Necromentia

Demons, suicide, necrophilia, transcendence through drugs and mutilation, all ingredients to whet the appetites of any self respecting fan of nastiness. Necromentia is a film well stacked with the good stuff and it has the right intentions to use it, but when all is said and done it comes in beneath its potential. It has the structure of a sequence of linked vignettes, the sequence of events avoiding a linear timeline in favour of unwrapping the mystery of how everyone is connected. A hip approach that film-makers have been fawning over since at least Pulp Fiction, it works here because everyone is connected and there isn't too much of randomness to things. The structure makes it fairly fun to get to the bottom of things and the ride is made all the better by the style on display, this is a very visual film with some sweet morbid imagery on display. The palette is predominantly dark (lots of shadow, grey and cold metal), the sets and shots cluttered and the art direction focused on chains, hooks and tools of pain, it's a horrific world on display and one so overpowering that the flesh tones and lighter colours of its characters come across as alien, an intrusion that inevitably leads to horrors as the darkness of the world around interacts with the flesh of the characters. If only the film had substance and emotional heft to support its style, but it sadly doesn't and the characters are a significant part of the problem. The acting is perfectly reasonable, with Layton Matthews conjuring an inscrutably sinister presence, Chad Grimes grimly determined and mentally frayed enough to do anything and Santiago Craig appropriately twisted and slightly pathetic. The trouble is that the film has a tight cast with most people connected, and pretty well everyone is so twisted, so tainted that empathy is impossible. The lack of balance wouldn't be so bad, since the film is clearly aiming to be something of a deeply macabre side-show, but in a film where no one is likable and the emphasis is on nasty stuff going down, things need to be seriously, impressively messed up and in Necromentia, they come close but no cigar. The visuals have imagination but lose their impact after a while, whilst the gore is kept mostly to a bit of splatter, skin carving and intestine play. The scenes are generally brief and not quite convincing, grisly but not grisly enough. So in the end the film falls somewhat short, a bit too much frustration making some of the cheaper looking scenes more noticeable and the overall hellish ambiance less interesting or effective than it could have been. This means that in the end the audience can't connect with the characters and isn't shocked by the grue, thus ends up slightly unmoved by the whole affair when it becomes apparent that it has little to offer beyond its ideas and atmosphere. Still, its watchable enough and a decent little independent effort, so a fair 5/10 from me..

The plot: A man seeking to resurrect his dead lover runs into a shady occultist who claims to be able to help him.

Necromentia is clearly one huge homage toward the works of Clive Barker -- Hellraiser, in particular. As a huge Barker fan, I was both excited and a little disappointed. The film is grotesque, gory, and beautiful, but almost everything in it is directly "inspired" by Clive Barker, making it a bit less original than I might like. Still, it has some truly striking visuals, and some scenes that you might remember long after the movie ends.

Necromentia is slow-paced and atmospheric, and people who are more used to modern, MTV-style filmmaking might end up being bored. The budget is clearly very low, but I thought they did an excellent job with what they had. Sure, some of the set design was a little underwhelming at times, but I was not nearly as disappointed as many other people seem to have been. There are many twisted and disturbing scenes, some of which end up with a very absurd, surreal vibe. Although not really a candidate for "most disturbing movie ever", it still deserves an honorable mention.

There some original ideas here, but the themes are as old as dirt, and, admittedly, becoming a bit clichéd in horror movies. If you're looking for something more than a Hellraiser clone, I can understand how you'd dislike this movie. Despite its issues, I still enjoyed it, and I think that other Barker fans may, as well.

Woow.!!!The Funniest movie i have seen..Its so funny that @ the end you feel like throwing away the monitor.The horror stuff was real funny,a ghost or a monster with metal equipments who sometimes suddenly starts eating human flesh.I think it is a movie for high thinkers as it was no where near my head.The pig head man seemed to be a suicidal ghost. I had to fast forward in the middle,so i am not sure if i missed something real good..

Sorry folks(for those who liked it).I found it funny rather than scary.Specially those inspired glimpse and scenes from Grudge,Ring etc.Anyway you can watch and laugh for a while before you break the TV Set.I am rating is 3 because it made me laugh for sometime..

I love the idea of this movie but the logistics don't work and that kills the final product for me. Told in a Pulp Fiction piece-it-together style, it tells the story of love, betrayal and resurrection but leaves out some fairly important information. How did the parents die? Why does their will not provide for adequate care of their children? And even *if* you're a junkie, how, when you run an underground scarification business, do you NOT charge your clients enough to survive on? Seriously. That ran through my head throughout the whole movie. Also - how do you cut off a client's finger and just continue on as if nothing happens? For me, this shows that no matter how much thought went into the movie (and it's an interesting premise), in the end Reginald choose cheap gore-points over an actual vision. The movie just...ends without a major plot point resolved.

The performances work well and the direction is decent. The pacing needs tweaking so as not to allow the viewer to actually think about the plot holes. While consistently a little too dark, the movie looks fantastic which is why I kept watching after the questions started popping up.

The pay off isn't worth the time invested. Worse, you really need to pay attention and that makes the ending even more disappointing.

Gotta admit, I was pretty excited to check this movie out. Combine the weird cover with a positive user comment here that said it's one of the sickest flicks he's seen, plus seeing a couple stylish screens of the film....I was ready for some Necromentia. Son of a bitch.

The story plays out as this anthology dealy, with basically three characters all interweaving with one another in some way. And to be honest with you bozos, it's nothing special. I'm already forgetting how they did connect, and I must say, that's a good thing. Instead of describing each character and his dilemma I'll just say the film revolved around revenge, love, redemption, and some silly nilly torture and necromancy.

Thinking about the flick I really can't think of anything truly memorable. The film even though wasn't my cup of tea, I can see that it was a labor of love. It's camera-work was stylish, the make-up alright, and hell, even during the credits they had cool symbols scrolling with the names. The acting and writing was all very mediocre, and at times boring. Not a good thing for only an 82 minute flick.

I'm a sucker for sing-a-longs, so that scene with the suicidal pig man....that was some good entertainment. Instead of going down this silly necromancy, demon realm (in a dumb tunnel) thingy, they should have maintained the focus on the truly bizarre. As that pig man scene was something altogether different and well-done.

Necromentia isn't anything I'm recing out anytime soon. The story was kinda dull, the characters unlikeable, the writing weak, but the flick had a touch of love, a splash of style and a sprinkle of originality that shows that the film-makers do have some promise.