Chaos

I read an article on this man they named Chaos and the story behind him. That's what peaked my interest in seeing this movie. I knew there would be violence,(that's a no-brainer). I just wasn't prepared for anything like this. I actually couldn't move at one point during the film because I was in shock. I felt ashamed and horrified that I was watching this all alone. I've always believed that horror films or any film for that matter doesn't have to be bloody or gruesome to be effective. This director seems to get off on the fact that he made the most brutal film ever. Can you explain this to me? Is he actually proud of this movie? He had the nerve to say it will save lives by watching it. I would love for him to elaborate. All I know, when making a movie, especially one that revolves around such a serious matter, you should use some common sense and decency. I feel sorry for the two young women who decided to take on these rolls. I'd like to know why they chose to exploit themselves. Not a really great way to start your career. If I ever see them in anything again, I'll never get those images out of my head. The movie is for people who love shock value. It's more than disgusting. It's just very very very sad. I pity the director of this film. He doesn't care about the message he's sending. I could see that when I watched all the extra's of the movie to find out what kind of person made this film. It's disturbing!!!!

This movie already annoyed me before it even properly started… The first screen depicts a written message in which is stated that hundreds of girls get abducted and sexually abused every year, and that the producers of this movie wish to illustrate these crimes as graphic and realistic as possible in order to warn parents and potential victims about the dangers of meeting up with strangers. Seriously, shenanigans like these make me furious because A) you honestly don't need to show explicit rape footage and sadist murder in order to pass the message of kids having to be wary of strangers and B) it's 300% hypocritical! If you want to make a raw and shocking exploitation movie, that's perfectly fine, but don't pretend even for one second that cinema like this has a deeper social moral or an educational task to fulfill. Perhaps my rant is slightly exaggerated, but pretentious messages like that at the beginning of a film irritate me enormously! Furthermore, I honestly don't understand where all the commotion with regards to this film comes from. Some people (mainly the haters) call it a rip-off of Wes Craven's "Last House on the Left", whereas others (primarily the fans) refer to it as an unofficial remake of that same exploitation landmark. To me personally it's just another entry in the "rape & revenge" sub-genre of exploitation cinema that is admittedly a lot more similar LHOTL than most titles. Throughout the 1970s and early 1980s, and then once more in the years 2000-2010, there were dozens of movies cashing in on the success of LHOTL (and, ironically enough, Wes Craven stole the idea of Ingmar Bergman's "The Virgin Spring") so why would one more form a problem? The only significant difference that "Chaos" has to offer is that it goes another step further when it comes to depicting misogynous cruelty and repulsive murder. Two young girls, Emily and Angelica, have planned to go to a rave in the woods, much against the will of Angelica's mother. They arrive so early that the rave hasn't even started yet, so they tag along with a guy named Swam who claims that he has ecstasy in his cabin. They end up in the hands of Chaos and his accomplices. Chaos is a dangerously deranged psychopath and rapist, and the poor girls' final hours will be excruciating and miserable. Then, in good old LHOTL tradition, the rapists somehow end up at the parents' house and another violent confrontation ensues. Yes, the violence is sickening. What Chaos does to the white girl's nipple and especially how he kills the black girl is truly disgusting and will make even the most hardened horror viewer squirm in his/her seat. But let's not exaggerate, neither. "Chaos" is not the most depraved film ever made, even though I'm sure that is what writer/director David DeFalco likes to believe. Kevin Gage, who's biggest moment of glory was to appear in Michael Mann's "Heat" in 1995, gives a more than solid performance as the titular sicko Chaos, but in spite of that he will never grow out to become a cult/exploitation icon like Krug Stillo (David Hess) did after "Last House on the Left".

One day, a wrestler (count the number of the letters in his name and you will still come up with a higher number than his IQ) decided to plagiarize Wes Craven's mediocre debut from the 70s... and in less than a year he vomitted out this "film", a horrifyingly dull attempt at offending and probably "shocking" everyone. A very failed attempt, needless to say. Wrestler, keep this in your "mind" (if you had one): one can only offend and shock when one represents something. A mosquito won't offend me, a worm won't shock me... why should I react any differently to a sad attempt by a pathetic subhuman wrestler? Just ignore him and in time he will die, alone and forgotten, and hopefully with "Chaos" being the only "film" he'll ever have made.

I viewed Chaos at the 2005 Flashback Weekend horror convention in Chicago. The Q&A session with the writer/director David DeFalco, producer Steven Jay Bernheim, and actor Sage Stallone was, strangely enough, before the film. After seeing the movie, I have a hunch as to why. DeFalco and Bernheim were very adamant at pushing this film as the "scariest and most brutal film ever," one of seemingly hundreds per year that reaches for that title. They then proceeded to bash the film they openly admitted influenced Chaos, Wes Craven's horror classic The Last House on the Left, calling it "unrealistic" and "hard to watch," to the point where there was an obvious change in the dynamic of the audience. Because DeFalco, who considers himself a "true horror fan," pushed so hard for people to like this film, I feel obliged to push the other way.

Chaos is by no means an original film. I've seen this movie made countless times with only slight variations on the plot. It does, however, have a few brutal, almost redeeming scenes that do make it worth seeing if you are a true "grindcore" or exploitation movie fan. Both of these, the first in particular, are what the movie will most likely be remembered by. They are both particularly well done, especially with the realistic looking blood and gore effects and the reactions of the female leads. This is, however, my last positive comment on the film.

Each character has been given a set of stereotypes that they must stick to, and none of them transcends their limitations. The girls in Chaos are as mindless as the girls in any other slasher or horror film, which is disappointing after hearing for half an hour about the "realism" of the movie. The police are the most generic characters in the movie, and the Sheriff's racism is extremely played out. Even the parents, an inter-racial couple that you'd think would be the least definable, stick to their stereotypes.

Chaos (the main "bad guy") and company are introduced in a completely unnecessary opening scene that does nothing but establish their characters as low-grade criminals. For a character that is supposed to come across as an example of the ultimate evil (he calls himself the devil at least once), Chaos is shown as a petty thief.

There are a couple inconsistencies in the plot, specifically timing issues. At one point, what seems to be a several minute walk for one group turns into a ten minute car ride for another.

Additionally, the ending feels entirely tacked on. I know that I wasn't the only person in the audience who laughed at the audacity of the director, after placing so much emphasis on realism, to include such a slapstick, somewhat comedic, ending.

In the end, I left the theater bewildered, but for all the wrong reasons. I usually am not so picky about "realism" in horror movies, but after hearing the director make such a point about it, I felt compelled to judge Chaos on it. I really want to believe that DeFalco has what it takes to make a good, original movie, because I saw potential in a few short moments. Unfortunately, after hearing the director speak so openly about this film as not only being his masterpiece, but set to trump The Last House on the Left, a film that has become a staple in any horror fan's collection... well, I'm not too hopeful that we're going to see anything too original from him.

Later this year will see the release of Eli Roth's Hostel, another film billed as the most brutal movie ever captured on film. Maybe a truly original "grindcore" film really is around the corner, but I'm not holding my breath.

Chaos is a film that sets out to show evil, and it succeeds. It shows brutality, torture, death, and rape (in that order) via explicit imagery. Wait, though, because that's not a compliment. The filmmakers have hence patted themselves on the back and continue to congratulate themselves by constantly regurgitating "most brutal movie ever" with every other breath as if repeating it enough makes it true (it's not, and it won't).

Congratulations, you've shown evil … now what are you going to do with it, DeFalco? The answer is nothing. Thus, Chaos ultimately contains nothing beyond its desperate bid to shock its audience. And therein lies the reason not to see the film, and it gives me very little to criticize.

Imagine two grown men, purchasing a new computer, opening the box then declaring, "Mission accomplished. It's installed." What is an obvious step that's not worth the time of most intelligent human beings to mention since it goes without saying, is the stopping point for DeFalco and Bernheim (the director/producer of Chaos). Watch the featurettes on the DVD as these men persist that they've reached a revelation that any idiot figured out way back when Ingmar Bergman made Virgin Springs.

The film is essentially a carbon copy of Wes Craven's Last House on the Left with minor alterations (translation: this exploitation has already been exploited … where are the shocks again?) Girls go out, get involved with the wrong people, find themselves trapped, and suffer at the hands of monsters in human flesh -- and suffer greatly, they do. The two positive changes from Last House being: 1 a relevant title (but did we really need a character named "Chaos"? Oh wait, a Wrestler wrote this … nevermind) and 2 the police are no longer complete incompetent idiots. Bland, racist nobodies, sure.

The meaningless changes? Inconsequential details -- names, exact methods of torture and/or death, number of villains, races of the characters, a pointless new intro to the villains.

Now the negative changes: 1 - the opening crawl laughably out of place on this film, a film that actively seeks to exploit the sufferings of other human beings. Watching, I was reminded of a staple gag to the comedy genre -- you know, the scene where a character is warned in such extreme detail that the audience gets a kick out of said character's silent reaction. This film is that joke, and we are the characters being warned.

Negative change #2 – the film's ridiculous ending is another joke straight out of a comedy. After the Last House chainsaw moment, the father of the victim has Chaos at the business end of his shotgun. In bursts the cops! They raise their guns, issue a warning, and when the father refuses to respond they blow his brains out. After which the wife grabs a gun off one of the cops and shoots the sheriff. The deputy wrestles the gun away. Chaos picks up the father's shotgun and shoots the deputy, and he's in control again. I literally laughed out loud at this scene. Cut out the gore, and this could be a scene for the next Pink Panther film with Steve Martin.

As I said, the film sets out to show evil and, indeed, on the most shallow level evil things happen in the film, complete with effective gore that non-horror fans may have trouble stomaching.

According to DeFalco and Bernheim, that appears to be their entire agenda. To which, I would pose the question, "So, why should I get a picture of evil from you two, when I can go across the horror aisle and get better pictures of evil, more pictures of evil, along with some intelligent observations, commentaries, philosophies, artistic interpretations about said evils for the exact same price?"

Why would I want to buy a t-shirt from you two, when I can get a frickin' car from someone more intelligent?