Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Slashers' started by DVD Connoisseur, Nov 26, 2005.
Dvdmaniacs has a review up.
Cheers, The Chaostar, I've just checked it out. It's pretty much spot-on, in my opinion, although I didn't personally mind the acting. I've seen worse and I didn't sit down with expectations of a quality drama. The level of acting comes with the territory, although I know there are exceptions.
I hadn't realised that the presentation was non-anamorphic as I'd viewed the film on my old 33" 4:3 television and thought it looked great. On a larger, widescreen television or projected, I'm not sure how it would look.
Interesting to read about the actresses. Must admit, as I watched the film I wondered if they knew what they were appearing in!
SaviniFan, go on, buy the alternative cover! You know it makes sense...
If I could watch before I buy, I would definitely be interested but $30 for a blind buy? No thanks. I spent $28 on the King Kong tin and that's something I REALLY wanted. You do have my interest perked up, though.
I just ordered this from MachiavelDVD.
I've posted in the other thread around here on this film why I think this flick is pretty much garbage. Crap acting, just a bigger budget re-make of NutBag (did Palumbo really write a new script for this?? If so, it was a waste of time...), shock-for-shocks sake scenes with children, and nowhere near as nasty as they would leave you to believe. Dead girls covered in blood and blood-splattered walls don't exactly equal disturbing for me. Henry and Maniac this isn't.
Glad I didn't buy the flick, as it would have definitely ended up on half.com.
Thanks for playing devil's advocate, Kam. I had my credit card in hand (again), trying to convince myself it is worth a blind buy. I'll hit the "indie" video stores here in town and rent it before I decide.
Yeah, I do like some "shocking" exploitation films myself (Cannibal Holocaust comes to mind, and I can even appreciate the great FX in Mordum), but to me, this really doesn't have much to offer. I suppose half of the blame can be put on the marketing team who pimped this as being so shocking, no one would release it. There's a couple scenes that are in bad taste IMO, but it doesn't really make it shocking.
And you can't even say it has great FX...one reason I was really amped about this was ToeTag would be doing the FX and this would have an actual plot (OK, so it didn't, but...). There's only one truly kick-ass gore scene. Like I said above, most of the gore is related to blood-splattered walls and naked chicks covered in blood. In fact, the film actually cuts away on most of the kills. You mostly just see the aftermath. This doesn't factor in to myself liking most horror films, but when you promote so much nastiness, it sorta does.
It's also kinda funny that they promote the horror celebs as being a big part of the film. Outside of Tony Todd, who had a nice scene, the rest are completely useless, and if you blink, you'll probably miss them.
I give the film credit for its final 20 or so minutes for being rather engaging, but everything before it is nothing more than NutBag (guy finds hooker, guy kills hooker, repeat) with some kids thrown in, and a badly developed "killer has a girlfriend" story thread. Definitely worth a rental though...your mileage may vary
I don't know why this film doesn't appeal to me. Films meant to shock are fun when they were done in the past, but I seem to have less tolerance for ones made today. Older exploitation films just seem kinda funny in their way, while newer ones strike me as mean. Daft I know, but maybe it's just that I feel that aiming to be "shocking" by showing hardcore gore is rather old hat. It's still effective for me in the context of a good story (Irreversible), but as pure spectacle? I don't know, I can't muster much interest for some reason.
Still, due to thsi thread I hoped on to DDD to see what they wanted for it - and it's not there. Only the smaller sites have it, and they happen to be the sites with high prices. As someone else said - $30 for this DVD? No thanks. I can get two or three other titles that i really want for that money, rather than plunk it down on a single film I may or may not enjoy.
I wish these new FX gurus would settle down and make another "The Thing" where their effects will be remembered in a better context, rather than the tired "psycho kills women in gruesome ways" so called "story line".
Nick can take his DVD and fuck himself with it.
For $30 even if it was good(and it's not) he's got some balls to try and sell an single disc non-Anamorphic DVD at that price.
In fact this pricing and amount he is cashing in on hype is more ground breaking then this film or anything this guy will do in his life.
Next stop....porn director, as it is of my opinion he likes to think he's making a film but really just wants girls who would never get naked for him get naked for him and insert it into his films to totally disconnect you from any sort of story that was going on.
He was given an awesome budget for this type of film to do whatever he wanted with, that is something that NEVER happens and he made this crap. He's a douche bag forever in my book, I don't care what he does. He won't see this kind of freedom or budget again....well maybe if you keep buying his DVD with multiple covers at that price.
Well you do have a point Skank. After all, we bought a lot of Criterion titles for just 23$ from DDD this November... 30$ is insane for a non-anamorphic single disc.
I must be in the minority. DVD of the year????!!!! You have got to be kidding! This is the biggest piece of sh*t I've seen this year, next to CHAOS. Don't get me wrong, I like a good sleazy movie every now and then. But why do the new directors of horror now a days feel like all they have to do to make a horror movie is ramp up the violence and bloodshed. And add a controversial scene or two. I guess this movie was made for people under 25. Oh well, enjoy kiddies
I Bought and watched M-S-P last night. Not as great as I was hoping for. Yes, there is plenty of blood and for a low budget flick, I was impressed by what was accomplished. You could do lots worse. The biggest problem is living up to the hype. just reading the short blurbs on the DVD cover would make you think this is more than it is. Maybe I'm jaded at this point, but I was not shocked. The violence toward children was unexpected and rarely seen in cinema, but wasn't enough to disturb me or consider this a masterpiece of terror. The positives were some very interesting music by Zombi and The Giallos Flame, homages to Halloween, Texas Chainsaw Massacre part 2, and perhaps Henry: POASK, good photography, and a decent acting job by the lead actor. As soon as Fred Vogel made his cameo, though, I felt like I was watching an AU film, and I didn't like that. I should have listened to the naysayers who told me to save my $30.
I got around to watching this one over the holiday weekend, and you can chalk me up as another one who wasn't impressed at all. The worst part of this film is that it's just plain boring. Being a fan of Devil's Experiment, Flower of Flesh & Blood, Psycho: The Snuff Reels etc, I never thought I would be saying that a film like this is tedious, but MSP achieves it no problem. It was one of those viewings that I kept looking at the time counter just hoping more then 5 minutes passed, since it just seemed to go on for an eternity and lacked any of the charm (for lack of a better word) that the previously mentioned titles had to hold my interest.
Where is this envelope pushing brutality and gore? Like KamuiX mentioned somewhere, most of it isn't shown, we just see the lead up or aftermath. Aside from a scene or two, what IS shown isn't anything amazing or praise worthy, imho.
And the acting? awful!, especially the dude who played "The Photographer". It just helped to suck any lingering enjoyment from this flick.
It's a shame I had to spend $30 on this one, I would not recommend anyone else do the same.
I just watched this tonight, and agree. It was boring, and the gore wasn't anything I haven't seen. I did find the scenes with the children to be wrong and uneccesary though, especially that scene with the baby. Just downright wrong.
I thought you would've liked this one man. Sorry you paid so much to not like it. I thought it was great cheesy fun. On the other hand, I wouldn't recommend anyone getting Nutbag...that was bad.
I've yet to see this but just looking around the web I see that this review web site picked it as the horror film of the year.
After having read a reveiw of this a couple of weeks ago I've been very interested in seeing it. From what it sounds like and what I've read, I think I may really enjoy this one.
Shit! I ordered this the other night before checking back to this thread. I live in Canada and ordered from Xploited, so I wonder what my chances are of actually seeing this get through customs. I told them to send the tamest cover, but I didn't realize there was a company in Canada selling it. Damn!
I wouldn't even try to order this from the US. I find it hard to believe that customs would let this through, but who knows? Myabe they'll miss it.
I just watched this one tonight and man is it a big improvement over that piece of crap Nutbag. There's a couple of things done in this movie that really surprised me, and made me squirm a bit, but I can't say it offended me that much. Some of the kills were pretty damn well done too. Not the greatest film I've ever seen, but still pretty enjoyable as long as you aren't easily offended.
I watched this yesterday, mainly because of that top ten (plus I didn't have to pay to see it), and I find it hard to believe that the IGN guy even saw M-S-P. It was a very average movie at best I thought. The acting was terrible. At one stage, the main guy starts grunting or growling or something at someone, what hell was with that.
Anyway, I thought Wolf Creek was my favourite for 2005, and has some similar things, so just wanted to point out something with the two movies.
Murder-Set-Pieces - $2 million
Wolf Creek - $1 million
MSP and WC are almost like two opposites. MSP seemingly went for gore only, and WC went for everything but gore (good acting, direction etc). Watch Wolf Creek and this back to back, and you will see how great it really is in terms of filmmaking for a low budget horror. It think people who disliked Wolf Creek due to lack of gore, will find what they wanted in M-S-P, but in getting gore, you'll lose out in just about every other department.
The IGN reviewer having this above High Tension, Cannibal Holocaust (what was doing in there anyway), Wolf Creek, Saw II, The Devil Rejects, and even Land of the Dead, is a joke. (I assume he didn't see The Descent too)
IGN: "Ultimately, MSP is an amazing film that will offend and disturb almost everyone who manages to view it. That alone makes it worthy of being the best of 2005—but the fact that it's so well made only serves to cement its reputation as king of last year's horror films."
The first line perhaps shows what POV he's coming from, but then saying "it's so well made" - come on, that can't be serious, unless it's maybe only the gore he's talking about. It's not hard to offend someone, that takes no talent, but disturbing, it's hard to be disturbed by a badly made movie.
Yeah KamuiX, I thought it was funny with the horror celebs too. I noticed that Tony Todd, Ed Neal, and Gunnar Hansen, all got a higher credit than most of the cast (all except the main actor IIRC). Perhaps shows the director didn't care too much for the acting side of the movie, with 'name' people's cameos being more important.
hehehe, anyone spot pornstar Crissy Moran too?