XX: pasión por el horror

Four short horror films, no linking narrative, although there is some decent Svankmajeresque stop-motion animation serving as transition:

A boy loses his appetite after getting a glimpse of something mysterious; a woman discovers her husband's corpse on the day of her daughter's birthday; four attractive young people discover an Ancient Evil (TM) in the wilderness; and a mother deals with the discovery that her nearly adult son is disturbingly violent and yet everybody worships the ground he walks on.

Production values tend to adequate-high, and effects are acceptable, but there are small issues with each section that leave the overall film feeling amateurish. They're generally small issues, and I expect the filmmakers to work them out for their next projects.

Narratives are disappointing, generally from the lack of resolution-- although inconsistent characterization and unimaginable motives plague the second, making it the weakest. I can enjoy unresolved horror shorts in general, but it doesn't work here, not with the way these films are implemented; there's too much dragging along at each end, suggesting a reveal that never materializes.

The first was my favorite, and I found it generally creepy, although, again, the resolution was handled poorly; there were also some instances of poor acting, and too much voice-over exposition.

The "theme" of XX is apparently that all four films were directed by women, but there's not really any significance to that. If the title wasn't so eager to let me know, I wouldn't have realized it, and it kind of feels like painting a handgun pink for marketing purposes, a little dubious. Still, it's not a big deal to me, just a title. But after knowing, a few things stand out: the inversion of stereotypes for the parents in the first film; the unwillingness to commit to any crazy-lady characterization in the second, even though that's the only thing that would give the story even a lick of sense; the self-important and overly long soliloquy in the final film. (The only thing that maybe stands out in the third is that none of the attractive young people decide to disrobe, as they do so often in similar films.)

I'd say that the first film is probably worth watching, but I wouldn't bother watching past that. Not worth paying money for. Still, there's no reason not to expect good things from the filmmakers in the future, as they find some better scripts and improve their techniques.

I'm sorry to report that this year's "XX" doesn't quite live up to the great horror anthology that its trailer promises. This quarter of female-directed horror shorts is actually quite average, when considered together, and I'd give it a 6 out of 10.

Only the first segment is truly memorable — "The Box," adapted from a short story by Jack Ketchum. The directing and scoring is superb. (Seriously, the music is quite good.) The acting is also good throughout this segment, most especially by "The Strain's" Natalie Brown. She's a good actress and she's starting to grow on me. (And her memorable last lines here, which I assume come from the text of Ketchum's story, are weird and haunting.) This quarter of "XX" gets under your skin.

Despite "The Box" being capably developed and unnerving, however, there were no conventional scares at all. It hardly felt like a horror short; it was more like a particularly macabre and ambiguous parable. Nor is the story's mystery solved — it's left open-ended.

The second segment is largely a waste of time, despite being stylishly shot and scored. (Hint: it's got the same story device as "Weekend at Bernie's.")

The remaining two tales are more standard horror stories. I'd suggest they are somewhat fair at best.

I think I would recommend this only to the most well rounded horror fans who are in the mood for something different. And, even then, it might only be for the peculiar elements of "The Box."

First segment has a good premise. Lazy writing and uncreative filmmaking makes it really boring and the transition to the dream sequence is done poorly. Second segment is so far apart than the rest. It's not horror in any way shape or form. Third segment is using the traditional tropes of horror movie and it's well made. Unfortunately it is way too short for character buildings so I just couldn't care less about them. As for the fourth segment, It is definitely the better out of all. It has a chilling and dark tone and has somewhat more coherent story, had it been longer to further explore the topic it would've turn out a lot better.

The dolls and walking boxes inbetween the stories were much more unsettling than any of the four bland stories. I would rate the doll segments as a 6 and the stories as a 2 so overall a 4.

XX is an independent horror anthology that got a bit more press than the average due to it notably being advertised as one written, directed and being lead entirely by the fairer sex.

I have to admit this did interest me, women do tend to lead most horror movies but written and directed by? My interest was peaked, and I do love horror anthology films.

Telling 4 short tales separated by creepy stop motion animation it was worse than I ever thought it could have been. You see it reminded me heavily of The ABC's of Death (2012) which was an anthology I'd expected huge things from and ended up being one of the worst films I've ever seen. The stories were pointless, disturbing (And not in a good way) and just downright confusing, and that's basically what we have here. The tales aren't exactly what you'd expect, they aren't traditional horror or even alternative horror for that matter. They are weird art house films for the most part which are neither interesting nor scary. One of them simply isn't horror at all and the first story was just, well the whole thing is just terrible.

The third story was passable, the rest range from bad to absolutely dire. The films all female gimmick isn't worth watching this for, it's truly poor stuff.

The Good:

Story separators are interesting

Melanie Lynskey

The Bad:

3/4 stories are just awful

1/4 isn't even horror