Slashers

I watched it and though far from great it didn't exactly suck either. It's a B movie with decent gore it's basically "The Running Man meets Saw" I wouldn't be handing out any awards for this but if you have absolutely nothing to watch there is worse than this out there.

Slashers would probably do well as a theater play, though the audience would probably have been hard to find. But we'll get back to this in the end of this review.

First let me say that it was interesting to watch a movie filmed with only one camera, and from what I was told they didn't do any retakes at all. One take per shot, to create that feeling of live tv. The trouble with single take scenes is of course that any mistakes from the actors (or any other mistake) becomes even worse, and the acting here is on a low level from the start.

The story is weak and very predictable, and the characters are pretty lame, making the actors look even worse. The twist at the end (that seems to be a rule for horror movies) is very unnecessary in my eyes, I won't give it away but I'll just say that the story would have been better without it.

But what really made me feel less for the movie was that you really had to use your imagination to see more than what was shown. That's what I mean when I say it would have been better off as a play. In a play you are used to imagining that the scenery is just there to give you a general idea of how the scene looks, but in a movie I want the scenery to be complete. For instance, why did the characters say they where trapped in a room when the walls where only pieces of cloth hanging down from the ceiling, or maybe a paper-thin wall? Why did the characters stand a couple of inches in front of the bad guys without doing anything like trying to hit them or something, and why did they just watch when one of the characters where killed right in front of them? Sure, you could imagine that the walls where really made of concrete (or whatever), and you could imagine that if one of them would have tried something they would have been killed, but this was not what was shown in the movie, you had to imagine it for yourself.

I can't really see what kind of movie audience that would really like Slashers. The horror fans will be disappointed by the lack of story, the splatter fans will be disappointed by the cheesy gore and effects (or lack of them), and the fans of japanese style ultra-violence are way better of with a film like Battle Royale or something. But if you're just out to see a different, easy-to-watch and violently funny movie, Slashers could be worth the 2 hours. But not more.

My vote is 5/10, i.e. barely worth the time.

Slashers is some kind of social satire horror movie that introduces us to six characters being in a Japanese game show where they have to survive the night against three different killers. Honestly the idea sounds kind of fun and I was curious to see how this movie would turn out.

First of all let me say that the acting is really not good, most of the protagonists act pretty bad and that can be annoying to endure for 99 minutes. Also some of the dialogue was really dumb and probably even annoying but I would not rule out that this was made intentional. Exactly how some of the nudity was made intentional, two of the female characters get their shirt ripped off and the one girl has quite some screen time topless with hands over her breasts. It is even said in the beginning that nudity makes the characters more popular which is probably a nod to reality TV shows like Big Brother. The movie also has some great gore with some decent effects and probably the most memorable and best thing about the movies are the killers. You have three different killers that act at least a little bit better than our protagonists and they have different methods to torture the six contestants and I liked that. Overall the movie is decent and if you can bear the acting you might have some fun with it. [5,4/10]

A true work of Genius. I found "Slashers" to be a magnificent film. It's social comment was fantastic. I loved the concept of people killing one another for money. I also liked the idea of the women having to remove their clothes to become more popular, a great satirical comment about today's "Big Brother"/Jodie Price generation. Some of the dialogue was so clever, for example lines like "those dollar bills that you worship do not bare the face of the lord" really reflect the true intellect of the writer. This film was a great piece of social satire, reminiscent of George A Romero's "Dawn Of The Dead."

10/10

6 people (Sarah Joslyn Crowder, Kieran Keller, Tony Curtis Blondell and more) have agreed to be a part of a Japanese reality show in which they are locked in a creepy house and stalked and killed by 3 sickos (a wonderful performance by Neil Napier and an alright job by Christopher Piggins). Whoever gets out alive wins millions and millions of dollars. But who will get out alive? Maurice Devereaux does a much better job at writing than directing. The script is surprisingly original and smart.

The film is filled with bad actors. However, there are a few gems in here: Kieran Keller, who has done nothing and has nothing planned was actually pretty good IMO, and Tony Curtis Blondell is up and rising. But the best, IMO, was Neil Napier, who played 2 killers very well.

Out of all the "Reality Show" horrors, this is one of the better ones, along side with "My Little Eye" and Kolobos.