Ross Boyask & Phil Hobden have created, in this movie, a work so awful that it is utterly compelling.
If you remember the dreadful photo stories from the girly teen comics of the 80's, (so brilliantly parodied in UK adult comic Viz) then imagine a moving picture version with violence, and you will be most of the way toward understanding the feel and presentation of this film.
The storyline itself, is a poor version of The Crow, without all the coolness of course, and without the exceptional feeling of empathy for the main character. Where The Crow had dark, brooding, Gothic brilliance, with a classic and memorable score, this movie failed at everything... except at being bad, that is. If revenge story lines were drinks, The Crow would be a fine vintage Champagne, whereas 10 Dead Men would be p*ss flavoured water.
Where it fails in the storyline department, it fails equally as spectacularly in the action genre department. The fight scenes are patently contrived and badly executed, and the gore effects brilliantly poor.
The acting itself is so appallingly bad, that the viewer is forced to consider the possibility that Boyask abandoned the traditional auditioning route, and instead opted for the less orthodox method of approaching likely looking characters in bars, and asking them if they wanted to be in his movie. Seriously, the acting is so bad, that at times even the walking looks strained and put-on.
Doug Bradley's narration seals the deal. It comes across as a badly written afterthought; an addition to the moving picture storyboard. It's almost as if the director realised that the acting talent within the cast pool was utterly incapable of putting the rather tired storyline across, and threw it in as a necessary evil. The movie is however, all the better for it.
And therein lies the brilliance in this movie. It is so unintentionally bad, that it compels you to keep watching, right up to the rather predictable and clichéd ending. One needs to look to the deliberately awful genius of Peter Jackson's 1987 movie "Bad Taste" to see this sort of dreadful. Where movies deliberately made this bad miss the mark of awful by the very act of trying to be such, this movie succeeds in spades entirely by accident... It is that which makes this movie worth watching.
I would have loved to have given this movie a 10 vote, if for no other reason than the maker's sheer lack of shame for releasing it. In the end, I gave it one star, because awful REALLY IS the best description for it... and that's why you should watch it.
If you remember the dreadful photo stories from the girly teen comics of the 80's, (so brilliantly parodied in UK adult comic Viz) then imagine a moving picture version with violence, and you will be most of the way toward understanding the feel and presentation of this film.
The storyline itself, is a poor version of The Crow, without all the coolness of course, and without the exceptional feeling of empathy for the main character. Where The Crow had dark, brooding, Gothic brilliance, with a classic and memorable score, this movie failed at everything... except at being bad, that is. If revenge story lines were drinks, The Crow would be a fine vintage Champagne, whereas 10 Dead Men would be p*ss flavoured water.
Where it fails in the storyline department, it fails equally as spectacularly in the action genre department. The fight scenes are patently contrived and badly executed, and the gore effects brilliantly poor.
The acting itself is so appallingly bad, that the viewer is forced to consider the possibility that Boyask abandoned the traditional auditioning route, and instead opted for the less orthodox method of approaching likely looking characters in bars, and asking them if they wanted to be in his movie. Seriously, the acting is so bad, that at times even the walking looks strained and put-on.
Doug Bradley's narration seals the deal. It comes across as a badly written afterthought; an addition to the moving picture storyboard. It's almost as if the director realised that the acting talent within the cast pool was utterly incapable of putting the rather tired storyline across, and threw it in as a necessary evil. The movie is however, all the better for it.
And therein lies the brilliance in this movie. It is so unintentionally bad, that it compels you to keep watching, right up to the rather predictable and clichéd ending. One needs to look to the deliberately awful genius of Peter Jackson's 1987 movie "Bad Taste" to see this sort of dreadful. Where movies deliberately made this bad miss the mark of awful by the very act of trying to be such, this movie succeeds in spades entirely by accident... It is that which makes this movie worth watching.
I would have loved to have given this movie a 10 vote, if for no other reason than the maker's sheer lack of shame for releasing it. In the end, I gave it one star, because awful REALLY IS the best description for it... and that's why you should watch it.