Bone Sickness

Bone Sickness is an obvious no-brainer from the start. With a title like that, it's likely anyone gearing up to watch the movie has certain expectations about what follows. The seasoned horror viewer might. Or rather, it should be an obvious indication, had it been a better written movie to explain the details of the sickness that has inflicted one young man (and the home-made cure appears to be a mix of ground bone marrow and ground meat of corpses) in a low-budget zombie movie that has the feel of friends who shot somewhere in a small town where permits weren't necessary.

But the gory details and probably are likely to earn this movie mention, despite their being something of an afterthought of intensity (as did the gratuitous nudity), at least according to the director in the Uncle Creepy interview that is included on the DVD. For anyone who doesn't find this a selling point, at most Bone Sickness should be watched in the company of less-than-sober friends purely for riffing entertainment.

this is the lamest thing i've ever seen..i suppose the comments on it such as "what a great old school zombie movie" and other junks are written by people involved in the production.i cannot imagine that someone who considers himself as a reasonable person can give a higher vote than 1.actually i do not think the movie deserves even 1,it's mostly like -10. there's no plot,there's no acting,there's no even one decent character conversation,the zombies are awful,the filming is the worst part.the camera man is putting his heart into the attempt to film almost everything else except the actors. yes,there are fountains of blood and piles of guts,which look totally fake.there's only one decent scene in which the sick husband spits worms.nothing else. ...it's just a crap,shot in someone's backyard,and i've wasted more than 90 minutes of my life to watch it.don't make the same mistakes...

This starts out normally with a twenty-something woman in New England taking care of her husband who has some kind of debilitating bone ailment with no known medical basis. Through failed trial and error the wife gets desperate enough to seek out her husband's mullet sportin' friend who brews up his own concoction from body parts of the recently laid to rest in the nearby graveyard that he works at.

"Bone Sickness" gives its obvious cues and nods to Fulci's "City of the Living Dead" and "House by the Cemetery." This is the kind of account that only "makes sense" to those neck deep in the horror genre...and with a history of mental disorders to boot. If the audience really attempted to sit down and think about if point A matches up with point B, or if their anatomy teachers were lying to them, madness will probably take over. Can creepy crawlin' bugs really nest inside peoples' faces underneath easily ripped off skin and also come vomiting out of mouths, who knows? It can make for interesting visuals, but as more and more time goes by, the events taking place seem to get more and more diluted and a little more adventurous than the filmmakers can scurry to handle.

"Bone Sickness" is an excuse for carnage and catered towards surrealism. The atmosphere drips, slimes, smells and ultimately disgusts like any old school horror movie enthusiast would crave--myself included. This is about excess and exaggeration, though the pacing is something that needed tweaking as the flow--even with all its head slicings, neck gashes, gut munching and nudity going on--doesn't steadily captivate one's attention span or put one right there in the mix. Though it's still more effective than, say, "Das Komabrutale Duell."

The sound effects range from Italian horror style to stock haunted house. The special make-up effects can be effective, plenty and downright juicy; though due to budget limitations you might see the occasional recognizable food item as well as more "frozen" victims than you can count that just stand or lay there ready to be taken alive through premeditated gore traps. This is unconventional cinema on the low-budget end--shot on video, poor lighting, camera humming--though this isn't, for instance, like "Tetsuo," "Premutos," "Schramm," "Naked Blood," "House on Tombstone Hill" or "Bad Taste" where the production values were pitiful, but the out-there stories were translated with more refined and captivating creativity that could lock you in without looking back or questioning why this or that was done or if you should hit fast-forward to speed it up.

I've recently read a review of this picture that said: "The acting in this low-budget, independent zombie film is actually surprisingly good. All of the actors and actresses (who get completely naked!) actually give great performances and it is obvious that they really worked hard to make sure they delivered the best performance possible. Not only was there great acting..." I had to laugh. Look, I'm all for giving kudos where kudos are due...but the acting in this picture was not good...it wasn't even decent. Here is a problem with indie movies...people actually think this caliber of acting is good. Acting is just as important as lighting or sound...if its bad, the movie suffers. And it does...suffer.

Like I said, I'll give kudos where they are deserved: the gore and makeup effects in Bone Sickness are incredibly good, given the micro-budget it was shot with. Makeup artists should take note of Paulin's detail and execution. Excellent job in this category.

Another area this movie excels is in the nudity. I don't know how Paulin managed to get multiple cute girls completely naked...but he did, and I don't think they were strippers. Gore and nudity sells horror films...and the nudity in this film is a great bonus. Too bad the lead girl has to lay down to show her boobs...they are huge, and should have been shown with her standing up, not on her back. I suppose they must sag, and this was the most flattering of positions...but still, they are too big to not see standing up. The red head in the film had an especially nice figure, and she got fully nude...excellent! It's ashame that other than the nudity, gore effects, and makeup...the movie slouches to a 1 star picture. The camera they shot it on wasn't very good (certainly not HD), and the DP and lighting designer (if they had one) didn't know how to optimize picture quality. There were also far too many slow motion effects, which looked horrible and digitized--if it looks bad, don't do it, unless you absolutely have to. Paulin uses slow-mo nearly a dozen times...and they all look like crap.

The sound was passable, but still suffered from your typical no-budget film issues: blips, background noise jumping up and down, inaudible dialog...I don't imagine they used a boom once (I could be wrong).

Paulin...take my advice. Go to Hollywood and be a makeup artist--you'll do quite well for yourself. Don't direct pictures. Yes, they may sell because your gore and nudity are awesome...but the movies, storyline, acting, lighting and sound need a lot of work. It's really sad that you not only cast yourself as one of the leads, but it's even sadder that you're the most natural actor in the cast (which isn't saying much).

Sorry about the bad review. I think you need to drop directing, and focus on what you're good at: gore and makeup.

This film looks bad, sounds bad, acted bad, edited horribly and even has the worst gore i have ever seen. The blood was like kool Aid. I have no idea how this movie was ever sold. Brian Paulin can't write, direct, edit, act or even light a scene.

You can always hear static and the sound of the cameras motor.

Stay away from this film. It is no better than some 12 year old's youtube movie.

He can't edit a film the movie has no L-Cut and terrible scene changes.

Don't think this is some unfair review by some jerk. I love b-movies i am a fangoria fan (JasonVoorhees665) this movie was just plane bad.