Change Your Image
smegthat
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Families Feud (2023)
How does this rate a 7 on this site?
"The Families Feud" (2023)
How is God's Divine Name does this have a rating of 7.0 on IMDb without trickery?
Okay, compared to a lot of the garbage I've been watching, this movie has a bit of brains behind it, but it is only there to say, "Hey, we know our movies, so give us a break, okay?"
Some Mafia-type goombas go deep into the backwoods to bury someone they whacked. Based on their reaction to the bagged-up body, it took them a LONG time to bury the body. Yeah, I know, don't apply real-world stuff to movies, but the level of rot they complained about wouldn't have set in if they buried the body within hours of killing the poor guy.
Anyway, while attempting to bury the body, a few Bigfoot, or Squatch (short for Sasquatch), hunters appear. They have a gun fight and one of the Don's army is wounded. The capo and his right-hand guy go for revenge. After offing the wounded guy. Go figure.
They end up captured, and the Don knows this.
Just so happens that the Don is under fire from another Mafia boss, who is attending the longest running poker game I have ever witnessed. But whatever. It's a movie, right?
You can see where this is heading. Things escalate. More Familia are sent in, and more hillbillies arrive. An all-out war takes place in the backwoods while the Don is fending off hired killers in the big city.
This is a really great set-up. Totally fumbled because the filmmakers must be Tarantino freaks and wanted to show their knowledge of film history as they work in endless references to infinitely better films of the past. None of these references are subtle. I. Mean. NONE!
These references are occasionally funny, but they undermine what could have easily been a "Southern Comfort"-type of situation. I would have loved that.
Instead, beyond the "slap-you-in-the-face" film references, you get poor editing and performances that are both over the top as well as being deeply rooted in simplistic cliches from both "Deliverance" and every crappy Mafia movie, up to and including "The Godfather" franchise. It doesn't work as a straight film, and it ultimately fails as a parody. A double loss.
How in hell does this movie have a rating of 7.0 on IMDb if not for padding by the cast and crew of this mediocre attempt? I mean, if they had played it straight, it might have been interesting, but as a cheap comedy, it falls on its face, even though it clearly had a reasonable budget to work with.
I picked this because of Anna Rizzo, from "Blood Pi". Again, she does a decent job here and, again, looks utterly wonderful with her cleavage deserving its own screen credit. I hope this lady finds some success outside of these crappy movies, but even in low-budget fare, she stands out.
Seriously, other than friends of the production skewing the score, this film deserves a marginal 6 for simply not being totally brain dead, but never a 7. A 5 or a 4.5 would be far more accurate.
It can be found on Tubi. And, no, I'm not advertising for them. They just have a lot of crap to watch. Including the old-school "The Partridge Family" series, which I watched the first episode again and greatly enjoyed in spite of it aging somewhat poorly.
This movie, however, is worth a watch if you just have to see the Mafia, hillbillies, and a touch of Bigfoot horror blended into a comedy that barely works 37% of the time. Be ready for a TON of jokes based on the most tired cliches connected with each overall category.
Killerhertz (2020)
What in hell were they thinking?
You know you are in trouble when you realize that the movie you are watching could only be helped by an appearance by Neil Breen.
"Killerhertz" starts with the credits running over a shot of Casey, our heroine, showing EVERY STEP of her walk from the water, across the beach, until she reaches her shoes, which have been front and center in the screen this whole time.
She answers her cell phone, acts confused, and looks over her shoulder to the shoreline.
Got that? Excellent!
Now forget what is arguably the best scene in the film (because you haven't learned to dislike ALL of the characters yet) because it is never properly addressed. Ever. That's over a minute of your life gone watching credits in a font borrowed from the late 70s.
Apparently, her mom died. Now, Casey has PTSD concerning the beach or having running water on or near her - whatever the hell is convenient for each scene. She freaks out over water dripping from a faucet in one scene, yet she walks through the rain without freaking out in another. (Yes, I understand, in real life, PTSD can be triggered differently depending on circumstances, but fictional movies should operate under their stated rules/concepts. "Killerhertz" refuses to commit, leading to confusion and nonsensical situations.)
Her boyfriend, Kyle, played by a Casey Affleck clone known as James Calloway (or Gino Wilson or Gino Meeajaun - take your pick), is an unlikable nerd trying to please everyone in his life, especially his successful daddy. He applies his study of energy transmitted by frequency waves to Casey's Mommy obsession and creates a "dead-a-phone" that could potentially allow people to speak with loved ones in the space around us.
Before this honestly intriguing premise can even get on its feet, Kyle is electrocuted by his own computer equipment during a scuffle with their flat mate, Edmund. Confusion ensues as Casey wants to get help for Kyle, but Ed, fearing the scandal would cost him a scheduled promotion, tries to stop her, but fails.
Casey finds herself being told by the police that she could be charged in Kyle's death. Unknown to the officer, Kyle, now a spirit, can manipulate energy which he uses to electrocute people, like the officer (among many others), which allows Casey to escape. Unfortunately, she is now wanted for a series of bizarre electrical deaths.
Kyle does a Max Headroom routine before possessing Edmund's body. Kyle's daddy shows up. Casey's large number of murder charges and legal issues are eliminated with one throwaway sentence. People die. That pesky, inconsistent PTSD issue figures into the climax (like you are surprised by this?).
As I watched "Killerhertz", I propped up my sense of disbelief into regions where oxygen is non-existent to give this movie a chance. Until the camera focused on the wide black (duct? Electrical?) tape used to outline Kyle's body. After laughing long and hard enough that I choked, I had to give up and start insulting the movie back each time it seemed to forget real people are supposed to watch this thing.
"Killerhertz" cannot make up its mind what it is about. Casey and her mom? The "dead-a-phone"? Using electrical systems for travel and attack, like in "Ghost in the Machine" (1993) or Wes Craven's "Shocker"? Body hopping like "The Hidden"? Disembodied assault like the Id Monster from "Forbidden Planet"? Pick one and develop it properly.
While you should not expect Oscar-caliber performances, you should expect something better than what sounds like an earnest attempt by strangers plucked off the city streets. No one in the cast is helped by dialogue that often sounds unnatural.
Full disclosure: I'd like to say that Haley Osborne gives the best performance in the film. Key phrase being "I'd like to". The fact she reminds me of Susan Swift (for whom I had a "crush" when I was a youngster) might shade my opinion. Do keep in mind I did NOT say her performance was great. With this movie, you work with what you are given.
Bonus questions for the filmmakers/writers: Why insist on your two lead characters being from America when they clearly speak with very natural English accents? Why is most of your movie dubbed in post which gives the whole film an unreal and unprofessional feel?
Even though the film was reportedly made for less than six thousand US dollars, "Killerhertz" misses every opportunity to be an interesting film to, instead, be like the character Kyle - it tries to please too many and fails on every count.
Nukie (1987)
Geez, Quit Your Whining Already
To all the whiny babies who think this is the worst movie out there, you should cork it until you have watched one hell of a lot more movies. Try "Killerhertz" if you want something worse. Oh, no, wait, watch "Toxic Schlock" and then get back to me.
"Nukie" is pointless, dull, pathetic, and scatterbrained, but just because Red Letter Media ridicules it, you don't have to follow in lockstep with them.
Need another title that is worse. "Demonic Tapes"! It is a moron listening to cassettes for 90 minutes!!! At least "Nukie" pretended to have some action, not some millennial twit listening to tapes and avoiding the phone. Oh, wait, that IS a millennial, just replace the tapes with crap music. And the guac toast. And artisan latte.
Get a grip, folks. "Awful" is a sliding scale, and you are NOT the freaking Gold Standard by which we measure things. You aren't that important.
Toxic Schlock (2017)
What Is This Thing?
Can I call a movie a POS here? If you don't know what "POS" stands for, well, we'll soften it down to "piece of stool", which is kind of more disgusting that the actual word, but it is still workable. And I shouldn't have used the word "soften".
"Toxic Schlock" is a new low point in my 50 years of movie watching. You want comparisons? Bill Osco's "Gross Out" is actually fun when put up against the film being reviewed here. Hell, anything written and/or directed by Scarlet Fry (AKA Walter Ruether) is better than "Toxic Schlock". Yeah, I'm sure most people have never heard of either, and there is a very good reason for that. They are pretty awful and seem to punish you for watching.
"Toxic Schlock" does not punish you; it doesn't care about you that much.
We have three main elements in "Toxic Schlock":
One - There are three eco-terrorist types who have stolen some experimental glop, and right from the beginning, we see one of the three drinking the green goop and pour it into the water on the beach. Don't even ask, because you won't find out, and after 20 minutes of the film, you won't give a flying fart.
Two - There is a family that consists of a rather portly transvestite, his weird "daughter" who talks in a mind-numbing breathy voice, and "Brother" who is someone, wearing a dog-like gimp outfit, who delights in anything horrible happening to the transvestite.
Three - We learn that the seaside community is being attacked by The Seaside Strangler, who is a naked guy wearing body paints who strangles folks. For no reason really. Even the pointlessly overlong confession scene doesn't honestly explain why.
We spend the first chunk of the film with the weird "family" in the beach house. They ramble about nothing for a while. Then gimp-suited Brother is brought into the room and mimes reactions to what is said as the other two talk for another long while. Then a framed photo of Hitler is kissed by the "daughter". If there was any real point to any of this, the dialogue did not communicate it. The dad/mom puts leashes on both "kids", and they all go for a walk. At night. With a strangler loose. As a viewer, you will be very okay with them departing. You hope the strangler kills them and then kills himself.
Abandon all hope.
Our three eco-terrorists stumble into the beach house. Peter, the one who was drinking the weird green goo earlier, tells the other two that the house belongs to his family. He takes great pains and goes to great length to impress this fact upon everyone, but you won't need to remember it because it is tossed aside quickly enough. After that, we listen to these three prattle on and on about whatever it was that they stole (the green stuff) and how they need to lay low and destroy their phones and pat themselves on the back for saving somebody from something by their terrorist act. Again, it does not and will not matter much in the end, yet the scene goes on and on and on and on until, like the "family" scene before, you realize you do not care what happens to these people as long as it shuts them up.
Eventually the weird "family" comes back, explain they won the house in a card game, and offer to rent rooms to the three complete strangers who have made themselves at home already.
The rest of the film concerns itself with doing damned little and showing every second of it. Odd characters come and go even though they do not impact the plot beyond becoming additional victims of The Seaside Strangler, yet the film forces the viewer to put up with these useless characters until the nude guy strangles them after they have had far too much screen time.
I have watched boring movies. I have watched movies that incite an active hatred towards the film. I have watched movies that made me fear for the future of humanity. This is the first time that a movie has made me aggressively not care. You are given zero reason to give thought to any part of the film. The characters are placeholders wrapped in pathetic attempts at edginess but have no depth, so you do not care what happens to anything or anyone. The events in the film mostly happen off camera, but they seem to have zero impact on any of the characters, so, again, you do not care.
The acting hardly rates being called that. The actors either try too hard to be wacky or come across as if they are just doing someone a favor and don't see any reason to make any effort at acting. The camera work tends to point the lens in the direction of the actors but the shots are so static that you hope for anything to break the skull-crushing sameness of every scene.
By the way, I would like to point out to the filmmakers that there ARE ways to keep the wind from drowning out dialogue on external locations. Please consider researching that before shooting another scene that sounds as if it were filmed during a freaking hurricane.
Do not take my review to mean that "Toxic Schlock" is so bad that it is a hoot to watch. Don't let the fact that Troma is connected to this film sway you. It lands like a thawed turkey on a dirty kitchen floor; it goes nowhere, and you only feel regret at the waste.
Les affamés (2017)
Could become a modern classic
I will not ruin this movie for viewers as it is just coming out.
I will say that this is the quietest and most subtle take on viral/zombie outbreak films I have seen. Three quarters of the film is mostly silence, but the more quiet things become, the more you strain to hear any noise from the screen. This is a good thing as it draws you into the very quiet world inhabited by the characters as they attempt to find a safe haven.
A number of the tropes associated with these films are here, but don't expect them to be by the numbers. This film applies fine twists and turns to what we expect to see.
It is glorious.
It is French-Canadian, so the dialogue is in French, but there isn't a whole lot to deal with, and the version I saw had English subtitles, so you should be fine.
It makes for a great film in general, but it is easily one of the best horror films I have seen in years.
Devil Rider! (1970)
Could be worse
Quick note: The girl's FATHER hires the private detective, not the mother. This error has been carried over from the synopsis in Michael J. Weldon's THE PSYCHOTRONIC VIDEO GUIDE.
Basic impressions: It's a Brad Grinter movie. For those who know that name, you know what you are walking into. For those who don't, run far, far away, unless you like groaning at a movie for moving slow, having low-to-no acting and action scenes that make you question the use of the word "action". It is inept, poorly lit, uneven in tone and basically awkward in most respects. The two highlights are the mother's overacting that makes you wonder if she is on the verge of hysterical laughter or if she found out just how little money she was getting for her one scene, and the father is played by the director/writer himself in a performance that makes soggy white bread seem perky in comparison.
Story: Pointless twaddle about a girl who is looking for kicks taking a ride from some local biker gang because she's bored. A bad movie ensues.
Questions: If everyone seems to be aware of this local biker gang, their members, AND the location of their camp, how is it that no one seems to have a clue about what the bikers do? Why would they stick a fairly competent back story for a fairly minor character in the middle of this mess when it would have made a better movie than this wreck? Why have the only reasonably smart character in the film pull one of dumbest moves, in the most ghastly disguise no less? (Yes, I know it was to move the plot, but, jeez, they could have done it a dozen other ways.)
Final comments: I have a soft spot for Brad Grinter films. No, it isn't the patch of quicksand referenced in film. There's just some element about his movies that compels me to stick around, just to see what weirdness he will throw in next. This is not as much fun as his BLOOD FREAK, but it still works well enough. Credit is due to him for making the biker gang act more like you would expect a gang to act during the final confrontation. Seriously, folks, do NOT go into this film expecting ANYTHING. Even then, you might still be disappointed.
The Crow: Salvation (2000)
I just don't get this whole "Crow" thing....
From the first clips of rapid-fire editing during the credits, I knew I was in trouble. Slide right into an electrocution scene that is all image and no reality, and you can see the screenwriters and director all thinking, "Yeah, this will get the MTV crowd hopping."
I will admit (and I'm committing a sin in the eyes of many, in my opinion, deluded movie-watchers) I never liked the first Crow film. It had all the elements for a seriously wild film, and it sold out. "Crow: Salvation" is the logical offspring of such a movie. This movie establishes the fact that when the first Crow film was made, some Hollywood suit had the franchise all mapped out in his/her head.
I will give the movie a few good marks. It is fast enough moving that you don't get bored until near the end. The violence is graphic, and does not lend itself well to making death seem like a "fun" thing to do.
And that's all that can be said. Pointless repeat of a pointless original movie, all aimed at people who think a soundtrack is reason enough to see a movie.
Cockfighter (1974)
One of those great films made before stars mattered
"Cockfighter" is not an easy movie. It doesn't have one of those carbon-copy scripts that you can write like cheap romance novels. It doesn't have characters that cater to what the stars think will make them look good. There is no spoon-feeding here.
Just re-released for sale on tape (and DVD), this film is now available again for those who like to watch a movie that honestly takes you someplace that few of us have ever been. Warren Oates plays a character who lives by a moral code much like the people in the pulp westerns and detective stories -- a man's honor is shown by his actions, and his willingness to see his convictions through to whatever end may come. After letting his pride destroy his chance of winning a high honor amongst cockfighters, he takes a vow of silence that will last until he earns that honor.
While the scenes of actual cockfights can be distressing, they are essential to showing the viewer the main character's struggle as well as his obsession. When the character's love interest is added to the equation, the story takes on an epic quality formerly reserved for tales of a knight trying to win the love of his lady and the respect of his peers.
Perhaps that may be giving the film too much credit, but I don't think so. While there are plenty of exploitational elements to draw a wide audience, the actual meat of the film is a man seeking redemption and honor.
Find this movie. Watch it. Enjoy it. And see if it doesn't stick in your mind a heck of a lot longer than the average contemporary "Hollywood" movie.
The Knack ...and How to Get It (1965)
What the heck is all the fuss?
Reviewers fell all over themselves to praise this film when it came out. I personally tend to be a sucker for good, wild British comedy. I wanted to believe the reviews.
Why did they lie to me?!? Oh, have no doubt that at the time this was wild and crazy and totally unlike just about anything out there. I can see that in the film and I can also see the whole generation gap thing playing itself out in there as well. I see all that was said to be in there, except for great performances and the wacky comedy.
I shall not try to comment on story or plot. This film doesn't even pretend that those elements matter, and they certainly don't if you should happen to see this movie. You're there for the "event" of the film itself. Other than Rita Tushingham's heavenly eyes and lips, there IS no "event" worth hanging around to see.
This is one of those films that should be viewed only in the context of its place in film history. It fails to survive the passage of time on its own merits. It is merely an interesting curiosity from the 60s.
On another, short note, the soundtrack is incredible. It makes the film worth sitting through.
Frozen Scream (1975)
One of those movies that make you say, "Huh?!"
Is this movie worth watching? That depends on your reason for watching movies. Do you like big budgets? Oscar-winning performances? Splashy production values? Rich character development? You will thankfully find none of that here.
The soundtrack was done in post-production so none of the voices seem to match the mouth movements. The story, what little there is of it, flops wildly about like a fish on the creek bank. The special effects are okay for a low budget film (with a budget of $10,000 or less). All of the actors seem to be drugged, and I am not talking about the ones who are supposed to be zombies.
But there are good points to this movie. It is incredibly short, so you can get on with your life quickly, faster if you use the fast-forward button. If you like cheese, this has a mountain-esque cheese factor. And, my favorite scene, a character takes great pains to close a door in one direction and a killer on the other side clearly has a door that opens in the opposite direction.
It's bad, but I doubt the makers thought it was a classic. If you love "bad" movies, you can't go wrong with this "chiller".