August Underground

This is one of the more "famous" exploitation films of the new century. Too bad it sucks.

It's about a psychopath serial killer who is followed by his friend with a bad video camera, filming his every move. There is no plot - we just see Peter, the killer, roam around and act like a jerk and sometimes kill people.

The most shocking part of this movie is the first 15 minutes, when we see a girl who has been tied up and tortured. Her dead boyfriend is in a bathtub in the next room. It's a fairly effective use of gory special effects and a chilling example of the hidden lives of serial killers.

Once they leave their house for the first time, however, the movie falls apart. After that, they just turn into stereotypical frat boys who wander around and do immature pranks and annoy people. The script is stupid and unrealistic. I have never seen a movie go from disturbing to boring quicker than this one.

The acting is terrible. Peter, the main character, has a super annoying laugh that I guess is supposed to be psychotic, but just makes me want to turn the volume down. We never see the guy holding the video camera, which is good because he mostly just makes bad jokes and acts like he has low self-esteem. They are more believable as pathetic losers than hardened killers.

The lesson of this movie is that psychopaths are actually lonely frat boys who are desperate for friends.

The "story" in this annoying little movie consists of home movies shot by one of two serial killers. The camera follows them around as they indulge in all manner of disgusting deeds, whether they're putting human victims through pure hell or just raising trouble in general. (For example, they act out inside a convenience store.)

Prefiguring the "torture porn" genre began by movies like "Saw" and "Hostel", "August Underground" works like a mash-up of "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" and "The Blair Witch Project", except that it *really* ups the ante in terms of extreme human depravity, and that it lacks any sort of craftsmanship whatsoever. It may be one of the most disgusting movies that this viewer has ever seen. Its fans may argue for its sense of immediacy, or the fact that it's so vivid and so committed to portraying filth on film. But it's still impossible to want to spend time with the characters here. Apparently, the movie *does* have some sort of script, by Allen Peters and director Fred Vogel, but it feels like it was ad libbed for its interminable 71 minute run time. The effects are plenty tacky, but still have the power to thoroughly distress an audience.

If one really wants to see a serial killer epic based in some sort of reality, they're much better off watching or revisiting "Henry".

Three out of 10.

This camcorder tape cant even be classified horror, and would be an insult to the outstanding horror directors to have it labeled as such. It is the result of two very sick and twisted depraved examples of individuals who think they can be the next Blair Witch producers. Nothing is further from the truth. It is a fine basis for them being able to commit a heinous crime and be able to present a defense of INSANITY. It would appear similar to the result of two freaked out, doped up teenagers who would next think of attempting to simulate the Columbine incident. I have viewed most of the top listed horror or disgusting films and would not even consider this to be in the running. As I started my comments, this is not even a film. And I would not give it the satisfaction of being something worth rating. I listed it as 1/10 because that is the least one can to to proceed with their comments.

It don't even fall in the category of the Guinea Pig series. Those can be seen for what they are. This is nothing.

what exactly is the point of this movie?

I just watched a little of it, and at first I was obviously disgusted. It's not hard for me to believe people watch stuff this extreme, but I at least would like to know what the point is. It wasn't even entertaining or scary, just disgusting. The director might as well try making real snuff films. It's obviously his real passion. Another question would be why exactly there's a minimum of 10 lines to a comment. I hate reading long comments anyway. But anyway, I guess i see films like hostel and the saw movies and I thought that was extreme, and then there is underground stuff like this going on. Sooner or later there will end up being real victims in movies. I mean honestly where can they go from here? I guess we all do wanna see things that disgust us and scare us to some degree that cant be denied, but I mean how far are we willing to go?

OK, I heard about this series of films a while back, and read up on the director, the production company, what they have done since etc.etc. I don't really have a strong stomach for violence, but i do like to be shocked. And, to be honest, it took me a while to get round to picking this ( the trilogy ) up and preparing myself for what i'd heard was a pretty shocking ride. I was quite cautious putting it on, and expected to either turn it off or fast forward at some point. well, what a let down. Granted, it is pretty vicious, but not in a way that is going to disturb anyone, at least anyone of a reasonable disposition. I can only see anyone really enjoying this if they are using this purely as a means to fulfil some sort of need for pointless aggression, which is just what this film is, pointless. I have given it 3 stars, and that is purely down to some of the dialogue being, and i am sure many will disagree, quite witty, and i am sure it was not scripted at all. i can't believe there was a script involved in this full stop. Also, the apparent lack of motivation for any of the events in the film could be considered interesting if it were handled in a more professional fashion. I believe the director quotes 'Henry; as one of his prime influences, more precisely the home invasion scene. Well, that scene, and film in fact, is pretty shocking, and i'd recommend that over this a thousandfold. I can't quite work out what the director was aiming to achieve with this, because a certain connection with the situation, or characters, is required to engage the audience enough to care about what happens, and this just isn't the case. you don't care, you are just waiting for the next shocking thing to happen to see if it repulses you, and quite frankly it doesn't do that. I started to watch the sequel, which appears to have a far more sexual motivation, but had to stop due to having something better to do, and i don't think i'll bother watching the rest.

I don't think vogel is totally talentless. He can't direct, clearly can't script a film and his acting sucks ( there seems to be a pre-occupation with ridiculing victims because of their weight, when none are anywhere near as fat as he is, which is quite unfathomable ) but put him with a team of competent, talented film makers and i reckon you might get something really good out of him. Having said that, avoid this unless you really feel the need to watch it, i expect the reasons that most people would want to see it are because of the supposedly shocking and outrageous violence. Well, it isn't shocking, and neither is the sequel ( of what i have seen ), only a bit sad and misguided.