Painkillers

A surgeon fooling around whilst driving crashes his car, killing his young son. He then suffers from a very rare form of PTSD, the only thing that can stop his violent shaking is drinking fresh human blood! I really do not know what the writer was thinking when they came up with this idea. Yes, it is a different, modern take on the vampire story but a ridiculous one at that. I found the acting weak, as is the film as a whole. It plays more like a TV drama than a horror movie. Thankfully it is reasonably short.

The pain start when you begin to watch it and by the end you wished you would have just killed yourself....

'Painkillers' aka 'The Incredible Shaking Man' has a remarkably novel premise, in that it is an entirely toothless Vampire movie that in actuality is no less pallid than the iconic, blood-sucking Mythos it tries so desperately hard to reinvent! 'Fashionably be-stubbled, Daytime TV Handsome Surgeon' suffers a paralyzing, palsy-inducing emotional trauma after surviving a tragic auto accident, only to discover that this ceaselessly excruciating neurological malady is temporarily assuaged by the consumption of human blood; the steamy fresh, wholly organic, ikky-poo variety mind you, absolutely NONE of that Vegan/hybrid muck, thank you very much!!! On the lugubrious evidence of this anemic, torpor-inducing travesty, one sincerely hopes that the timorous filmmaker's egregious plan to spawn a similarly gutless Zombie movie remains no less stillborn than their execrable concept of an entirely fright-less re-make of 'Fright Night', oh...

6/10 is not a bad rating in my opinion. There is no huge drama or suspense. I think this was never intended. Occasional moments of violence flow but don't over dominate the story. There is no certain conclusion to the film. And if you watch it you may share my opinion it does not need one. The uncertainty of life and addiction does not need one. I thought it was very well acted by the main actor and the actor playing the sinister role. Was this intended as an example of addiction in a different premise to show it is not a choice of life of it or just the situation of a character in an almost impossible to escape or both? I don't know if it is one or both of them. Or maybe just a different take on vampire films? Whichever way what is given to you is a film which is in no way entertaining. It is gruelling in its horrible story of a man who has not made wrong choices in his life though feels he has. It is unclear for some from the offset of opening scenes. If I had done his actions in the first scenes I would have blamed myself. But I don't blame him for his actions at the start. That put you in to his psyche from the start. I would blame myself for what initially happens at the start of the film. But I in no way at all think he is guilty of anything and it is just a terrible event. That, I think, may be the intent of the filmmakers. If so that is very deep thinking of an uncontrollable event that leads to a mental torture and then into addiction to blank out the pain. I could imagine myself unravelling very quickly in to a non confirming life only controlled with the use of anything, in this case blood (as a metaphor?). And again can see if someone else in that situation had suffered itto think they should have no guilt. I found this very interesting and quite upsetting. It opened more unanswered questions than it answered. Almost like life itself. I can't give it higher for me 6/10 because it is not a huge blockbuster that will never be forgotten. That causes me guilt. I need a fix. Blood!

Sorry, I just had to end on a joke. Amusement is sometimes my fix. Luckily! I was taken by this movie a lot. I hope you do to if you decide to view.

Painkillers: A new take on the Vampire Mythos. Opens with a woman being attacked by another (crazed) woman in an alley. The victim's wrist is cut with a knife and the assailant starts to drink her blood. Surgeon John Clark (Adam Huss) is involved in a car crash in which his son is killed. Physically he recovers but for no apparent reason he suffers from great physical pain. He meets a stranger, Herb Morris (Grant Bowler) who offers a solution to his suffering - blood. Clark dismisses this but his debilitating condition makes him realise that blood is indeed a palliative.

The film convincingly portrays the breakdown of a surgeon, the only way he can stop shaking is to ingest blood. But when he returns to work he is caught drinking waste blood after an operation. A doctor of course would have access to the hospital blood store but eventually discrepancies would be noted. These vampires operate in daylight and are not deterred by garlic or crosses, nor do they possess eternal life, but to function "normally", drinking blood is a necessity. Morris offers to supply Clark but it's at a cost, either he joins in hunting society's pariahs and using them as bloddanks or he pays a high financial price.

Effective horror showing that a vampire doesn't need a cape and fangs to be scary. This is the very banality of evil in action. But an evil which has been visited upon these Vampires, the great pain demands blood. Director Roxy Shih has created an interesting addition to the Vampire Film Canon. 7/10. On Horror Channel.