Ten Dead Men

I could only get about 3 minutes into this video. Most of the reason for this is because it is, in fact, a video and not a film. This is an important distinguishing feature, because the use of a video camera here has made the piece look amateurish despite some decent camera work and far above average editing. Everything is there to make this a mediocre film... except the film. A better camera and an actual professional sound crew would have made this video something worthy of the video rental vending machine I got it from. Unless you are a film student and want to view this from the point of view of a director/ editor, then I strongly recommend that you avoid spending any money on this at all.

I watched 10 Dead Men following some of the comments I had read here on IMDb. I agreed with some of them and found this to be a (very) low budget revenge film albeit with some interesting scenes, (mostly the fight scenes).

10 Dead Men borrows from quite a few gangster films e.g. Reservoir Dog in the use of costume and flash backs as this is not necessarily a bad thing.

The makers have tried to add parts to the movie such as using Hellraisers Doug Bradley as a narrator that I felt were a surprise and welcomed.

This is by no means the best acted film ever but at times shows promise, (without giving too much away). Worth a watch if you can find it but probably only the once.

This flick was sold at a horror convention due the name Doug Bradley. Horror geeks do know who he is, pinhead from Hellraiser. Naturally, by using his name the producers thought it would sell well. Doug isn't in the flick at all, he's just the narrator.

It even got nothing to do with horror, it is more a mafia flick were one is taking his revenge for killing his girlfriend. 1O people were there so ten men had to die. This is a British production and by doing so you have to dig the accents used. But it's all understandable. The last year I have seen a few revenge flicks coming out of the UK but this one here isn't that brutal. It's rough and merciless but I have seen rougher flicks like for example A Day Of Violence. Still, due the merciless fight scene's it isn't for the easily offended. The red stuff do flows but the torture is done off screen. So it's easy to see that it was a low budget. Personally I expected a little more from it but it fits in the line of British mobster revenge flicks. And there's a bit of relieve of fight scene's due the goofy couple Parker and Garrett.

Gore 1/5 Nudity 0,5/5 Effects 2/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 1/5

I never give up on a film, but I jacked this one in after only 20 Min's just now. Bad camera shots, equally bad editing and sound post production. The score is one of the worst I've ever heard. I really could knock up up better one right now (even the instruments/sounds used are cheap ass midi tacky rubbish).

And to cap it all, (bearing in mind this is meant to be a hard bloke sorta film), it's only got Lee Latchford-Evans from a crappy British Village People-esquire pop band called 'Steps' that destroyed the airwaves for a good ten years or so.. trying to act hard/gangster. Even if your not British and don't know who he is, it's still not gonna sit right.

I get the feeling the whole thing is devised and made by inexperienced, retired cage fighters still high on after show testosterone fuelled steroid binges.

This film is so utterly dreadful that I couldn't finish it. It's obvious that the "actors" were just martial artists plucked from a gym and had no acting ability whatsoever. There's been no story development past whatever gangster films the writer/director and producer decided to use elements of and lastly there's a voice-over ... which made me cringe every time I heard it, and insisted on telegraphing the story.

The story is not so much conveyed to us, but dictated to us which is just sloppy. Didactic films are not the way to go here.

It's at that point I stopped the DVD and checked out the IMDb. Guys, you proudly proclaim that this is your 40th film together. Did you actually bother learning anything from the previous 39? Things that are essential in film-making such as story, character, frame composition, lighting, sound design, music and directing? It's obvious that while you have the talent (or luck) to get projects off the ground, you've no idea about how to execute a film.

In summation, either watch a bunch of really good films and learn to see how they work ... or just stop now and let other people have a go. I really hope this isn't representative of your body of work but i've an odd feeling it is.