feelings on this film correctly. I have nothing but absolute contempt for the cast and crew responsible for this travesty... ARGHHHHH!!!!!!!
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
An ungodly mess
31 May 2004
Stephen King has officially lost his touch. I saw hints of his newfound mediocrity riddled through the bad-but-watchable ROSE RED. But this pretty much solidifies it. For whatever INSANE reason Lars decided to take his BRILLIANT miniseries RIGET and sell it to ABC and Stephen King so they could make RIGET, American STYLE, aka KINGDOM HOSPITAL. I'm not exactly sure where communication between Stephen and the muses broke down but it was somewhere before he started writing this piece of trash. Every week is 40 or so minutes of nothing happening. It doesn't even seem that all these little things are building up to anything. It just feels pointless to watch (which is why I quit after episode 5 or 6). Nothing makes sense. Now I know what a lot of you are going to say "That was the idea behind the original." Well, there's a huge difference between surrealism, and not making any sense. The original had a lot of stuff happening that seemed odd but it was all the purpose, and it was effectively understood by the viewer.

But this...I would rather bathe in the waste product of all of New York then stand for this mini-series a second more. If you really know your film, you should have already seen RIGET aka THE KINGDOM. If you haven't, you should. But don't waste your time with this mini-series which is on a descending spiral towards the honor of worst mini-series of all time.
15 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
BRILLIANT!!!!!
28 May 2004
Saw this short on Cinemax. I absolutely adored it! I've read a lot of the other comments about this film and they talk about how insulting it is to veterans and blah-blah. Well that's just crap. The intention of the film is to deliver a much deserved slam to Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer (two of the worst filmmakers in all of film history) and their all style/no substance $100 million action flicks. And to this point the short succeeds impressively. With scenes of quick back-and-forth, genre-distilling moments ("I'm the smartest man on your panel who never speaks up unless the world is in terrible danger..."), Ben Affleck is blown up by a piece of asteroid. Funny, funny stuff. But more then funny, it's down-right clever. Congratulations Mr. Moniot, you just got yourself a fan! 10 out of 10
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed