Pig

This has more or less the exact same "plot" and has the exact same title as PIG (from 1998) made by Rozz Williams (former singer of Christian Death) and Nico B. ...Sooo...wouldn't this count as plagiarism?? Yeah I can understand this movie having the same title as you can't really copyright a one word title, but for having more or less the same plot ASWELL as having the same title....?? Surely that seems a bit "too much of a coincidence"...No? Did the creator of this movie really hope that no one would take notice?? Well too bad for them because I sure DID take noticed! Horrible! Get your OWN ideas instead of stealing others!

A psychopath's idea of fun is to torture and kill people on a ranch in the middle of nowhere. Seemingly filmed in one take, Pig is pretty much just torture, killing and degradation, with a slight twist at the end. Grim, mean spirited stuff. But effective. .

I knew what I was getting myself into before I started to watch this movie and so should anyone else, so I'm not going to even mention the violent content. It's a movie about a crazed killer, what do you think is going to happen!? In fact, I think Texas Chainsaw Massacre has a lot more graphic gore than Pig does. Perhaps what a lot of people have a problem with is that the main character is almost likable. Sure he's a sick twisted maniac, but thanks to Andrew Howard's fine acting he gradually becomes a 3 dimensional character that you begin to see is much more than just a brainless psycho. Every now and then there are glimpses of an almost regular guy here. A regular guy that just happens to be a blood thirsty animal. I should also say that ALL the acting is first class considering the subject matter and the fact that there's not much actual dialogue.

The single shot technique works extremely well. It gives us a sense of time and a good layout of his home and surroundings. This in itself is very impressive and should be applauded. The music is sometimes annoying and unnecessary, but it's not a major flaw. I also love the talk radio in the background, almost like a commentary on what we are witnessing.

All in all, a fantastic effort. Adam Mason is a director to be taken seriously. He is pushing the boundaries without relying on excess gore and expensive effects. He obviously has an excellent sense of nail biting tension without forgetting to deliver us interesting characters that force us to react to them.

I'll finish off by saying, the ending of Pig is genius!!

Adam Mason, I salute you.

My quick rating - 2,4/10. All this is? 69 minutes of watching some supposed psychotic serial killer demoralize some captors in the middle of nowhere. Scenery is great if you want to stare at a mobile home for that long. So terrible acting, pissing on a woman for no reason, cooking with blood, a pregnant captor acting like a two year old....that about sums up this movie. Oh, that other one minute? (yes, the "movie" is only 70 minutes which is hardly categorized as a movie) That other one minute is the only reason this gets a single point since I never saw the ending coming. Beyond that, horrible in every way. They skipped the killing to make it about a serial killer. The one person killed just, died from headbutts. Oops (yeah, he actually says "I didn't mean to kill her") I'd mention poor script, but I doubt there was one.

Adam Mason's "Pig" premiered free to all tonight, on bloody-disgusting, dreadcentral, and Twitchfilm. Mason was responsible for the mind-f*ck of a film "The Devil's Chair." as well as "Blood River." To call this a film would be liberal usage of the word. It's more of an experiment in the technical side of film making. There is no narrative, no character development, and honestly no purpose to the film. The bulk of the movie(70 minutes) was filmed in one take. If you explain this to the average movie goer, not only will they not care, but they most likely won't even know what you're talking about.

Now that I've explained that this isn't really a movie, but more of a talent showcase, let's delve into what worked for me. Knowing I was viewing one continuous take blew my mind for most of the film. The cinematography is nothing short of amazing after consuming that fact. Even more impressive is how they allow for F/X gags to be set up while the camera is running. A quick re-frame of the shot, allows for the off-screen crew to quickly set up the special effects. Some of the tricks used here were absolutely brilliant. Setting the kill in the bed of a pick-up truck, allows for them to make a quick cut to a wide-shot, while someone crawls on their belly, setting up the effects for the kill.

This isn't a movie to be enjoyed. In fact, I wouldn't recommend viewing this film to anyone unless they are not only an aspiring film maker, but interested in film making as an art form. It's hard to watch, and not because of the subject matter. While our main character prepares his "meal" the camera lingers on him, with his captive struggling in the background. This goes on for what seems like forever. A lot of the time, it made me feel like I was stoned. I knew something should be going on on the screen, but I felt so disoriented that I couldn't tell if I was missing something, or if that was just the way the movie made me feel. The acting is decent, considering there's not much coherent dialog, and that this is mostly happening in real time. The setting is believable, all-be-it a little bland. The music gets a tad annoying, with the same song being played in the back ground over and over.

If you're interested in becoming a film maker, and marvel at the technical aspects of a film, you may want to endure this experiment. You'll definitely be in for something original. But please, don't go into the flick expecting an enjoyable movie, because aside from marveling at the talent behind the camera, there's nothing to like here. Watch if you dare, and remember you've been warned.

http://liberaldead.blogspot.com