The Scary of Sixty-First

While the giallo influence may have been intentional, it didn't land for me. The conspiracy-driven plot combined with ritual horror was more frustrating than eerie. The constant tonal shifts, including the off-putting audio choices, made it feel more awkward than unsettling. I kept wondering if the weirdness was part of the charm for fans of this style, but it just didn't click. If you're into offbeat horror that pushes the boundary of strange, it might be for you, but I found myself distracted by how rough it all felt.

Even with its strange premise, it felt like it was trying too hard to shock rather than build suspense. The Epstein conspiracy angle didn't add depth, and I kept waiting for something to pay off that never did. Overall, it's a miss for me.

This movie is outrageous, purposely offensive, gross, stupid, and overflowing with conspiracies and I absolutely loved every minute of it. I am not sure I have laughed so hard in my life as I did to some of the more outrageous scenes. I can only assume the bad reviews here are from prudish folk who either wandered into the wrong film or just are not capable of understanding a joke, albeit, a wildly offensive one.

If you love goofy conspiracies (Epstein, Clintons, etc) and can stand an offensive joke and some seriously whacky sex scenes, and would like it all wrapped up in the style of a 70s Italian slasher flick, you will love this movie.

Neither suspenseful and self-aware enough to be a gallo film nor clever in its psychological distress of the stripe of Argento, nor as conspiracy-addled as Eyes Wide Shut (despite the material lends itself to a serious search-no Aquino, no Wexner Ohio police force, none of the threads re: Epstein's being a tapped gifted student the likes of Sarfatti; an episode of Subliminal Jihad will take you much further). Nor is the film willing to hurl itself into experimentation and formal editing proper (a Brakhage-esque experiment in conspiracy qua audio-visual editing, like a Project Wandering Soul meets Paul McCarthy, would be genuinely interesting). This is a film that loses its thread early on and lapses into clichés that do not embrace their being clichés, which means the film refuses to be self-referential. It loses the thread in a way that is similar to Jacques Rozier's Maine Ocean, but is not as smartly edited or funny. This ends up looking like the director made a poor film not as a critical exercise with which to playfully challenge but because they simply could not make a good film. The sole saving grace is, at certain points, the lighting. A pity, because the Epstein matter lends itself to cinema. Go watch Francesco Rosi for much more accurate and affecting cinematic portrays of conspiracy. I do hope the director's subsequent film takes up the challenge of making a genuinely good film.

The movie should have been a cool psychological thriller. It started well but became incoherent. There was no explanation to why things were happening. People just started acting crazy for no reason.

And rather than focusing on the story/legend /conspiracy, they were more focused on meaningless and irritating sexual activity.

Terrible movie. Acting and dialogue was so terrible the audience was laughing. Tried to do an Eyes Wide Shut x American Psycho thing, but it was like a high schooler's tribute. Was looking forward to it being shot on film, but it was done terribly. Half the shots didn't even come out and were used anyway. It's clear this entire movie was just to showcase that Nekrasova is a sexy little freak, as the clearest and most thoughtful shots were her spitting in co-star Madeline Quinn's mouth during a (completely unnecessary to the plot?) sex scene. The ONLY redeemable part of the entire film was the score by Eli Kessler, which was subtle but powerful at the same time. Incredible musician.

See this movie but only if you stream it, dont give this any more money lol.