[go: up one dir, main page]

    Kalender veröffentlichenDie Top 250 FilmeDie beliebtesten FilmeFilme nach Genre durchsuchenBeste KinokasseSpielzeiten und TicketsNachrichten aus dem FilmFilm im Rampenlicht Indiens
    Was läuft im Fernsehen und was kann ich streamen?Die Top 250 TV-SerienBeliebteste TV-SerienSerien nach Genre durchsuchenNachrichten im Fernsehen
    Was gibt es zu sehenAktuelle TrailerIMDb OriginalsIMDb-AuswahlIMDb SpotlightLeitfaden für FamilienunterhaltungIMDb-Podcasts
    OscarsEmmysSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideToronto Int'l Film FestivalIMDb Stars to WatchSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAlle Ereignisse
    Heute geborenDie beliebtesten PromisPromi-News
    HilfecenterBereich für BeitragendeUmfragen
Für Branchenprofis
  • Sprache
  • Vollständig unterstützt
  • English (United States)
    Teilweise unterstützt
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Anmelden
  • Vollständig unterstützt
  • English (United States)
    Teilweise unterstützt
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
App verwenden
  • Besetzung und Crew-Mitglieder
  • Benutzerrezensionen
  • Wissenswertes
IMDbPro

Things

  • Video
  • 1989
  • Unrated
  • 1 Std. 25 Min.
IMDb-BEWERTUNG
2,9/10
1770
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Things (1989)
Body-HorrorHorror

Ein impotenter Ehemann, getrieben von dem fanatischen Wunsch, ein Kind zu zeugen, zwingt seine Frau zu einem gefährlichen Experiment. Das Ergebnis: Die Geburt einer Vielzahl monströser DINGE... Alles lesenEin impotenter Ehemann, getrieben von dem fanatischen Wunsch, ein Kind zu zeugen, zwingt seine Frau zu einem gefährlichen Experiment. Das Ergebnis: Die Geburt einer Vielzahl monströser DINGE.Ein impotenter Ehemann, getrieben von dem fanatischen Wunsch, ein Kind zu zeugen, zwingt seine Frau zu einem gefährlichen Experiment. Das Ergebnis: Die Geburt einer Vielzahl monströser DINGE.

  • Regie
    • Andrew Jordan
  • Drehbuch
    • Barry J. Gillis
    • Andrew Jordan
  • Hauptbesetzung
    • Barry J. Gillis
    • Amber Lynn
    • Bruce Roach
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • IMDb-BEWERTUNG
    2,9/10
    1770
    IHRE BEWERTUNG
    • Regie
      • Andrew Jordan
    • Drehbuch
      • Barry J. Gillis
      • Andrew Jordan
    • Hauptbesetzung
      • Barry J. Gillis
      • Amber Lynn
      • Bruce Roach
    • 52Benutzerrezensionen
    • 35Kritische Rezensionen
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • Fotos12

    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen
    + 6
    Poster ansehen

    Topbesetzung19

    Ändern
    Barry J. Gillis
    Barry J. Gillis
    • Don Drake…
    Amber Lynn
    Amber Lynn
    • Reporter
    Bruce Roach
    • Fred Horton
    Doug Bunston
    • Doug Drake
    Jan W. Pachul
    • Dr. Lucas
    Patricia Sadler
    • Susan Drake
    Gordon Lucas
    • Tortured Man
    Bruce Hamilton
    • In Dream
    Daryn Gillis
    • Reporter #2
    Allison McGinnis
    • Reporter #3
    Jackie Seaman
    • Doctor's Assistant
    Jeff Payne
    • Hanging Man
    Jessica Stewarte
    • Nude Lady
    Glenn Orr
    • Stretcher Boy
    Tom Hochman
    • Igor
    Arthur Wenner
    • Joker on TV #1
    Cyril Gillis
    • Joker on TV #2
    Sohail A. Khan
    • TV Victim #1
    • Regie
      • Andrew Jordan
    • Drehbuch
      • Barry J. Gillis
      • Andrew Jordan
    • Komplette Besetzung und alle Crew-Mitglieder
    • Produktion, Einspielergebnisse & mehr bei IMDbPro

    Benutzerrezensionen52

    2,91.7K
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10

    Empfohlene Bewertungen

    5Mike_T-Little_Mtn_Sound_Archive

    Either a 1 or a 10...I can't really decide

    I typically rate movies on personal grading system:

    (How enjoyable it was) + (How well it accomplished what the Director attempted to do) = Final Rating

    Now...for the first part, it's pretty simple. Did I like it? Was it enjoyable? Would I watch it again? This means lots of different things, as some movies are hard to watch due to their content but are nonetheless enjoyable and well made (well made being more the second part).

    The second part is much more subjective. It's easy to discuss differences between a blockbuster Hollywood production and a straight-up indie film w/ limited budget and fx. It's much more difficult to determine when it's a film made for the purpose of being bad. Some films completely miss the mark by taking themselves too seriously (ie making a seriously crappy film but believing it is true cinema). Then there are films like Plan 9, or Things, which are made with the express purpose of being bad. And when I say bad, I mean, like, REALLY BAD. Like, SO BAD that the viewer questions how any sane person could make a film. When it comes to Things, that exact scenario is what we are met with- it's a bad...REALLY bad...and intentionally so. That said, the film accomplished exactly what the director set out to do, so how can it be anything other than "very good?" Serious film elitists will look at 'Things' but rare it based on comparing it to other films. How can one of the trashiest films in history be graded under such rubric? The answer...it can't.

    Therefore, when I aggregate the scores, the film is DEFINITELY either a 1 or a 10. It is disgustingly bad...horrible...a travesty of a waste of the Super 8 it was shot on...despicable. But amazingly achieved in each way.

    If you're looking for a serious film to get in to, this is not the one for you. It is a '1.' If you're looking for a filthy piece of trash that is offensive to you as human and steals 90 or so minutes of your life, and offering absolutely ZERO redeeming value, then this is your '10.' If you don't know which category you would fall under, then assume it's a '1' and skip it. If you believe you might fall in to the latter, then here is your '10.' The caveat is that you will not get back the 90 minutes of your life you spent on this, so consider it dead to you.
    1jonathan-577

    This movie appears to have been a documentary...

    OK it's late and I don't have the energy to do it justice, but I am committed to telling the world about the 'Things' screening in Toronto this past Saturday. In case you didn't hear Things is the most hilariously incompetent and berserk movie ever made in Canada (NOT the worst though - that honor goes to 'Caged Terror' - competence isn't everything) and possibly the universe. It is mostly shot on Super 8 and basically involves some hosers drinking beer and wandering around the house. They are occasionally interrupted by an inert papier-mache ant with fangs - it doesn't seem to bother anyone too much that it ate its way out of one of the guys' wife's stomach - and 'newscasts' of moonlighting pornstar Amber Lynn reading cue cards WAY off to the side somewhere. There is one scene where a guy silently waves a flashlight around a bathroom for ten full minutes. Dialogue includes "Next time we go somewhere together I'm leaving you at home!" and "Does a toilet flush during a blackout?" Star Ray TV's legendary Jan Pachul shows up as some kind of 'mad scientist' and trumps everyone with his skeezing hyperbolic delivery even though he's basically playing the same mullet-headed boob as all the others. You can not believe that this thing cost two months and $30,000 to make. They must have bought a lot of beer!

    But the real show was the guys themselves. Most of the crew showed up for this, the 19 1/2 anniversary screening - which they said was the first time they ever saw it with an audience! The director was a modest soft-spoken guy, but the co-writer/'star' was very stoned and just could not shut up. He seemed to alternate between embarrassed, pre-emptive defensiveness and attempted good-natured embrace of the audience's howling contempt for their work - signified by him going "HEHHEH" very short and sharp and loud about every thirty seconds during the movie. When Trash Palace proprietor Stacey Case paused the tape for intermission Gillis insisted on telling everyone how much better it was about to get. (It really really didn't.) After the movie he took to the stage and wouldn't let it go; he talked so much no one could start the Q & A, and when the director gave it a shot he talked over HIM. He repeatedly promised to give everyone an autographed DVD (with extras!!) and to interview people for a 'documentary' they were going to do about the movie. Unfortunately both were sidetracked when - AFTER the movie had been over for about ten minutes - they went to turn the camera on and couldn't get it to work. Instead we got to watch three of these guys torture the camera in the corner for perhaps fifteen minutes while Stacey tried desperately to fill up the space. Finally the guy - who had been moaning about the turnout intermittently all night - stood on the stairs and yelled something to the effect of, "I mean I don't HATE Stacey, he's gotta make a living..." at which point the heretofore mesmerized audience came to the collective realization that they might actually never ever get out of there alive, so I did everyone a favour and started making strong ready-to-go gestures like standing up and putting on my backpack. Fortunately the stars all suddenly went out for a smoke which gave us a chance to declare the evening officially over.

    Marijuana is a hell of a drug. I feel privileged to have been a part of this event - now "Things" will have new layers of meaning every time I watch it, which I expect will be once or twice a year for the rest of my life. (And for the record, the free DVDs did happen, after I left...peace Barry!)
    2cheapthrills

    I've seen bad movies, but this takes the cake!!!

    I consider myself to be a bad film connisseur, but this movie is THE worst EVER!!! It's a badly made Canadian giant bug film, with even worse footage of former porno queen Amber Lynn edited between scenes as a reporter, reporting on things unassociated with this movie. Its a partial rip off of Evil Dead and Last House on Dead End Street, but without the charm of either. Watch at own risk,eh.
    1deheor

    I'm just trying to ease the tension

    This is it my friend. When you haunt video stores in the hope of finding the worst movies ever made you can stumble across all types of elements that can make a movie terrible but 'things' managed to combine them all to produce a film that is so bad that it totally represents the bottom of the cinematic barrel.

    1.Bad special effects. Check. The mutant ants (which seem to number in the dozens despite the tiny belly that they erupted from) in some scenes seem to be filled with green slime and in others, paper mache.

    2.Bad dialog. Check. This is one of those movie where everyone seems compelled to make noise no matter what they are doing. My favorite scene involves a man looking through cupboards and saying "Hummm" as he opens each one.

    3.Fully dressed Porn star. Check. Porn star and club owner Amber Lynne shows up as a reporter who spends the entire movie sitting on a chair and reading off cue cards. The remarkable thing is that in one of her first mainstream films, the set she is on has lower production values than any porn she had appeared in.

    4.Referrences to better movies. Check. The biggest mistake a bad movie can make is reminding the audience of much better films and "Things" seem to revel is discussing movies like "Evil Dead" and comments about "last house on the left"

    I could go on but the point has already been made. Of all the movies I have seen in my life this may actually be the worst. I know negative reviews will often cause people to seek out certain films but let me just say, watch at your own risk.
    1spetersen-79-962044

    Worst thing to come out of America's hat

    I am a bad movie buff. But "Things" made me hate all of Canada by proxy. It is seriously that bad. I watched it TWICE. Once with a buddy. (He has not visited my house since then, so he might not be my buddy anymore. I don't blame him, really.)

    Then I showed it at a get-together with about a dozen friends who also love bad films. My hopes were that their good spirits and jolliness would find some seeds of corn in this turn. They were game - they tried to joke and laugh at it, but in the end it was Man vs. Machine. And, sadly, "Things"'s mean-spirited stupidity and bad sound quality triumphed over my friends' willpower - by the end, their spirits were broken. All they could do was sit there glumly and say mean things about my mom.

    I am a bad movie buff, so I thought I "needed" to see Things. I was wrong. If you are a bad movie buff, and you're considering this, back away slowly. Trust me. You do NOT need to see Things. It is worse than Curse of Bigfoot. It is worse than The Creeping Terror. It might not be worse than the soul-crushing dreariness that is Theodore Rex, but it's a toss-up. Get out while you still can.

    I actually BOUGHT this thing, and it's sitting on my DVD shelf right now. It's making me dislike the movies that sit next to it on the shelf by association. It's honestly that terrible.

    Verwandte Interessen

    Jeff Goldblum in Die Fliege (1986)
    Body-Horror
    Mia Farrow in Rosemaries Baby (1968)
    Horror

    Handlung

    Ändern

    Wusstest du schon

    Ändern
    • Wissenswertes
      Jessica Stewarte, who plays the nude woman in the opening scene, was a real-life prostitute. Attempts were made to include her in 2008 DVD release, but she could not be found.
    • Patzer
      Much of the audio does not match what the characters are saying. Likewise, characters mouths frequently move but no sound comes out.
    • Zitate

      Don Drake: The next time you come with me, you're staying home.

    • Crazy Credits
      You have just experienced Things.
    • Verbindungen
      Featured in Half in the Bag: Summer Movie Catch Up and Things (2013)
    • Soundtracks
      Things Theme
      Performed by Stryk-9

    Top-Auswahl

    Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
    Anmelden

    Details

    Ändern
    • Erscheinungsdatum
      • September 1989 (Vereinigte Staaten)
    • Herkunftsland
      • Kanada
    • Sprache
      • Englisch
    • Auch bekannt als
      • Вещи
    • Drehorte
      • Toronto, Ontario, Kanada(The Amber Lynn sequences were filmed the North Star Media studio.)
    • Produktionsfirma
      • Left Field Productions
    • Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen

    Box Office

    Ändern
    • Budget
      • 30.000 CA$ (geschätzt)
    Weitere Informationen zur Box Office finden Sie auf IMDbPro.

    Technische Daten

    Ändern
    • Laufzeit
      • 1 Std. 25 Min.(85 min)
    • Farbe
      • Color
    • Seitenverhältnis
      • 1.33 : 1

    Zu dieser Seite beitragen

    Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
    • Erfahre mehr über das Beitragen
    Seite bearbeiten

    Mehr entdecken

    Zuletzt angesehen

    Bitte aktiviere Browser-Cookies, um diese Funktion nutzen zu können. Weitere Informationen
    Hol dir die IMDb-App
    Melde dich an für Zugriff auf mehr InhalteMelde dich an für Zugriff auf mehr Inhalte
    Folge IMDb in den sozialen Netzwerken
    Hol dir die IMDb-App
    Für Android und iOS
    Hol dir die IMDb-App
    • Hilfe
    • Inhaltsverzeichnis
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • IMDb-Daten lizenzieren
    • Pressezimmer
    • Werbung
    • Jobs
    • Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen
    • Datenschutzrichtlinie
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, ein Amazon-Unternehmen

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.