"We accept you, one of us!"

"Freaks" is the story about a band of circus freaks and a trapeze artist who marries one of them for his inheritance, while at the same time secretly seeing a circus strongman. When the freaks discover this, this love triangle turns into one of the most controversial horror films of all time, which destroyed Tod Browning's career. Given the time of occurrence, it is understandable that most of the actors in the roles of circus freaks were the real deal. In the lead roles, we have Siamese twins, a torso-man, a woman with a beard and several dwarves. Due to the exploitation of these unfortunates and the extremely shocking impact on the audience, the film has long been banned worldwide and parts rejected during censorship have been lost, so today it only exists in a fiercely mutilated one-hour version.

7/10

I would very much like anyone who liked this to explain to me one thing... WTF?!

This film is considered one of the best comedies of all time. I cannot say if it was a good comedy back in the thirties, I wasn't there and maybe I'm incapable of perceiving it from that point of view. But if anyone would make something like this anytime in the last few decades, I'm almost certain it would be considered a total crap. In my opinion, this movie has absolutely nothing to offer. The storyline is supposed to be satire, but it's too stupid to be effective. There is no characterization at all and I couldn't connect with any of the characters. From my point of view, this is just a bunch of piled up jokes and slapstick gags that are not particularly funny, and not only they weren't entertaining enough, but after some time they became quite irritating. I was bored to death and I literally forced myself to endure it to the end. Subjectively, I would rate it two out of ten, but I have to acknowledge the impact this movie made on the film history, so I'll go with

4/10

It hurts...

How the hell this movie got an average rate over six?! It is very close to being the ultimate winner in a stupidity contest. It is one of very few most stupid things I ever had the misfortune to see. Of course, it could be even worse, it could last more than ninety minutes... This movie was banned worldwide because of nudity, perversion, and a complete lack of morality. But in my opinion, that's not the worst thing about it. It should be forbidden because of extreme stupidity and terrible terrible acting. My recommendation - avoid it at any cost.

2/10

Good idea destroyed by low budget

Good, interesting idea, destroyed by the low budget. Siamese twins, one of which looks like an overgrown tumor on the side of the other, are separated against their will. Years later they are on the killing spree to get revenge. With today's technology and medium budget, this could be a decent horror movie. 35 years ago and without money, authors should have taken a different approach. If they could not afford production on a satisfying level, instead of completely ridiculous horror scenes, they should have based their movie on psychological effect and with some skillful directing let our imagination strike terror in our bones. But they decided to destroy potentially great horror by showing us extremely unconvincing bloodshed and the lame monster that is everything but scary. Sure, there are movies that go so deep into stupid that they penetrate all through to the other side and we get a hilarious result. But this one is not stupid enough to border with genius. It is just stupid. And that's a shame, because this story has big potential and even quite a psychological depth.

4/10

Disappointing

An omnibus of five stories based on horror comics from the fifties, directed by George Romero and written by Stephen King. It sounds tempting, but it just sounds. Too silly to be scary, not silly enough to be funny.

5,5/10

Awesome finale

80's are definitely a golden era for B production gore horror. And this is one of the brightest examples. It's based on Lovecraft and painfully stupid. Although I had an awesome time watching it, I cannot rate it higher than 5,5/10. But last 15 minutes, and especially the scene in which sweet sexy Meg is sexually abused by a severed head, deserve straight 10. The scene is hilarious. :D

5,5/10 for the movie overall.

9/10 for last 15 minutes.

10/10 for naked Barbara Crampton and David Gale's head.

"This is the start of your new life Brian, a life full of colors, music, light, and euphoria. A life without pain, or hurt or suffering."

Original and entertaining story, but once again tragicomic realization. Production is so bad that it hurts. The impression is that the movie is not made by professionals at all, but by a random group of horror fans. Still, as bad as it is, I must acknowledge its originality and strong drug addiction message. I'm not sure if the whole movie is intentionally made as drug addiction metaphor, but it's there. For me, the best scene in the movie is probably the most bizarre scene of "oral sex" in the history of cinematography. You can find it on YouTube.

5,5/10

What is seen cannot be unseen

To me, this one is slightly better than the first one, but also completely unneeded. I don't see a reason to make sequels to "Basket Case" and, more than that, I don't understand why the hell I decided to watch it. This movie contains a sex scene you won't be able to forget. What is seen cannot be unseen, so think twice before you risk having flashbacks of "Basket Case" ruining your sex life. Although, I must admit, it possesses a certain amount of morbid romance.

4,5/10

Retardaedal

This Henenlotter guy is really something special. Basket Case 1 & 2 are nuts, Brain Damage is completely insane and Basket Case 2 and Brain Damage contain two ultimately craziest sex scenes I have ever seen. But Frankenhooker exceeds all previous achievements. Combination of Jack the Ripper and Dr. Frankenstein with a silly twist at the end. It's categorized as horror/comedy, but to me, it isn't either funny or scary. But it's full of naked ladies to compensate. In my vocabulary, this kind of movie goes under "WTF I just watched" genre. Objectively, this is complete crap, but I have to recommend it and I will definitely watch it again sometime, because I'm thrilled with its level of greatardation. Its quality deserves one or maybe two out of ten, but it's retardaedal for ten out of ten, so whatta hell, I'll give it

6/10

P.S. Just in case it's less obvious than I thought: Retardaedal = retarded + daedal Greatardation = greatness + retardation

The best... or the least bad part of the trilogy

Like previous two, "Basket Case 3" is complete trash, but nonetheless the most amusing out of three. Although I rated it low, I do recommend it for it's very entertaining.

5/10

Strange, unexpected, and fun

A German movie in the German language, but with the plot located in New York and the main characters being a Sicilian gay inspector named Macaroni and a Russian crazy scientist named Smirnoff. By itself, this is enough for a hilarious movie. It has elements of Film Noir and, with scenes and music, it parodies "The Godfather", "Psycho", and many more legendary movies.

The plot is based on the living condoms that bite off people's genitals in the hotel "Quicky" and the inspector who is trying to solve the case. As much as it sounds retarded and ridiculous, this movie really isn't bad. Two hours flew like nothing and I think I will watch it again, because I probably missed some more concealed references.

Objectively, the movie doesn't have some special qualities, but for originality and entertainment, I would rate it ten out of ten.

7/10

Can you imagine portal to someone else's head?

You don't have to. Just watch this twisted masterpiece. I have no clue how anyone came to this awesome idea, but its originality itself is enough to make this movie worth your time. When you add good director and a great cast in the story full of weird surprises, you get one unforgettable piece of cinematography and an excellent entertainment.

8/10

It's hard to describe in words how bad this movie really is. This is one of those things that you must personally experience to believe. Objectively, this movie does not deserve anything above 1/10, but since on my scale 1/10 represents absolutely unwatchable crap I couldn't force myself to endure, unfortunately I have to rate it

2/10

"This film is like getting stabbed in the head.

You know that foreign exchange student from high school who used to creep out all the girls with his clumsy leering and broken-English pick-up lines? Well, he's all grown up and somebody gave him money to make a film. Tommy Wiseau, whose accent could best be described as "half-drunk Croatian cyborg", stars as Johnny, the man with the most sculpted ass in all of San Francisco. His girlfriend Lisa, played by oft-topless Juliette Danielle, seduces his best friend, played by department store mannequin Greg Sestero. To go any farther with the plot would be overdignifying this laugh-out-loud crapfest. Imagine a two-hour episode of "Red Shoe Diaries" written and directed by Balki from "Perfect Strangers". Trust me, this is the worst movie you will ever see ever in your entire life. Ever. But is it pathetically awful or sadistically hilarious? What you think will depend on your life experiences and viewpoint. But we can all agree, it's a big, steaming nut-filled turd." - by RCarstairs

"The work of an old genius with Alzheimer's"

I understood absolutely nothing at all. Four hours I wasted on this movie and came to the conclusion that I'm stupid. Then I thoroughly dug forums, YouTube, and movie sites to realize that I'm not stupid but this move cannot be understood at all. It does not even have a storyline.

"I think Lynch's newest head trip is probably best understood as not understood at all. Instead, it should just be experienced - a jolt of pure cinema full of revelations about the power of film, but only because of what it is rather than what it says."

Maybe this movie is a delicacy for David Lynch lovers, but it will take some time for me to forgive myself for not giving up on it after the first hour. I cannot remember when was the last time I was so bored and overwhelmed with the feeling of complete futility... Complete crap.

2/10

Nabokov is turning in his grave! This is blasphemy to the great novel and one of the very worst movies I have ever seen. There is too little plot and too much sex for a mainstream movie, but too little sex and too much talking for a porn. The story is at average porn level, sex is lousy, and directing, acting and camera are terrible. The movie has no quality at all. On the one hand, there is no artistic quality, and on the other, you cannot even jerk off while watching it. Throughout the whole thing, I was thinking about Nabokov turning in his grave, but after the last scene, I think I died and started to turn in my own. I would give it a zero if it was possible, but unfortunately, I have to satisfy with

1/10

Human Centipede Trilogy

The Human Centipede (First Sequence) (2009)

A mad scientist kidnaps three people and turns them into human centipede by sewing the mouths of the third and second person in a row to the anuses of the second and the first. I think that this description alone is enough for you to see how this thing is not worth your time. I honestly have no idea what made me watch it and, even worse, what madness came into me to make me watch both sequels after I already saw how disastrous this is. This is in every aspect, essential and technical, complete crap. On my scale, the 1/10 is a movie that I did not manage to see through, the 2/10 is a movie I finished with superhuman effort, so I will rate this crap

3/10

The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) (2011)

The fan of the first film decides to surpass a crazy doctor and connect twelve people. This film is slightly less crap than the original.

4/10

The Human Centipede III (Final Sequence) (2015)

Inspired by the previous films, the warden of a notorious prison decides to bring his unbearable prisoners in line ... literally. Human centipede grows to 500 members. To be honest, this one is also complete crap, but I must admit that it is somewhat amusing.

4/10

1/10 and 10/10 at the same time... This movie should be watched on hallucinogens in the dark of movie theater. Unfortunately, I had to watch it on my computer while eating chicken wings. In the first case I would probably rate it 10, but completely straight I could not avoid being irritated by all its flaws. The idea is great, the story well developed, although told in a completely twisted way typical for Gaspar Noe. Camera and photography are works of genius, use of colors and strobe, bird's-eye view, unbelievable visual adventure. Though, epileptics and those with hypersensitive eyes should definitely avoid this ride or at least watch it in bright light. You risk a serious headache because, as much as it is beautiful, it is also very heavy for eyes. Unfortunately, it seems that Noe got into it too deep and lost control after a while. The movie is unnecessarily too long. Scenes of tripping on hallucinogens last five to ten times longer than it would be humane towards the audience. Also, astral flights, between every two scenes Oscar is watching, are too slow and too long. If he cut all of that in half, the movie wouldn't lose any of its meaning or visual poetics, but it would be cut down from almost three hours to under two hours and he would avoid the danger of having half of the audience leaving the theater before the movie ends. This movie definitely isn't for a mainstream audience. It is too long, too confusing, very explicit in showing drugs and sex, and extremely tiring for eyes. But although I was at the edge of giving up in the first half an hour, the movie slowly pulled me in its world and then it gave me two more hours of hypnotizing ride. It is very hard for me to rate it. When I have to force myself to watch it till the end, I give it 1/10 or maybe 2/10, depending on the successfulness of that forcing. And when a movie gives me such an amazing ride like this one did and leaves me under strong impressions, it is usually 9/10 or 10/10. But this is the first time I saw a movie that meets both criteria. Still, despite all the flaws, I think this movie is worth more than it seems at first glance. !!! SPOILER ALERT !!! At the very beginning of the film, when they mentioned reincarnation and explained how exactly it works and looks like, I instantly knew how this movie will end. And to be honest, it would be stupid to end it any differently. Although, I would make a slight change in it. I would reincarnate Oscar into his own incest child. Somehow it seems to me that movie this sick has to end even sicker. :D

8/10

Good movie, terrible name At first, I was rejected and disgusted, but then I decided to give it another chance without prejudice.

Technically speaking, the movie is very well done, far better than almost every other Serbian movie I ever saw, and as I am Serb I saw quite a few. Story... OK, it's morbid, sick, disturbed, even insane, but the warning is clearly stated: drama/horror/mystery, so those who do not like horrors are warned and should skip it. Nobody forces them to watch. However disturbing it may be, in its own genre it is not so shocking, no more than "Hostel" or "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" for example. It has an easy introduction, a good plot, few nice twists, and an ending typical for its genre. The quality screenplay, pretty good acting and, for Serbia, fantastic production. Within the genre, it's surely the very best Serbian movie.

The main issue with this movie, the thing that makes it controversial and repulsive for a domestic audience and even lovers of the genre, is its name. "Hostel" was not named "Czech Movie", it was named "Hostel". This country, if we had a real one thou, should have censored this title and force authors to change its name before releasing the movie. They had no right to represent our country this way. There's enough prejudice against Serbia and other Balkan countries already, we do not need more negative representations. After all, it is just a movie and it should be observed like fiction that it is, but under a different name, more fitting to the horror genre, it would be much better accepted.

For the movie: 7/10 For the title: 0/10, and the one who came up with it should be sued or simply kicked in the butt.

"I just saw a live tire"

"In the Steven Spielberg movie "E. T.," why is the alien brown? No reason. In "Love Story," why do the two characters fall madly in love with each other? No reason. In Oliver Stone's "JFK," why is the President suddenly assassinated by some stranger? No reason. In the excellent "Chain Saw Massacre" by Tobe Hooper, why don't we ever see the characters go to the bathroom or wash their hands like people do in real life? Absolutely no reason. Worse, in "The Pianist" by Polanski, how come this guy has to hide and live like a bum when he plays the piano so well? Once again the answer is, no reason. I could go on for hours with more examples. The list is endless. You probably never gave it a thought, but all great films, without exception, contain an important element of no reason. And you know why? Because life itself is filled with no reason. Why can't we see the air all around us? No reason. Why are we always thinking? No reason. Why do some people love sausages and other people hate sausages? No fuckin' reason.

Ladies, gentlemen, the film you are about to see today is an homage to the "no reason" - that most powerful element of style."

The film is set in some California wasteland. We see a road and on both sides of it a vast desert, dry land, low seared vegetation and, of course, garbage. On a hill, not far from the road, a group of people with binoculars are waiting for the "movie" to begin. At first, nothing happens, until at one point they notice a worn car tire that looks like it is waking up. The focus shifts from the observers to the tire and we soon realize that we have found our main character. The tire straightens, shakes off the dust, and starts rolling. It is insecure, confused, scared maybe. It moves, stops, falls, gets up again, like a child learning to walk. Then it begins to curiously explore its surroundings and test its possibilities. With the ability to run over and crush a plastic bottle and a small scorpion along the way, it soon discovers special powers, the ability to, whether by willpower or rubber vibration, make things explode. It is more and more confident in itself and happily embarks on a killing spree, through an innocent bunny and a careless bird, to a real genocide of people. Soon, the police have to be involved in the story. But is it the real police or just the actors, because all this is just a show for observers on the hill. Or maybe it's not ...

"Rubber", an experimental, surreal, black-humor horror parody, is almost entirely the work of French director and DJ Quentin Dupieux, who signed screenplay, directing, cinematography, editing, and music, and it is undoubtedly one of the strangest movies I've ever seen, and I saw thousands of them.

Even if we don't take into account the budget of only half a million dollars, this film was superbly shot. The first half of the film, before the slasher action starts, is a real work of art. The camera, directing, and editing, accompanied by perfectly blended music, completely mesmerized me. Some frames are so beautiful, I would like to frame them on the wall. The supporting characters, which basically refer to all the people in the film, are very diverse and, although they were given a ridiculously little space, I have the impression that I met them personally.

And the main character is a car tire. The main character in the true sense of the word. It is not only the protagonist of the plot, it has a soul. It is amazing how Dupieux brought the tire to life, gave it personality and character, and allowed us to see its feelings and moods. He made us bond and sympathize with it. Throughout the film, we watch as the tire wakes, becomes self-aware, aware of the surroundings, and how its psyche evolves and changes according to developments. It is fascinating that they avoided CGI and that the film was almost entirely done using practical effects, which adds a lot of strength and credibility.

The second part of the film accelerates the pace and the art-film gives way to a slasher-horror parody. The tire has completely transformed into an anti-hero, and as the surreal scenes, full of completely wacky dialogues and monologues, follow one another, the corpses pile up. If you are film-savvy, you will have the opportunity to notice tributes to some film classics, among which stands out the homage to the scene in the bathroom from Hitchcock's "Psycho".

"Rubber" can be seen as a deconstruction of a B slasher, an art film that mocks art films, a study of the relationship between the audience and the film, or an environmental satire about how irresponsible use of petroleum products and littering will soon catch up to us. I don't know what Dupieux wanted to achieve. Maybe all this, and maybe I completely missed his idea. Maybe, as it states in the monologue that opens the film, he really just threw a bunch of surreal scenes as a homage to "no reason". In any case, this is a movie that can be viewed from many angles and experienced in many ways. It is up to you to discover your own.

9/10

Embarrassment transfer

I can't believe big names they gathered for this kind of movie. Completely sick, I cannot come to my senses after what I've just watched. On first glance, it looks like some independent low budget production made by some stoned adolescent, and then you see Dennis Quaid, Greg Kinnear, Hugh Jackman, Kate Winslet, Naomi Watts, Emma Stone, Richard Gere, Uma Thurman, Gerard Butler, Halle Berry... and dozen more famous stars. This movie is a delicacy for those who love embarrassment transfers and dark and vulgar humor. Must watch.

"The filmmakers wish to extend their personal thanks to... AND ANYONE WHO HAS EVER HAD A DIRTY THOUGHT" :D

8,5/10

Awesome

I was listening about this movie for years and I had no intention to watch some low budget retarded crap. And then I realized it has 3 more sequels. Wait a minute, if it is failure why would they shoot 3 more. It had to make some serious money if they continued to make sequels. OK, let's give it a chance. And wow, what a movie!!! I hate shark movies, even the famous "Jaws" was retarded for me. But this... this is awesome! I wouldn't say it was a horror, more of a bloody action drama, but it really keeps your attention and occasionally your ass at the edge of the seat. I am thrilled. Definitely my favorite shark movie and favorite horror action. Highly recommended.

P.S. When I saw Steve from "Beverly Hills 90210" in the leading role I thought he is too fatuous for the role of macho hotshot who saves the day, but he did it very well. Awesome awesome movie.

8,5/10

WTF I just watched?!

I didn't read the novel and I didn't even know this is an adaptation of Fyodor Dostoevsky until way after I saw the movie, but it does feel like him. Honestly, I'm not even sure what did I see, but even without fully understanding the film I must admit it has its charms. It is difficult to watch and quite entertaining at the same time.

7/10... I suppose... not really sure...

Movie is crap, but it has something that forces you too see it through. It has some kind of charm or whatever.

5/10

"Maggie Gylenhall is perhaps the least attractive human being alive." - I don't know if this is generally true, but in this movie she certainly is.

"If you are going to eat a sandwich, you would just enjoy it more if you knew no one had fucked it."

This is a "documentary" about the vampire community in Wellington. Three vampires live together in a modern world and struggle with everyday life issues. Although I didn't particularly like it, it has its moments and occasionally could be quite funny. I warmly recommend it to fans of sleazy vampire stories, like "Twilight", "Vampire Diarrhea" and similar artistic achievements, because I believe that, if they really existed, this would be a much more realistic representation of vampires.

5/10

Deacon: "I think we drink virgin blood because it sounds cool." Vladislav: "I think of it like this. If you are going to eat a sandwich, you would just enjoy it more if you knew no one had fucked it."

Fun! Fun! Fun! I have no idea how to describe this madness except by MUST WATCH !!! It is a parody of horrors, with caricatured characters and sick dialogues, but with a plot that keeps you watching more and more. I would not expect anything less of "American Horror Story" makers. This is one of the most entertaining things I ever saw. I refrain from giving it 10/10 because it still cannot go in the same rating with masterpieces like "How to Get Away With Murder" or "Californication". * * * * I just finished the second season and I deeply wish that this show never ended. It's damn super-fun. Parody to horror stereotypes with references to a bunch of cult movies and shows and everything packed so stupidly exaggerated that it must be work of genius. The characters are great, the cast even better, and Jamie Lee Curtis is simply perfect. You'll attach to these irritating characters in no time and you'll enjoy loving and hating them at the same time. Warm recommendation.

8,5/10

• I've never seen a real beaver before up close.
• Well, maybe you should try going down on me once in a while, Buck.

If you liked the first one, you'll love this one :)

Considerably less realistic than original, but insomuch more fun. They made an effort not to repeat scenes from the first movie and indeed they came up with a bunch of new ideas, while repeating only things that simply had to be repeated as franchise trademark.

When, in the first movie, the main character is swallowed by a great white shark and survived, how the hell can you beat that in sequel ?! Easy, he gets swallowed again and he survives again to even the score and then top that by finding arm with a gun in its stomach, arm that was bitten off his wife at the beginning of the movie. You have to be a complete genius to push absurdity so far that it becomes credible.

Plus, besides the lead couple from the prequel, a bunch of celebrities have cameo appearances and side roles. The overall impression is a bit below the first movie though, but just a bit. I loved it very much.

7,5/10

Rarely stupid movie. Fortunately, it lasts below average, about 80 minutes. It is so dumb that it even gives it some charm. I think it has social message and it's basically parody to modern business, but it does not make it any less retarded. :D

4/10

Human Centipede Trilogy

The Human Centipede (First Sequence) (2009)

A mad scientist kidnaps three people and turns them into human centipede by sewing the mouths of the third and second person in a row to the anuses of the second and the first. I think that this description alone is enough for you to see how this thing is not worth your time. I honestly have no idea what made me watch it and, even worse, what madness came into me to make me watch both sequels after I already saw how disastrous this is. This is in every aspect, essential and technical, complete crap. On my scale, the 1/10 is a movie that I did not manage to see through, the 2/10 is a movie I finished with superhuman effort, so I will rate this crap

3/10

The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) (2011)

The fan of the first film decides to surpass a crazy doctor and connect twelve people. This film is slightly less crap than the original.

4/10

The Human Centipede III (Final Sequence) (2015)

Inspired by the previous films, the warden of a notorious prison decides to bring his unbearable prisoners in line ... literally. Human centipede grows to 500 members. To be honest, this one is also complete crap, but I must admit that it is somewhat amusing.

4/10

Damn, what the hell I just watched ?!!!

Original movie was one of those that are so unrealistic and exaggerated that their stupidity borders with ingenuity. Then in the second movie they went one step further and I thought that even one more step in that direction would result with unwatchable crap. And then I started this one and it seemed that I was right. After about 20 minutes I decided to give it up and even delete 4th one too without even checking it out. And just when I was about to move my lazy ass towards keyboard they went one more step further with unreality and exaggeration and I had to halt for a second. And then they went one more step and then one more... and when I thought that this movie can not be more unreal and hyperbolical they made a jump further and continued with action that was faster and more unreal every minute and I was completely stunned with my jaw on the floor. Along the way, they inserted occasional emotional scenes into action, scenes that ascend mockery with Hollywood pathetics to the level of art. From scene to scene movie speeds up and every scene is more bizarre until mindblowing finale. And when you think that's it you realize there's just a bit more.

Sharknado 3 ascend its genre to epic proportions and I barely refrained from giving it 10/10. But, although I can not remember when was the last time some movie took me for a ride and amazed me this much, it would be blasphemy to put it side by side with the biggest masterpieces of cinematography. So 9/10 will do.

Don't do it to yourself

Warning: Spoilers Sixteen years old girl, all alone in the world, has only one possession, extreme natural beauty. So she goes to LA to become a model. She goes up in the fashion world very fast because she is natural while her competition is products of plastic surgery and makeup. Of course, she becomes arrogant after a while. Everyone falls in love with her and everyone wants to hire her because she has that "something" no one else has. That's why her jealous colleagues decide to kill and eat her hoping that they'll take over that "something" from her. A lesbian makeup artist who fixes up corpses in a morgue is in love with her so she has fantasies of her while making love to corpses. One of the models throws up her eye and then kills herself. The other one picks up the eye and eats it again. I hope I talked you out of making the same mistake I made and waste two hours of your lives on this crap.

Visually, this is well done, original and interesting, but the directing is lousy, the acting is bad, the music is irritating, the story is retarded, the movie is boring, painfully stupid and completely redundant. If the author was hoping to bring us the message and give a statement about the fashion industry he failed in that attempt. Complete nonsense. I would rate it even lower if the visual side was not so impressive.

3/10

My favorite franchise

I just realized this was my 500th movie since I registered on IMDb. Jubilee should be cheerful and this movie was definitely a hit. Exaggeration of epic proportions, travesty, quotes from famous movies, crazy action from the very start and enormous amount of laughter and entertainment. The movie has no introduction at all, madness starts from the very beginning. They nailed it again.

• It wouldn't be Texas without chainsaw massacre.
• Dad, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore.
• It's not my mom, my mom is a shark, not a robot.

Disappointing end

I thought Henenlotter finally made a really good movie... Good atmosphere, nice pacing, instead of retarded special effects from previous movies he left some things to our imagination... Instead of showing us unconvincing monsters he made better effect by clever camera angles, cuts in all the right places, faces of characters when they see things we cannot see and similar tricks. But no, he could not resist. Near the end, he gave up on good directing and got back to retarded special effects, showing us the monster that is so stupid that spoils it all and lowers this movie on the same level with "Basket Case" franchise. And then he buried the movie with an incredibly lousy ending. If he endured keeping the movie on the same level till the end it would be strong seven, but this way I cannot go over five, and even that is more for the idea than for its realization.

5/10

Awesome :D

While listening to some random metal on YouTube I ran into the soundtrack for this movie and a bunch of thrilled comments about it. Usually, when I run into some movie I want to see, I just add it to IMDb watch-list and one day it may be its turn... This time I could not wait. Whatever I had to do could wait for a few hours and a few minutes later I was in for a crazy ride.

A high-school metal-head moves into a little puritan town. Greeted by rejection, he falls in love with the best chick in the school, meets the only other metal-head, they start a band (you guess - Deathgasm), find an ancient notes with Latin text, take them as their new song and by playing them they open a portal for a demon king to take over the Earth. And the fun begins...

As much as I could not wait to see it, I did not expect anything from it, because it is a New Zealand low-budget horror comedy made by a bunch of no-names. Movie exceeds all possible expectations. Although it is director's low-budget debut, this movie is better than almost everything I saw in the genre so far. The story is interesting, characters are caricatured but yet realistic and actors carry their roles very well and you'll fall in love with them from the start. Effects and overall production are above every expectation for a low-budget movie, and directing and camera have some very interesting moments. The movie is extremely gory and explicit, impregnate with very twisted and sick humor and you get to listen to good metal from the beginning to the end. Mandatory for all gore lovers and metal-heads.

9/10

I want more!

This is simply awesome. Combination of high-school show, comedy and horror, that packs clichés of 80's and 90's into catchy 20 minutes portions of pure fun. All accompanied by lots of weed and heavy metal. Plus, in the main supporting role, we have Jason Mewes, Jay from legendary Jay and Silent Bob duo. The only flaw of this show is that it was canceled after two seasons, so the main story is left incomplete. However, every episode has own rounded plot so they can be watched separately. Also, an animated movie that should finish the story is announced and it's expected very soon. Recommendation for everyone who loves metal, weed, 80's horrors, teen comedies, things so stupid that they're ingenious and good fun. I saw all 26 episodes in just a few days and I yearn for more.

9/10

Unwatchable

I get the idea behind this movie and I must acknowledge few really ingenious dialogues and monologues, but overall, the movie is almost completely unwatchable. It is satire so technically speaking it is a comedy, but it is not funny or entertaining at all. It's just plain boring. It is obvious that movie is done by someone very smart who has many things to say, but who is at the same time so self-involved in own smartness that he made this movie understandable only to himself. The movie is unwatchable, both in the story and in an aspect of technical realization. It is extremely rare, but it happened - I gave up on this movie before the end. I did it just a few times in my life, gave up on single digit number of movies out of thousands I saw so far. But I could not force myself to see this through. This is one of those things that remind me that life is too short to waste it on literally every crap I run into. I'm sorry to do this because I can tell that basic idea was awesome in authors had, but he terribly failed to make something good out of it. So I must rate it

1/10

"Billy the Kid Versus Dracula"... WTF?! As much as title promises complete nonsense, you must admit it makes you bit curious... I expected mix of western and horror that parodies this two cult movies or spoofs western and Dracula genres in general. I could bet this movie is dumb, but I hoped it is somewhat funny. Even when I realized I can not find it anywhere I simply could not give up. When I finally found online stream and saw its terrible quality of both picture and sound (probably pirate VHS rip of 1966. movie) I still could not resist. And I'm glad I didn't.

Movie is not comedy or parody. It is based on classic Dracula plot, puts it in Wild West scenery, and enriches it with western elements, making plot more interesting. Story is more complex than in original Dracula and combines western, classic Dracula horror and romance in some kind of thriller. Although production is bad and special effects ridiculous, story is good enough to hold your attention in spite everything else being bad. Also, movie is just over an hour long and that leaves no room for idling. And end... to me it is awesome. Final clash between Billy the Kid and Dracula, that last just few moments, is one of shortest, most efficient and funniest fighting scenes in movie history. I had to rewind this scene more than a few times with huge smile on my face.

Objectively, this movie does not deserve more than weak four, but it is original for nine. Overall, warm recommendation to fans of old Dracula movies.

6,5/10

I could write a novel about this film. For quite some time I was thinking how to write short review and not miss the essence. Mass bashing of this movie does not speak so much about its quality as it speaks about today's audience. World got faster, people have no time, they're impatient and nervous, and even worse, they're addicted to adrenaline injections served by modern big and home screens. Unfortunately, this movie is not for everyone. It's not for most of people. But if you are willing to relax, open yourselves emotionally and let the moment carry you, this film could be enriching experience. They say it's pretentious, boring and has no story. True, it's not perfect, it has pretentious and even boring moments and it is very tiring watch if you are not capable to let go. Fact that it does not have plot doers not mean it has no story. It has story, and what a story it has, it just does not tell it in conventional ways. It tells the story by picture and sound and emotion. Every cadre is like a postcard, every sound contributes to artistic photography. This is one of those movies that are not supposed to be analyzed, but felt. I never saw any Terrence Malick movies till now, and if this one really is his worst then I definitely must watch all the rest.

8,5/10

P.S. For those incapable to enjoy artistic movie, if nothing else, two hours of Christian Bale surrounded with many gorgeous women should be enough reason to at least try.

• Hungry. Longing for something without knowing what it is.

• Treat this world as it deserves. There are no principles... just circumstances.

• You think when you reach certain age things will start making sense. Then you find out you're as lost as you were before. I suppose that's what damnation is. The pieces of your life never to come together. Just splashed out there.

• So much I was given. So much I left behind.

• Real life's so hard to find. Where it is? How do you get there?

• Pay attention to this moment. And everything is there... perfect and complete just as it is.

• There's so much love inside us that never gets out.

It's hard to describe this movie even with spoilers, let alone without. It's weird like Lynch did it, and reminds me of Jarmusch too. Strange combination of old school space SF, western, noir and musical. Extremely low budget and yet very effective. Cory McAbee, in Chaplin manner, brings us one man show. He wrote the script, directed, played leading role and wrote most of the music. And music is story for itself. It is impossible to picture it verbally. This has to be seen and experienced. You have to experience it for yourself.

8/10

I'm not sure to what extent I understood this movie, or if it is at all possible to catch everything from just one watching, and I really want to understand it fully. I think it would be best if I read the book. Complete mindfak, but not in usual way of inexplicability or unpredictability, but because story, although pretty much explained, is extremely complex and told in very unusual and original way. Movie follows six stories at the same time, switching from one to another every few moments, so in the beginning you have a feeling like someone is terrorizing your TV remote. Situation is further complicated by fact that all stories are placed in completely different epochs, six unrelated locations, and they even differ by genres, but the same cast is acting six different group of characters in all stories. Makeup and costumes are so believable that in some cases I did not recognize some actors in all their roles until end credits, while in other cases it's obvious but still beautifully done. Some transformations are bit raped but I didn't mind. Some actors even have roles in both sexes. There are four Oscar winners: Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent and Susan Sarandon. At the beginning stories are seemingly unrelated, except for the cast of course, but as film progress, connections and coherence are more and more obvious, until at the end you realize that all stories make one rounded entirety, when even tragic moments gain meaning and make you smile. Whole construction is even more fascinating considering that stories are placed on 1849. boat, 1936. England, 1973. San Francisco, 2012. London, 2144. Seoul and 2311. post-apocalyptic Hawaii. Till today I never heard of this movie. I run into it by accident and I'm glad I did. This is one of rare examples of a movie that lasts 3 hours but holds attention strongly from beginning to the end. I warmly recommend it to everyone, regardless of your movie taste, because in this movie you can find overseas ship adventure, freeing of slaves, classical music, gay drama, intrigue, blackmail, 70's thriller, sex, violence, comedy, gore scenes, futuristic SF, post-apocalyptic tribal civilization, reincarnation, new worlds, romance and, well, everything you could possibly put in a movie.

8,5/10

Twin Peaks Diarrh... Diary

There's a chance David Lynch is crazy. But I honestly doubt it. I think it's much more probable that he simply screws with us. We are struggling to understand his movies where there's, in fact, nothing to understand. He just stuffs his films with everything and anything that comes to his mind, without any sense and meaning, and then he sits aside and laughs his head off on our pathetic attempts to explain his outburst of "genius".

****

The first episode was promising. Strange, mysterious, distinctive. I was hypnotized. But in the second episode I was already at the edge of giving up. I was held only by curiosity. Now, after the third and fourth episode, I can not take this seriously anymore. I have a feeling that I'm watching high-budget parody to "Twin Peaks" instead of the long-awaited third season. Unlike first episode that mesmerized me and kept me in suspense, through third and fourth I mostly laughed, partly from agony, partly from shame transfer to which the show abounds, although there were also few really good jokes. But overall it feels like spoof made by the principle "it's so bad that it's good." I'm more and more convinced that Lynch really is screwing with us. David, I have no idea what you're on, but give us a little so we could feel nice too.

****

• How the hell did this madman know that he will be able to make the third season after 25 years? How did he know, not only that he will be alive, but that the rest of the crew will also be alive, capable and willing to shoot... Did he simply risked and had luck?

• Why does almost every episode end in "Ally McBeal" manner?

I really want to rate this movie ten out of ten although I know it definitely doesn't deserve it. But I wanna... For quite some time I was thinking how to write smart and competent review and I've got nothing so far. I can not hook you by short summary without spoiler risks. To abstract some deep thoughtful philosophy out of it I really don't want to even try. Even if there are some I didn't notice them. This movie is simply pure fun of epic proportions. There are some artistic cadres, trippy weird amazing and jaw dropping mindfaks, there's drama and pathetic, there's action and CGI intemperance, sanatorium and whorehouse, little bit of Kill Bill and a bit of Hobbit, alternative history, train hijacking, samurai and trench battles against Germans, incompatible epochs mixed in same scenes, there's everything and everything is awesome.

To lure mail audience, there's bunch of hot girls in sexy battle outfits, armed to teeth with swords and machine guns, who, in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Charlie's Angels and Matrix style, jump out of WWII airplane on running trains and medieval castles to butcher and riddle everything from people to zombies, robots, orcs, and eventually dragons. Complete madness. Zack Snyder is the king.

I do not like Emily Browning in leading role (my only objection to this movie), but Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone and divine Carla Gugino nailed it with both performances and looks.

9/10

WTF I just watched ?! I heard many things about this movie and everything was true, but even if I did know what to expect I was swept off my feet. Adventure that, in very vulgar and explicit way, makes fun of racial, political, sexist, homophobic and every other stereotype you could possible think of, alluding or directly spoofing celebrities, famous events, movies, music. I think it is impossible to catch all layers and details of this movie in just one watching. Technically it's nothing special, but story is good enough to make everything else negligible. Even the worst scenes are fun, and those best and most shocking I had to rewind and re-watch several times, not being able to believe my own eyes and ears. I couldn't say it's one of the best animated movies of all time, but it definitely is the most original and bravest I've seen so far and I'm absolutely amazed.

9/10

I barely forced myself to watch it till the end. First time I thought about giving up was after maybe ten minutes or so, and that urge didn't left me throughout the rest of the movie. It mostly looks like bunch of piled up random pretentious crap that leads nowhere. Here and there you can see something interesting, but overall movie is pointless and boring. I endured to the end only because it was written and directed by author of great Donnie Darko, so I hoped it could be one more *beep* movie that pays off at the end. Yes, it was another *beep* and at the end I understood it, but wasting two and a half hours on this nonsense definitely didn't pay off. It's unbelievably stupid and the only thing in it worth seeing are Buffy the Vampire Slayer and several more interesting women.

2/10

!!! SPOILER ALERT !!!

This movie is rated rather low, but not because it's bad, but because it's misunderstood. For a start, whoever classified it as horror comedy is either stupid or didn't see this gem at all. This movie has absolutely nothing to do with horror genre, and although many see it as a black comedy, I really don't understand why. Also, the short description of the film, as well as the genre classification, misleads to totally wrong expectations, which will lead more superficial viewer to disappointment and accordingly to low ratings.

This is neither a comedy nor vampire horror. Vampire's Kiss is drama, somewhat freakish and bizarre, maybe even black humorous a bit, but nonetheless a drama. A drama about a man whom the vanity and loneliness of one's own life leads to the escape from reality, first into drinking and one night stands, then into hallucinations and suicidal madness. Except for totally unconvincing scene of bat attack, this movie has practically no weak spots. Screenplay, scenery, directing, and almost every support role in this movie are great. Maria Conchita Alonso deserved at least some awards, and Nicolas Cage played one of the best roles in his career, a performance that barely lags behind his role in Leaving Las Vegas.

9/10

Move everything on your watchlists one place down and put this first. In fact, whatever you do, pause it for an hour and watch this now. Theatrical adaptation of Peter Pan that "goes wrong" is so over the top that it should be painfully stupid. But this amateur dramatics group pulled it off amazingly. They went so far over the top that they made hilarious comedy that will make you laugh to tears. If I ever get a chance to see this in theater I surely won't miss it.

9/10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNCutxWbpIU

Vampyros Lesbos is German-Spanish erotic movie with elements of horror. This is artistic flick so, as expected, it has nice camera and atmosphere and everything else is bad. Poor attempt of plot is contributed by dull acting, lousy music and idle scenes. The only thing worth something in this movie are Soledad Miranda's scenes, especially her stage performances and lesbian scenes with Ewa Stromberg. In those scenes camera, directing, colors and sexual charge of this "club 27" member achieve a somewhat hypnotizing effect which makes us forget, even just for a moment, how trashy this movie really is.

3/10

I'm reading reviews and trying to find golden middle with no success. Audience considers this movie either the best or the worst British movie of the year. British have an unusual and for the rest of us often incomprehensible sense of humor. If you're used to Hollywood this probably won't entertain you. I suppose that most of the lowest ratings came from USA. At the other hand, I think this movie is overrated and that most of the tens, that pulled it to an average of eight, came largely from Britain. From my point of view, this is solid movie for one watching. I wouldn't call it a comedy. It is horror adventure sprinkled with lots of humor, British humor that tries not to be too British, but to adapt to the wider audience. And in that attempt lies it's biggest issue. Also, it is very difficult to mix genres, especially if there's too many. Although this movie somewhat succeeds in that attempt it didn't quite shine. Still, we have to acknowledge this brave attempt to make something unusual. All together, if you're not a fan of recent British film don't even give it a try, but if you are able to slip into British state of mind I think you'll enjoy this flick. I surely did.

7/10

WTF I just watched?! When I sat to watch this movie I expected something like Power Rangers repacked into comedy. During first half an hour I believed I'll give up any minute now. But somehow I found myself completely pulled in the story which caught me unprepared for what it brings. Forget about trailers and what you heard about genre and story and enter this adventure without any prejudice. It's the only way. Any expectation will only bring you disappointment while if you have none you are in for pleasant surprise. IMDb says action-comedy which is nonsense. Technically this is SF drama, essentially it's black-humorous allegory. Story is very original. It's told plain and simple and to audience, accustomed to popular complicated scenarios with plenty of surprises and twists, it may seem boring. But to me it was welcome refreshment and example how even with little can be shown a lot. I want to commend excellent performance of Anne Hathaway and recommend you this, in my opinion, strong seven.

7,5/10

If you are a sincere fan of slow, but extremely slow movies, play this movie on x2 speed and you may somehow hold on to the end. I have to praise myself, I fell asleep only after more than an hour. I usually evaluate the general impression that movie has left on me, but sometimes, as in this case, this is impossible because my impressions are very divided. It's done in similar style as Neon Demon, but in my opinion it's a bit better. Movie is visually fascinating and deserves 9/10, but the story and pace are terribly boring and I hardly made myself watch it to the end, which is on my scale 2/10. As it's better than Neon Demon, which I rated 3/10, I will draw the average from 2 and 9, and rate it

5,5/10

For the beginning, I have to emphasize that this time I will not even try to write an objective review, but just try to present my completely subjective film experience.

This is the sickest mindfak I have ever seen! A movie which I want to rate ten and zero at the same time, and probably all the ratings in between. I literally moved mouse pointer on IMDb stars for about ten minutes and finally gave up. I have so many controversial impressions about this movie that the head starts to hurt me.

Camera and directing - In some scenes I was fascinated by Park's solutions, some of them completely hypnotized me, and again, in some scenes I was like - wtf, are you serious; bro, you're retarded; who let you make movies; etc. There are scenes for every single rating from one to ten.

Actors and their performances - I am not a racist and I really do not have anything against Asian, but probably because of the lack of any contact with them (I only know the owner of a local Chinese shop and I've only been watching a few Asian films) I often do not distinguish them and their facial expressions are strange to me. To me their acting always seem either non-expressive or as if they're over-acting, so acting in some scenes did not left any impression on me, while in other characters look retarded, as if fooling around.

!!! SPOILER ALERT !!!

Story - Now we have reached the most interesting part. The idea for the script is ingeniously complex and told in a way that raises tension and holds attention. The characterization is good, and the twists are unexpected and shocking. But even though a good part of the story deserves a ten, some parts completely spoil the overall impression. The first thing that bothered me is the scene in which Woo-jin Lee explains to Dae-su Oh his hellish vengeance. I think it would be much better to omit the verbal explanation and leave only indications on which the viewer will construct the story himself. For a moment we saw wings in Mi-do's bag. Wasn't that enough for us to realize what's going on?! Also, the reason for his revenge could have been shown in flashbacks, without verbal follow-up. Simply, too much talking for this kind of film. At the moment when I figured out who the Mi-do was, I already rated the story with a ten, but after hearing a detailed explanation 'how and why' in my eyes story was severely weakened. I can not say that the cause for Woo-jin Lee to dedicate his life to revenge is stupid, but I can say that it sounds stupid to me. From my corner, Dae-su Oh's entire life was destroyed for nothing. I could understand that a raped sister killed herself, but that she had entered the whole story voluntarily and then committed suicide is simply unconvincing. Eastern culture, tradition and education are so different from Western ones, and especially from my own perceptions, that I do not consider myself competent to judge the realism of the story. Still, all the complexity in upgrading the story is worthless, when the basis on which the story is based is totally unconvincing and unrealistic, and thus I am not able to identify myself with either of the characters, nor to sympathize with any of them.

So, even though I am aware of the complexity of the story and the quality of its realization into a movie, it is subjectively stupid tome, so I'm emotionally completely indifferent to it and my impression was - God, what a nonsense. Scene in which Dae-su Oh completely broke down before his tormentor was completely retarded and caused shame-transfer in me. I was disgusted by him shitting on everything he represented during the movie. I literally was on the verge of switching off the movie when he started to imitate a dog. And the end of the film is one of the dumbest endings I've ever seen.

wtf/10

I finally saw it on the big screen

I watched this movie several times at intervals of several years and every time I barely made it to the end. I attributed my inability to like it by saying that I was too young to understand it, that I was not in the right mood, and so on. In the end, I gave up. Until tonight, when I finally got a chance to watch it at a cinema.

I gave it one more and last chance...

Every cadre of this movie, standing by itself, is a work of art, followed by an excellent sound. Together they build a fantastic atmosphere that in a movie theater has a hypnotizing effect and it compensates for almost complete lack of plot. If I saw this back in the '60s in a theater, I would almost certainly give it 10/10. But watching it at home, on a small screen and without a quality sound system, this hypnotizing effect is lost and what is left is a pretty much boring movie that seems like it would never end. That's why I rated it seven, the average of visually beautiful and audibly genius film, and the fact that I usually give the movies, which I must compel to endure, two, maybe a three. But tonight's experience proved my theory that this movie must be seen in a theater to be fully experienced. After watching it on the big screen, I changed my attitude toward this masterpiece and I'm giving it a ten.

P.S. Ending scene, with the baby floating in space, is surely one of the creepiest things in the history of cinematography. Usually, I have nightmares for days after seeing this movie, just because of that damn baby.

Objective quality for a movie from the '60s - 10/10 Audio-visual experience - 10/10 Entertainment - 3/10, because it's still boring

When I watched Scott Pilgrim vs. the World I had no idea who director was nor was I interested at all. After Baby Driver name Edgar Wright began to get the significance. Then I saw Shaun of the Dead and decided to watch everything that this man made. Hot Fuzz, the second film of this "trilogy", takes over Shaun of the Dead's cast and style and takes them one step further. Movie begins a little confusing and it seems that it will not be able to maintain the level of its predecessor, but then in the second half it turns into a black comedy thriller that overcomes it in every way. Original and completely unexpected turns with continuous bombardment with quality humor will glue you to the screen. Perhaps it is not one of the best movies of all time, but it certainly is one of the most entertaining.

8,5/10

According to IMDb, Shaun is the best, and then the trilogy goes downhill. My impression is just the opposite. Shaun of the Dead was an experimental attempt, and then the same team, motivated by its success, continued in the same style and achieved better results, crowned with The World's End. Perhaps this SF horror action comedy is not so much better than its predecessors as I liked it more for the characters I can identify with, because under the mask of fantasy, horror and crazy action hides a very realistic human drama. This movie criticizes globalization and a modern society in which it is desirable that each individual be just a well-oiled gear in the mechanism, alienation and loneliness of unadjusted, as well as self-deception of those who live seemingly perfect lives. Anyway, this movie has delighted me and I am eager to see if Wright and Pegg can overcome themselves again.

9/10

This is, so far, probably the best Edgar Wright's movie. However, I still have to look at his debut "A Fistful of Fingers", but I doubt it can even be compared with this. Scott Pilgrim is a twenty-two year old boy with a serious lack of confidence, who dates a 17-year-old student and falls in love with a girl with a complicated emotional past. He has to find the strength to break up with the kid and defeat the seven exes of his new girl. Instead of boring or pathetic love drama, this film Scott's overcoming his own insecurity and girl's emotional luggage displays in the form of fights in the style of "Mortal Combat". Whole movie was made in a combination of video game and comic-book style. Acting and music are good, and the camera, direction and editing will make your head spin. In this action romantic comedy, Wright once again shows his skill and genius.

9/10

An absolutely delightful little ball of funshine

A decorated policeman, dishonorably fired from the service, indulged in alcohol, divorced, and became a hitman, which, at first glance, leaves the impression of a bum from Hell. After a decade, his ex-wife asks his ex-partner (with whom he cheated on her) to find her kidnapped daughter. Meanwhile, the captive daughter sends her imaginary friend in search of her father, whom she believes is the only one who can save her.

When, in the first episode, a middle-aged drunk ex-cop hitman sees a miniature bluish unicorn Happy fluttering around his head, trying to convince him he doesn't hallucinate, and that he has a daughter he doesn't know about and who urgently needs rescuing from the evil Santa Claus psychopath, the series turns into complete madness, which does not subside until the end of the second season. There begins a parade of exotic, eccentric, and sick characters (and creatures), excellently characterized in all their unlikeliness, and a festivity of completely wacky, morbidly hilarious situations, perversions, profanity, and spilled intestines, accompanied by appropriate music.

The story in the first season relies mostly on originality and the surprise factor and, combined with the insane pace and inevitable bouts of laughter, will leave you breathless. The second season is more complex, but is losing steam because we are already accustomed to the style of this series and its ruthlessness is not so shocking anymore, although it will still occasionally surprise you (the scene with Happy and Bo Peep is a textbook example of "what is seen cannot be unseen"). It is difficult to weigh whether the scenes and dialogues are sicker or funnier, but they are indisputably imaginative and skillfully balancing on the verge of bad taste (some will surely say that they quite crossed it). I have often rewound in disbelief and replayed them several times, and I must admit that it is quite hard when your jaw is trying to simultaneously drop to the floor and scream with laughter.

All the actors have done a great job, but I especially want to commend Christopher Meloni in the lead role, Bryce Lorenzo in the role of little Hailey, Patton Oswalt who lends a voice to Happy, as well as the unforgettable villains, the genius sociopath Patrick Fischler, the demonic semi-god Ritchie Coster and, of course, the star of the show, Christopher Fitzgerald.

I have a lot more to say about this series, but I want to avoid spoilers as much as possible, because the surprise factor is one of its strongest assets. For those who have not watched the series, I am very sorry for this little spoiler in the text so far, but if I were to write completely without spoilers, it would be just a few sentences, so general that writing this review would no longer make any sense.

Excellently written, filmed, directed, produced, and acted story, with super effects and music, powerful drama presented through the prism of unscrupulous black humor, and scenes that will disgust you to the point of vomiting. DO NOT MISS IT!

10/10

James is a seventeen-year-old who thinks he's a psychopath and dreams about murdering someone. He meets Alyssa, moody peer who is leaving her mother and step-father to start a search for her father. James comes with her in order to kill her on the way, but this adventure gets unpredictable twist which will stick you to the screen. Jessica Barden and Alex Lawther perfectly portrayed two eccentric teenagers. The series has eight twenty-minute episodes and there was no way I could stop until I saw it through. I dare you to try.

8/10

I want to see as many as possible and that's why I rarely repeat movies, but some movies one simply has to watch over and over again. "Trainspotting" is one of those. With "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" (1998) and "Requiem for a Dream" (2000) it makes a "holy trinity" of drug addiction movies. While I really can not stand the first two, "Trainspotting" is real masterpiece in every way. Story is adapted from cult novel of the same name by Irvin Welsh, about Mark Renton, heroin addict from Edinburgh, and his low-life friends. Although at no time does it condemn drug addiction directly, the film shows the life of addicts in a way that is much more effective than any moralizing. The story is fast paced, full of crazy and surreal situations, unforgettable scenes, black humor, and phenomenal dialogue and monologues. Great acting, original directing and one of the best soundtracks of all time. Movie that instantly became cult classic and even after two decades it does not lose any of its strength.

10/10

When I first saw "The Evil Dead" (1981) many years ago, I was disappointed. I gave up on franchise and made terrible mistake. "Evil Dead II" is what its name says but also much more than that. At the beginning movie reboots the story from "The Evil Dead" and then continues where it left off. Story is painfully stupid and characters make stupidest possible movies in a given situation. But it does not matter at all. There's no introduction or characterization, it's complete madness from the start. The movie is an unstoppable bloody over-the-top action, exaggerated out of all proportion, with a camera that savages all over. Shots that shake and move in all directions, scenes from the first person and a lot of slimy liquids of all colors splashing everywhere. And in the middle of all that Bruce Campbell, whose acting deserves at least nomination for Oscar. The man is damn genius and I can not wait to see him in "Army of Darkness" and "Ash vs Evil Dead". Without delay, tonight. One of those "it's so bad it's good" flicks that you can rate both zero and ten without the guilty conscience. I rate it

8/10

While first Evil Dead was stupid horror, second so over the top that it was more of a comedy than horror, third one is pure comedy of epic proportions. This one also continues where previous left off, but once again it does not begin the same way previous ends, but changes its ending a bit before continuing the story. Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell once again overcame themselves and made "Army of Darkness" the best one in franchise. It's a shame franchise ends here. I hope TV series won't disappoint.

8/10

For the first half of the hour it kept my attention, for the next half an hour I was more and more indifferent, and then I was barely waiting for it to finish. Although I did not like the movie much, I have to admit that it has that something that every big movie must have. It left an impression that won't fade soon. Objectively, though I think that's not the case, there is a possibility that I did not understand (enough), so I do not consider myself competent to criticize it. Subjectively, I like the acting and the striking mystical atmosphere created by the combination of directing, music and the fact that the entire film is taking place in the metro network of Budapest, but the story is too confusing, vague and without context. However, as this is Nimrod Antal's both writing and directing debut, I can not go below

7/10

!!! SPOILER ALERT !!!

I'm not sure whether Bulcsu had a split personality, and unknowingly killed all those people, or the killer was someone else, or whether the scene where he leaves the killer behind to be run over by the train was an actual event or just a symbolic release from his own dark side...

What is seen can not be unseen...

I love Kevin Smith and I saw all of his movies, those he wrote, directed or acted in. Johnny Depp is possibly my favorite actor. I saw all of his too, even those in which he had just cameo appearances. Movie with Johnny in it, written and directed by Kevin Smith, for me is definite must watch. I thought I knew exactly what to expect from those two, but I was so wrong. This has no similarity with anything any of them ever did. IMDb says comedy, drama, horror, and although it has elements of each, I can not agree with that classification. True, there's humor, but if you are in for a comedy, you're in for extremely unpleasant surprise. Although it has elements of eighties B horror, this movie is not scary. It won't frighten you or keep you tense, but most of it is both psychologically and visually unpleasant. And whether you will characterize it as a drama, I think it depends on your subjective experience. It's surreal, awkward, nasty and sick. Whether you like it or not, it's certain you won't easily forget it.

8/10

Japanese erotic drama, which, balancing on the very edge of pornography, tells a fascinating story about love, passion, and obsession that leads to inevitable death.

8/10

#keepitinthefamily

I was looking at the IMB score and I was completely confused. Did we all watch the same movie? Then I entered reviews to find out what's it all about and now I'm not confused anymore - now I'm pissed! If you've never seen anything from Kevin Smith, or if you did and you did not like it, please, do not even try to watch "Yoga Hosers". This film is the second part of "The True North Trilogy" (the third part is still not out) and therefore requires that you see "Tusk" first. And for a true understanding and complete experience of any Kevin Smith film, it is required that you already saw all of his previous movies. If you did not, you have no right to give negative comments on this one. True, it's not a masterpiece on the level with "Chasing Amy" or "Dogma", but it's side by side with "Clerks" and "Jay and Silent Bob Strikes Back".

"Yoga Hosers" takes place in the same "world" as "Tusk", and takes a part of the story and several characters from it. The film mocks the teens today and is full of references to many of Kevin's previous films, as well as a bunch of other stuff from pop culture. Johnny Depp has taken the role in this trilogy because "Chasing Amy" and "Jersey Girl" are his favorite films, and his daughter is the best friend of Kevin Smith's daughter since kindergarten. And guess who plays the main roles in this movie. If you saw "Tusk", perhaps you remember a teenage girls working as saleswomen in "Eh-2-Zed". These are Harley Quinn Smith, daughter of Kevin Smith, named after Joker's villain lover from "Batman", and Lily-Rose Depp, daughter of Johnny Depp and Vanessa Paradis (who also appears as a history teacher). There are also Depp's son Jack and Kevin's wife Jennifer, who's Harley's mother both in the movie and real life. Real family movie. There's also Kevin Smith himself, in the role I mustn't mention to avoid spoilers, as well as Adam Brody, Tyler Posey (Kevin is "Teen Wolf" fan and character Gordon Greenleaf is written specifically for Tyler), cameo appearance of Stan Lee, and of course Jason Mewes. The story is "so bad it's good", completely crazy and over the top, but what essentially makes this film ingenious is a continuous array of references to all sorts of things, that have led me to tears of laughter. So, gentleman haters, it isn't Smith who lost his genius, but you are the ones who got old in the meantime and lost your sense for humor.

8/10

This film is just an excuse for several beautiful women to show their breasts. Its stupid trashy script, unconvincing and dull acting, boring direction, poor editing and cheap production made it probably the worst and sleaziest Dracula movie to date. If you decide to watch it because of boobs, I'll spare you the agony of watching whole damn thing. Just watch from 0.50.30 to 0.51.40. to see two female vampires sucking blood from the tits of the third and skip everything else.

2/10

"Vampires, bad acting, poor editing, etc.

maxrenn-934-60219126 June 2011

Oh dear god! I can't believe how bad this was. Where shall I begin? I'll start with the atrocious dubbing if you don't mind. It's a joke. there's no emotion in the dubbing whatsoever. I had to laugh when Dracula says "I'm the happiest man in the world." In a tone more suited for a sentence like "I can't find my keys."

Also, Dracula speaks in this mind-numbing, monotonous voice for the whole movie! It's like listening to someone read mass.

What about the plot you may ask. There isn't one. Just a random series of events: shots of day becoming night, scenes of people walking down empty corridors for what seems an eternity. Absolutely horrendous! The only reason this movie was made was to show tits. I was screaming at the film to end after the 50 mins mark, it's just so goddamn, dull. After watching it through however I can safely say two things. 1)This is easily the worst movie ever made. 2) I'd like to have met Mr. Paul Naschy before he died. So I could kick his ******* ass."

They lost it :(

"Sharknado 5" continues in the direction of its predecessors, but this time they failed. Previous films have been based on unrealistic, but established quasi-scientific premises, and they stuck to them so that all the time you can be clear about what, how and why. This time, through most of the film I had no idea what was going on. Confusing, illogical and full of holes and with no quasi-scientific explanation that would give some sort of credibility to the story. Bunch of events that do not hold your attention, unconvincing story, poor CGI and unforgivably bad acting of several actors. Too stupid for a serious movie, and not nearly enough over-the-top to be a hilarious ride, like those brought to us by its prequels. But I can not completely bury it, because it does have some bright moments. The film is full of references, both verbal and visual, to pop culture and some cult films, and several times I sincerely laughed.

5/10

If you carefully follow the details, you will recognize references to "Lady and the Tramp", James Bond, "Star Trek", "Wonder Woman", "An American Werewolf in London", "Back to the Future", "Monty Python's Flying Circus", Indiana Jones, "Mission Impossible", "Mad Max" and others.

Let's misbehave

These seven sexually oriented stories are based on original and interesting ideas, but the realization of the film is bad in every way. Cheap production, poorly written script and unnatural and forced humor leave an insipid taste in your mouth. The second story, about a man in love with a sheep, and the seventh, which represents a human organism as a machine operated by a large crew faced with a sex opportunity, in my opinion, deserve eight and seven out of ten. Although the ideas on which other stories are based also have a lot of potential, these ideas are wasted on a rather stupid film.

5,5/10

This movie is simultaneously extremely stupid and awesome. Although "Kick-Ass" is much better, this movie is for epic fantasy what "Kick-Ass" is for the superhero genre. If you like FRP, LARP, epic fantasy, B horrors and heavy metal, or if you were the fan of "Todd and the Book of Pure Evil" series, this is something you simply must not miss.

In the middle of some forest nowhere a big live-action fantasy role play tournament is held, but one of the "wizards" accidentally uses the real spell and the innocent game turns into real bloodshed.

Story and characters are not particularly well-developed and everything is two-dimensional, so in combination with a small budget we get a production fiasco. On the other hand, the idea is great, the gore scenes are fun and the cast is fantastic. In the leading roles there are legendary Tyrion Lannister, nerdy Steve Zahn, then Ryan Kwanten and cutest sexy ballerina Summer Glau, whom I am in love with since the "Firefly" series.

I rate it seven, which is the average grade between its objective (un)quality and my enthusiasm.

7/10

"Total monster screen time for this picture clocked in at about 30 seconds, unless you count Tori Spelling."

Imagine that Stephen-King-wanna-be wrote the gay adaptation of Lovecraft and entrusted directing to David-Lynch-wanna-be. If this sounds to you like an interesting concept, make sure to check out "Cthulhu" from 2007. To me, this accomplishment has left the impression of a paranoid schizophrenic trying to meaningfully screen his hallucinations. On the one hand we have a boring, confusing and seemingly pointless story, mediocre acting and characters with whom I could not connect at any level, and when I saw Tori Spelling in one of the roles I was really on the verge of giving up. And yet, on the other hand, we have an interesting camera work and captivating mystical atmosphere that has kept me to finish it. How to evaluate a movie that I barely made to see through (2/10), which at the same time left a quite strong impression (8/10) ...

5/10

I suppose this film falls under what is called a "comedy of absurd". Absurd it certainly is, but not a bit funny. Something like Monty Python, but terribly bad. This is one of the most pretentious, stupidest and most boring things I had the misfortune to see and I admire myself that I endured to the end. And to prevent the comments that I did not understand it - yes, I did understand it very well, but I still think that this film is overrated garbage.

2/10

Mesmerizing torture

A film that's so boring that I barely made it through the end, and yet so hypnotizingly well made that I could not make myself shut it off before the end. Very difficult to watch, and even more difficult to evaluate.

5/10

Almost unwatchable, but worth watching

I think Andy Warhol had nothing to do with "Blood for Dracula" aka "Andy Warhol's Dracula" except for allowing it to use his name. This mildly politicized erotic horror comedy has a pretty good story and pleasant music, but everything else is very bad. One could eventually get used to bad acting, but the acting and especially pronunciation of the English language of the vast majority of actors are at the level of low-budget porn and so painful to ears that it makes the film almost unwatchable. During the first half an hour, I was on the verge of giving up, but later the story became more and more interesting and even brought a few really exquisite moments. The scenes where Dracula gets sick from drinking blood of the sluts, as well as the scene in which he lies on the floor licking the blood virgin lost during her first sexual intercourse, in my opinion, belong near the top of the trash cinema, and only because of those scenes and the way Udo Kier performed them I won't rate this movie 1/10.

3/10

"It makes me feel tingly all over and then nothing... There should be bells ringing, dams busting, bombs going off."

I ran into this while watching movies from the list of the most controversial films of all time. Since it is a porno movie I almost skipped it, but when I read what it was about I could not resist. This porn has a story. Not a sorry excuse for a story, but it comes with a real plot based on sex which is explicitly shown. The premise is hilarious and it can rightly be said that this is a porn comedy. A woman who cannot get an orgasm comes to the doctor for help. This seems to be nothing unusual, but when you find out the cause of this problem is that the clitoris is located... Watch the movie. It is so stupid that it turned the game and became a cult masterpiece of the genre.

5/10

Сражение (1986)

Hitman kills toy designer and steals his latest design, a miniature army complete with weapons and fully functional miniature nuclear warhead. But when he arrived home, "toys" are starting to attack.

This Russian short animated film is an adaptation of Stephen King's story "Battleground". The only reason it was not boring for me is that ten minutes is not enough time to get bored. Although, I must admit that it is developing a pretty good story in such a short time and the animation is unusual. I do not like it, but I can not say it's not good.

6/10

Care for a little necrophilia?

This surreal satire was inspired by George Orwell's "1984" and it's second in Terry Gilliam's "Trilogy of Imagination", first being "Time Bandits" from 1981 and third "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" from 1988. Placed in a retro-futuristic dystopian world, which is completely drowned in bureaucracy, it shows everyone as just a cogwheel in this absurd machine. Movie is full of more or less obvious details that show us the reality we live in, in caricatured and exaggerated way, but essentially it's a warning what modern society is degrading to become - one huge more and more complicated machine that seemingly tends to perfection, but the more complex it becomes the more it loses its purpose, while essentially destroys humanity in every possible way.

Our main character is a clerk who seems to be satisfied with living an indistinctive life of small cogwheel, but in his dreams, he is flying through clouds, where he meets the lovely woman. Subconsciously, the man trapped by the system dreams of freedom and love. When a simple typo in paperwork causes an innocent man to die, he attempts to correct this mistake and doing so he meets the woman from his dreams in real life. Now he digs deeper and deeper into government machine, trying to find out about her, and the line between his dreams and reality fades.

The cast is phenomenal. The leading role is entrusted to Jonathan Pryce, and to support him there are Robert De Niro, in small but striking role, Ian Holm (Bilbo Baggins), Bob Hoskins (Super Mario), Michael Palin (Monty Python), Peter Vaughan (Maester Aemon from GoT), Jim Broadbent (he has too many great roles for me to chose from, but let's say Harold Zidler from Moulin Rouge), and many more. You'll find some beautiful camera work here. Dream sequences are breathtaking. Visually impressive, but gloomy and disturbing. The movie has a grace of film noir. It's drama, but with a certain sense for black humor. Watching this madness of symbolism and metaphors was one quite strange experience which is hard to describe. You should see, or better say, feel it for yourself. Strong recommendation.

10/10

Why would anyone accept to air such a crap?!

In writing this might be a decent story, but what I just saw is simply terrible. The lack of a budget can justify many shortcomings, but for garbage like this it is not a good enough excuse. Literally everything in this episode, besides the idea itself, is disastrously bad, and acting can hardly be called acting at all.

3/10

The only good bird is a roasted bird

I watched this on TV as a child and, although I forgot all the details a long time ago, it remained carved in my memory as terrifying. Of course, this memory was greatly influenced by its reputation as one of the most famous horrors of all time. I just watched it for the first time as an adult in its entirety and I must say - wtf?! The story is linear, simple and does not require even the slightest use of the brain. It starts as a typical romantic comedy of its time (and it would be better if it stayed that way to the end), and then turns into something that is supposed to be a horror, but it is at best a mediocre drama. There is no mystery and tension that we expect from Hitchcock, there are no interesting dialogues, and performances of the actors are at a rather low level. From today's perspective, the effects are tragicomic, and I believe they were not anywhere near top-notch even for their time, which leads to the question how the hell was this film nominated for an Oscar in that category. Occasionally, the effects were so ridiculous that I had the impression that someone deliberately mocked with bird attacks. This is a film from 1963, not from 1923. The events in the movie remain completely unexplained, but that didn't bother me much because I couldn't care less about the reasons for bird attacks. The only good thing about this movie is the premise itself, because it is relatively realistic. Considering the number of birds on the planet in relation to the number of people, the very idea that birds can turn against us and attack us all at once is horrifying, because, despite their primitiveness in relation to human technology, I believe that in this war mankind would have no chance to win. Ever since I can remember I felt moderate repulsion and disgust towards birds, and after this movie, however unconvincing it may be, I could easily develop a phobia. If this movie was of a more recent date, I would rate it even lower, but, considering technical capabilities of the sixties, I have to give it a slack, so I'll rate it

5/10

The perfect title

I just finished the first season of the American version of "Shameless". I never saw the British original, nor do I intend to, because the majority says that "remake" is better. Is it really better I can not say, but it is awesome.

How to describe this show in just one word? Shameless! I've never seen anything with a name that fits so perfectly and I can not decide if this show is more sick or ingenious. The story is boldly lifelike and, with a combination of heavy drama and hilarious comedy, it will hit you like a hammer. Whether you like it or not, there's no chance you'll be bored. Directing and music are great and the cast is more than excellent. From episode to episode it leaves me speechless. Complete nuthouse.

****

After 11 seasons, the series that I experienced as a parallel life ended. For something that lasts so long, the quality necessarily varies, but despite all the downs, the series has always managed to recover and maintain average quality at a fairly high level. I may have become too attached to it to be objective, but overall, I think it deserves

8,5/10

Original cliché

If you are a fan of art drama or you simply don't like the horror genre, I can understand if you hated this. But for every true fan of horror, with at least a basic knowledge of at least cult horrors through the history of the genre, this should be a real joy. "The Cabin in the Woods" is a weird movie that can not be precisely genre determined. It gathers horror ideas seen countless times and turns them upside-down. Nothing in this movie is new, but the greatest thing about it is its ability to make something very original using totally outworn horror cliches. This is a parody and homage at the same time. It is a funny-scary movie with great visuals and even better dialogues and one-liners, and its pace and twists (even the predictable ones) will not let you get bored even for a minute. And the final revelation is at the same time one of the most ridiculous and one of the most awesome things I have ever seen on the big screen. It is not a masterpiece, but it is a real gem and I loved it.

8/10

Ready to blow my mind?

One can go over the top only so far before it becomes completely ridiculous. Honestly, I doubted that even the second movie could be good and I deeply admire creators for being able to come this far. But after the fourth they really should have quit. The fifth I could forgive, but this crap is definitely unforgivable. The idea is not so bad and the movie is full of interesting references to a bunch of historical figures and events, as well as some cult movies (Back to the Future, The Planet of the Apes), but overall impression this movie leaves is as lousy as it can be. Everything from the script, through acting directing and special effects, is unbelievably terrible and boring. So far this was my favorite movie franchise, but after this, and especially its ending, which is one of the worst endings ever, I really hope they won't make fools of themselves anymore. If you liked previous Sharknados, skip this crap and preserve them in good memory.

2/10

All bow to Princess Kenny

South Park's authors should be given the Nobel Oscars for Lifetime Achievement. These people are completely nuts. It is the fact that everyday life is an inexhaustible source of inspiration for mockery, but South Park does it better than anyone else. This time they made a parody of "Game of Thrones" and spiced it by ridiculing "The Lord of the Rings", "Star Wars" and other cult franchises, along the way, poking gamers, global corporations, the media and more. And all that in the form of TRILOGY. Be sure not to miss episodes 7-9 of the seventeenth season. It was a rather painful experience, because it is quite inconvenient to laugh like crazy while your jaw stiffened in disbelief.

10/10

Let's start with a quote that perfectly sums up the coherence of the plot: "Ok, let me just see if I can get this straight. You were mortal there, but you're immortal here until you kill all the guys from there who have come here and then you're mortal here. Unless you go back there or some more guys from there come here, in which case you become immortal here again."

When this film came out, it was awesome to me. I was eleven back then and it bought me with a dark atmosphere, strong cast, very good effects for its time, fast pace, entertaining action, and sexy Virginia Madsen. Now, I still liked all of that, and in addition, I enjoyed several examples of great camera and directing, as well as the very good soundtrack, but this time all of that was not enough to cover for one of the worst screenplays in the history of cinema.

"Highlander II: The Quickening" retains the actors and characters from the first film, while completely ignoring the original story. Not only that it is neither sequel nor a prequel, but the stories of these two films are mutually so contradictory that it is impossible to fit them in any way. Even if we completely ignore the previous film, this one is for itself full of holes and illogicality, and it is incredibly stupid. When it comes to story, in this movie every spot is a weak spot. Immortal's mythology doesn't work, quasi-science also doesn't work, and even romance, which is completely redundant, also doesn't work. I mean, they meet for the very first time and minutes after initial introduction they are attacked. He hides her into a garbage can, fights the attackers and kills them. Then she leaves the container and has sex with him against the wall in the middle of the street. Yea, right, very believable. How much this scenario stinks is best illustrated by Michael Ironside statement:

"Yeah, listen, I hated that script. We all did. Me, Sean, Chris... we all were in it for the money on this one. I mean, it read as if it had been written by a thirteen-year-old boy. But I'd never played a barbarian swordsman before, and this was my first big evil mastermind type. I figured if I was going to do this stupid movie, I might as well have fun, and go as far over the top as I possibly could. All that eye-rolling and foaming at the mouth was me deciding that if I was going to be in a piece of s**t, like that movie, I was going to be the most memorable f**king thing in it. And I think I succeeded."

For the nine days of work, Sean Connery received three and a half million dollars and donated the whole amount to charity. I suppose he was just trying to wash away the shame. However, apart from the story, everything else in this movie I liked pretty much, so I can not completely bury it with the rating. Audio-visually I would give it a strong seven, and maybe three for the story.

5/10

"It is so awful it makes an Ed Wood film look like Casablanca."

Although it gathers the original cast, "The Star Wars Holiday Special" concentrates on Chewbacca and his family, a great part of the film is in the Wookiee language without subtitles, and the boring "story" and horrible production leave the impression of lousy parody rather than an addition or homage to the legendary franchise. I will take the liberty to go a step further and compare this garbage with "Teletubbies". If you truly love "Star Wars", this ass of a movie will abundantly crap onto your heart and soul, so I advise you to avoid two hours of agony and spend that time reading IMDb reviews, which are mostly quite original, imaginative and occasionally hilarious. Here are some examples:

• Do not watch this alone! Like any other emotional trauma, the support of friends is crucial to survival. By the end, you will either want to climb a steeple with a rifle, or go into the garage and start the car.

• It has to be seen to be believed, but do you really even want to?

• It isn't a train wreck- it moves too slowly.

• Don't talk to me about Episode I until you've seen this unholy mess.

• George Lucas has been quoted as saying: If he had the time, he would break every existing VHS-copy of this movie.

• "I felt a great disturbance in The Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened." Yes, Obi-Wan, we all felt it.

• Oh Harrison, oh Mark, oh Carrie... how could you?

• I watched most of the program with my mouth hanging wide open in utter disbelief. I still recommend watching the film if only to say that you have.

• Took me a whole day as well, because it's hard to watch more than 5 minutes at a time.

• Those that have looked into the abyss that is the "Star Wars Holiday Special" are brave indeed.

• The opening scene...in which we watch Chewbacca's family shamble about aimlessly making unintelligible Wookie noises...lasts for seventeen and a half hours. The clock may say fifteen minutes; the clock lies.

• It goes on...and on...and on...and, at some point, you discover that you're weeping uncontrollably and can't stop.

• In the name of all that's holy: turn back before it's too late.

• CBS could have beamed this program to Alderaan and destroyed said planet just as easily as Vader destroyed it with the Death Star.

• May the force be with you if you're watching this, because you're going to need all the strength you can get.

• Your perception of the Star Wars Universe will never be the same!

Speechless...

I watched this two-hour movie without pause, as hypnotized, and when it ended I was left staring at the ending credits and then the black screen for a few more minutes. I had no idea what to write, so I went to see what others have commented. Rare are films that divide the audience like this. There are no middle grades, I didn't see any fives, sixes or sevens. All the reviews I saw either spit on it, rating it one or two, or praise it and give it nines and tens. I think it is both an exaggeration, but one thing is certain - the film achieved the goal that is shared by all the movies, and that is to make a strong impression.

In the dystopian future, it is not allowed to be single. Singles are arrested and taken into a remote hotel, where they have 45 days to pair up or otherwise they'll be transformed into an animal of their own choice. A lot of them escape to the nearby forest and the hotel residents hunt them and for every one caught hunter gets an extra day at the hotel. The film shows both sides of the coin, life in the hotel and life in the forest. It is totally weird, irrational, morbid and mesmerizingly disturbing, yet again, it's not tiring to watch. The cast is very good and Yorgos Lanthimos definitely hooked me to see the rest of his movies.

8/10

In case you didn't notice, except for the main character and his two "best friends", there are no names mentioned in the entire movie. Even the names of the two leading female characters are left unknown.

Where's Oscar for McAvoy?

If you like "Trainspotting", you'll love this one. "Filth" is also an adaptation of Irvine Welsh's novel and, although the stories do not have much in common, the movies share a specific atmosphere that will pin you to the screen. Its name fits perfectly, because the film is uncompromisingly dirty. James McAvoy plays a corrupt police detective who would stop at nothing to get his promotion. But behind the mask of a self-confident macho chauvinist, there are hidden secrets that the movie gradually unfolds, up to the totally wicked twist at the end. Although McAvoy's character is almost utterly bad guy, his rude and ruthless charm will mesmerize you and make you be on his side all the time, even when his behavior is inexcusably brutal. In addition to his undoubted acting talent, Mcavoy dedicated himself to the credibility of his performance, so he drank lots of whiskey in order to make his role of heavy alcoholic and drug addict more convincing. His transformations throughout the film, and the powerful expressions of psychological states and emotions of his character definitely deserve an Oscar. Although the film is full of insane moments, surreal scenes and filthy humor, "Filth" is primarily a powerful and shocking drama about a man who is falling apart inside, but whose life thought him that he must not show it. The film brings this phenomenon to surreal extremes, but essentially it is something with which many of us can identify, and I think that's precisely what makes McAvoy's character rather antihero than a villain, and what makes us sympathize with him.

8/10

I would just like to mention the remarkable performance of Jim Broadbent, whose surrealistic scenes make this film even more bizarre, and if you pay attention, you may notice tributes to Stanley Kubrick's cult films "A Clockwork Orange" and "Odyssey".

Human Centipede Trilogy

The Human Centipede (First Sequence) (2009)

A mad scientist kidnaps three people and turns them into human centipede by sewing the mouths of the third and second person in a row to the anuses of the second and the first. I think that this description alone is enough for you to see how this thing is not worth your time. I honestly have no idea what made me watch it and, even worse, what madness came into me to make me watch both sequels after I already saw how disastrous this is. This is in every aspect, essential and technical, complete crap. On my scale, the 1/10 is a movie that I did not manage to see through, the 2/10 is a movie I finished with superhuman effort, so I will rate this crap

3/10

The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) (2011)

The fan of the first film decides to surpass a crazy doctor and connect twelve people. This film is slightly less crap than the original.

4/10

The Human Centipede III (Final Sequence) (2015)

Inspired by the previous films, the warden of a notorious prison decides to bring his unbearable prisoners in line ... literally. Human centipede grows to 500 members. To be honest, this one is also complete crap, but I must admit that it is somewhat amusing.

4/10

Self-absorbed boring nothingness aka Tarkovsky is turning in his grave

Even before this film, I knew that Lars von Trier is a weirdo, and yet I was surprised how far he is willing to go in combining sick and boring. Quality acting and directing are worthless when the movie is just plain self-indulgence of a pretentious narcissus. It was a gruesome effort to watch this insane and insulting idiocy to the end, and, after I already spent two hours on it, I refuse to spend two more on bashing it. Especially when someone has already done it in a very impressive way. Just read the review of Luket or some of the others who rated it one or two out of ten.

2/10

"It is with some regret that I have decided to spend time reviewing Von Trier's 'Antichrist'. I am, by nature a curious film watcher, and will, at times, succumb to temptation and reserve a couple of hours to cast my own opinion, when a film creates ample controversy. Thus far my curiosity, across the spectrum has been met with, elation and disappointment in equal measure.

This is, and I make no apologies for this statement, a truly terrible film. I was hoping to read the user comments and be satisfied that it was met with the utter indifference and loathing that followed my own viewing and was genuinely shocked with the ridiculous ratings that have been pulled from the posteriors of those who mistakenly interpreted this dull and pointless movie as high art.

Given that the acting was by no means sub-par (Dafoe was very good as a husband/psychiatrist torn between his professional disposition and the demons of his relationship with his wife; and Gainsbourg was nothing if not committed to the role of a postnatally depressed lunatic) and the cinematography was at times excellent, it should give you some idea of how bad this movie was.

One review entitled 'Canonical Sermon, Classical Hero Journey, Numeric Elegance and Name of The Beast' offered an academic dissection of the movie...referencing the film's numerical balance and some other contextual information that completely fails to justify the relevance and poor execution of this movie, which in principle, before pen hit paper, may have carried some merit and proved to be a dark and disturbing study of the human/inhuman condition.

So, let me 'break it down' without offering insight where there is none or jumping on board the 'Turner Prize' high-art mindset that has corrupted modern art finding thought and intellect in the explicit and mundane.

Firstly: This is NOT a balanced movie, no matter how Von Trier cuts the film into chapters. A nice prologue, followed by over an hour of self-absorbed boring nothingness (aside from the revelation of child cruelty), climaxing in a violent last 10 minutes that arrived way too late for me to care about the resolution. Simply put, it is quite an achievement to bore someone to the point that genital mutilation, the ejaculation of blood the image of a wife fingering a freshly drilled hole in her husband's leg does not leave them shocked or a little sick; and yet I was so paralyzed by boredom that I was rendered immune to the horrors depicted on the television in front of me.

It is all very well dissecting this movie for its symbolism and I am sure that for an academic essay it provides the necessary 'meat' for some critical analysis, but seriously, why to bother when as a film, as a piece of entertainment, this movie fails at its most basic level.

I have watched interviews with the cast, who really don't seem to understand the movie and listened to drivel about how this was a product of Lars' depression. The reality is that 'controversy' is the most marketable aspect of the film and one has to question the misogynistic stance/intentions of the movie. I am not a fan of feminism as it has moved beyond equality but it certainly wouldn't be too late to question Von Trier's relationship to the fairer sex, both in the context of this movie and his work as a whole.

Imbalanced and a cry for attention; a cheap snub of mainstream Hollywood that craves the attention Von Trier claims to shun; or a failed art-house movie that owes its substance and form to antiquated intellectual study that it fails to properly address and far superior 'cabin in the woods' movies that it does not get close to matching... Take your pick of which best describes this terrible film.

If you want cabin horror, watch 'Evil Dead'. if you like dark and harrowing try 'requiem for a dream'. There has been some talk as to the meaning of 'Antichrist' in the context of this movie. I can say with some certainty that it refers to the pure evil that stole 2 hours of my life last week. Damn you, Lars Von Trier, you are an idiot." - luket

"The human qualities can be expressed in one word: hypocrisy."

In the second film, Charlotte Gainsbourg takes on the lead role from Stacy Martin. These two actresses, both in appearance and in spirit, are so different that it was impossible for me to see them as the same person, which completely breaks down the continuity of the story. I literally had the impression that I was watching another film, about another woman, on a similar topic. And in addition, the protagonist of the first film, despite everything, was quite likable, while I felt repulsive and disgusted towards a disturbed masochist from the second part. Trier returns to his recognizable style of shooting scenes with the sole purpose of upsetting your stomach. No one will convince me that an explicit and extremely detailed view of a woman who performs an abortion on herself in any way contributes to a better understanding of the story or a stronger dramatic effect. It's simply there to shock you, upset you and maybe even make some of you give up on further watching. Controversy for controversy sake, which, in my opinion, is a feature of the egomaniac who must at all costs be at the center of attention. The story becomes more morbid, crueler and much darker, and technically too stretched, less convincing and more boring. Seligman's digressions got weaker and the overall impression was that actors too share my experience of the film and that they are already bored, and now they are only getting to the end.

Although it is single five-hour film, subjectively I experienced it as two films, of which the first is a masterpiece of drama, while the second is a weaker sequel that vainly tries to mimic the greatness of the first one. And yet, when my impressions settled, all the flaws of the film can not diminish their strength. If I ignore the parts inserted just for the sake of shock and controversy, what remains is one of the most powerful dramas I've ever seen in my life, and to which I simply can not give anything less than the highest rating.

Seligman: "You shouldn't use that word. It's not what you call politically correct." Joe: "Well, excuse me, but in my circles, it's always been a mark of honor to call a spade a spade. Each time a word becomes prohibited, you remove a stone from the democratic foundation. Society demonstrates its impotence in the face of a concrete problem by removing words from the language. The book burners have nothing on modern society." Seligman: "I think society would claim that political correctness is a very precise expression of democratic concern for minorities." Joe: "And I say that society is as cowardly as the people in it, who, in my opinion, are also too stupid for democracy." Seligman: "I understand your point, but I totally disagree. I have no doubt in the human qualities." Joe: "The human qualities can be expressed in one word: hypocrisy. We elevate those who say right but mean wrong and mock those who say wrong but mean right."

10/10

"When I die, bury me deep, lay two speakers at my feet, put some headphones on my head and rock and roll me when I'm dead."

As a great fan of Nicolas Cage, I could not resist seeing this achievement, although I knew that he's only shooting nonsense lately. But this nonsense has overcome all that precede it. As if David Lynch on hallucinogenic drugs has tried to shoot slasher horror. The originality, imagination, interesting cinematographic solutions and good acting are wasted on the film dull and boring that it's barely watchable. These two hours of life I can't ever get back, and therefore I do not want to spend a minute more on writing a more detailed review.

2/10

Beautiful madness 12 February 2017

I have no idea what to say about this movie. It's rare, but it happens. It left me speechless. IMDb says post-apocalyptic surreal black comedy. It is. And also romance, drama, and horror. One of the very strangest and most original pieces of cinematography I have ever seen. If you are not too lazy to read long reviews, I recommend an excellent one written by The_Void. Anyway, if you liked "The Grand Budapest Hotel", "Four Rooms" or "Sweeney Todd" you'll love this one too. It's a must-watch piece of madness. I'm stunned. Loved it.

9/10

It's "sheet", not "shit", you impatient illiterates!

I am reading reviews written by people who have bashed this film and generously rated it one and two out of ten, and I am shocked that all of them have failed to point out some of the biggest drawbacks of this pretentious garbage. First, if the ghost is shown as a white sheet, where are the chains?! Every ghost with any self-respect should rattle chains all night long. Secondly, it is widely known that ghosts rattle chains in the attic and, in this case, I'm not sure whether the house has an attic at all. Thirdly, this is an art film, and a good art film must necessarily be filmed in black and white.

Impatient superficial audience of the 21st century, your arguments against this film are valid about as much as those mentioned above.

This is a story about the ghost, where, instead of special effects and CG, we have an actor covered with a white sheet. But do not let that deter you from this unique cinematic experience. This is a film that shows that idea and talent are more important than budget, that emotions and atmosphere are more powerful than a story, that good directing and acting can hold your attention more firmly than dialogue and action, that with a little one can say and accomplish much. One of the slowest movies I have ever seen, almost without plot and dialogues, and yet, it was not boring for a moment. On the contrary, I do not remember when a movie left me with such a strong impression.

9/10

Unforgettable

Until an hour ago, I never heard of Jan Svankmajer, and at this moment I still have no idea of who he is and what he did, but after this unforgettable experience I will definitely explore it. This short movie combines live-action with stop-motion animation in a morbidly fascinating way, and while it is quite disgusting and sick, it is at the same time mesmerizing and thought-provoking. I think I figured what the author wanted to say, but I do not want to go into an analysis of the "story" because it is better if you see the film without any knowledge of what awaits you, and then get your own conclusions after your impressions settle. And the impressions are guaranteed to be strong. Take my word when I tell you that this film is worth 15 minutes of your time. It left me speechless in the most positive sense.

9/10

Some movies have a linear storyline with the only purpose to entertain, while others are trying to make an impression or have some deeper meaning. This one definitely is not linear, the only impression I am left with is confusion and, if there was some message between the lines, I missed it somehow. It is hard to rate it because I don't know if it is awesome or complete bullshit or somewhere in between. I simply have no slightest idea what I just saw.

7/10

"Umro je drug Tito"

One of the most original films I've ever seen is composed entirely of scenes stolen from other films. Hungarian director György Pálfi has made a universal romantic drama, skillfully and humorously combining clips from several hundred films, so black and white and color scenes, different genres and shooting techniques, actors, locations and epochs, rapidly alternate before our eyes, all followed by nicely blended music, also borrowed from other films and series. Clips were reportedly downloaded from torrent sites and, in order to avoid copyright lawsuits, the film was published as educational material by the Hungarian University of Film and Theater. It may seem confusing and even unwatchable at first, but do not let it deter you, because you will get used to it very quickly and after a few minutes you will no longer need extra concentration. The idea is ingenious, a realization hypnotizing, and I am afraid to even speculate how extensive his knowledge of world cinema is, as well as how much time and patience it took to assemble and edit this madness. Even if we disregard all the other qualities, the effort itself deserves a maximum rating. Bravo!

10/10

WTF?!

This movie ranks in the IMDb top 250 and has won two Oscars out of seven nominations, not to mention its cult status. If I didn't know all this, it would have left me without a special impression. But this way, it left me completely shocked. I honestly wonder who's crazy here. "Fargo" won an Academy Award for Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen. Okay, on paper this story really has great potential. I can also understand William H. Macy's nomination somewhat. But nominations for Best Picture and directing?! Really, WTF?! All the characters in the film, except the cold-blooded sociopath, are portrayed as slightly falling behind in their mental development. Both their actions and how they are portrayed by the cast cause chronic embarrassment transfers throughout the film. Something like that would work in some types of comedy, but with such characters and acting, to call this movie a drama or a thriller ... WTF ?! Directing also has nothing to do with these genres. Drama and tension do not occur even in trace amounts. The story may be a true event, and in reality it was probably a drama and a thriller, but the way it is presented in this movie is totally frivolous. It had the potential for upsetting drama, for a suspenseful thriller, and even for a morbid comedy, but this mix of the Coen brothers looks like a clumsy result of their hesitation to opt for the genre. Watchable, but probably the most overrated movie I saw in years.

6/10

"The Gun is good! The Penis is evil!"

This one definitely goes to "WTF I Just Watched ?!" list. Low-budget independent SF with Sean Connery in the lead role, whose fee of $200.000 makes one-fifth of the total movie budget. Given the very low ratings on the movie sites, I probably would never have looked it up, but when I saw Sean's outfit, the film immediately jumped to my priority watch-list. The movie definitely lived up to my expectations, and Sean's red panties are not by far the silliest thing to see. The whole aesthetic of the film screams the seventies and is reminiscent of the odd blend of "Flash Gordon" and "A Clockwork Orange." But all the cheapness of the production, as well as the over-the-top moments and acting are not a flaw here, but are at the service of the surreal atmosphere and messages that the film conveys. And there are quite a few, and if you don't allow yourself to be distracted by cheesy colorfulness, the movie will give you some interesting topics to contemplate. The symbolism of this film and the philosophy behind it could be discussed broadly, but I think it is better if you experience this unusual and, I believe, unforgettable experience yourself.

7,5/10

"The greatest western ever made...in Somerset"

Edgar Wright's official directorial debut, because for some mysterious reason his high school "Dead Right" doesn't count, is a parody of the spaghetti westerns, with an obvious emphasis on Leone, Eastwood, and even Morricone's music. The film is low(no)budget and the actors are amateur kids, as is the author himself, but you can already see all the elements that characterize his future masterpieces. From his trademark parody stories, through completely wacky characters and silly dialogues, to specific directing and editing, and refined sense of rhythm and detail. The humor is very reminiscent of Monty Python and, although it has some good and original jokes, it is mostly worn out and forced, but when you take into account the age, (in)experience and budget of the author, this film is astonishingly good.

7/10

I couldn't do it...

The television mini-series of six twenty-minute episodes, from the very beginning of Edgar Wright's career, turned out to be, at least for me, completely unwatchable. I watched some of his even earlier works and enjoyed them, but this surreal comedy was not funny to me at all, nor did I find anything worthy of attention in it. Not even the charismatic Simon Pegg pulls it off.

3/10

"2001: A Space Odyssey" meets National Geographic family drama

Superb photography and directing string beautiful breathtaking scenes, accompanied by excellent sound. But the atmosphere, which irresistibly reminds me of Kubrick's "Odyssey", no matter how powerful it is, is not enough to keep my attention for two and a half hours, if there is no story that would complement. I guess many have written entire quasi-philosophical essays on the symbolism and meanings of this film. Some are probably right for the most part. I'm not going to get into that. Technically, the film deserves a maximum rating. Essentially, the film is bullshit, Malick's divine art-masturbation. Beautiful, but pointless and unspeakably boring.

Technically - 10/10 Overall impression - 3/10

Everything's connected

I did not expect much from this show, considering the fact that it is a BBC America production, not BBC UK, and because of tons of negative reviews on the web.

When I start a show, I usually watch one or sometimes two episodes a day. The first season of this one I watched in one breath. I didn't even pause it for the bathroom or making coffee. Eight episodes of 40 minutes each felt like one bit longer movie.

The second season, of ten episodes, is done differently and is not as original and hypnotically addictive as the first, but its witty fairytale style quickly won me over.

Ignore fans of Douglas Adams who bash this show for not being faithful to original novels. It is not faithful, that's a fact, but it does not make it a bad show. On the contrary. Adams is tricky for screen adaptation. I don't think anyone has succeeded yet. He's too impossible and abstract. "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency" is just roughly Adams, but it's great in every way.

Any attempt of concise retelling is pointless, because this show is one big puzzle, a labyrinth that perplexes more and more and twists happen every few minutes. "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" is much more specific and linear, but I dare you to explain what it is about briefly and that it makes any sense.

If you liked "Misfits," "Happy," "Preacher," "Good Omens," or the new "Doctor Who", and if you like Douglas Adams, but you're not an obsessed fanatic, this is a perfect show for you. But if you expect a verbatim adaptation of the books or if you like linear stories, better skip it.

9/10