Girls Gone Dead

When did rambunctious rock and roll music replace collective and subtle horror movie synth and serve as the main source of suspense when something is happening? And for that matter, when did it become hip and fun to show dozens upon dozens of bare breasts and buttocks mindlessly in a horror film? Girls Gone Dead takes both of these things and incorporates them into a rather ordinary, yet interesting horror film, almost as if there is a good, successful film struggling to overcome the weight of the lukewarm one on top of it.

The story concerns Rebecca (Katie Petersen). a young woman who has been kept tied down with harsh restrictions and a tight religious upbringing by her mother. Rebecca and many of her friends, all of whom ex-cheerleaders, plan to vacation in Manatee Creek, a place where one of the girl's daddies owns a beach-house. When the girls discover Manatee Creek is a retirement community and there is almost no fun to be had. They get the bright idea to drive down to Daytona, Florida where celebrity Beetlejuice (played by himself) is filming "Crazy Girls Unlimited," a series where girls flash every part of their body in exchange for fifteen minutes of fame. Alas, there is a stalker who is repeatedly turning up in a red cloak and an ancient weapon straight out of a grim reaper novel, and the body count begins to start.

It takes the film a good hour before even a sign of a climax appears, but in the mean time, we are bombarded with shot after shot of gratuitous nudity. It wasn't long ago I saw Piranha 3DD, a film that had me wincing at the lack of intensity, depth, and interest. All those things had been traded for gutter-minded idiocy and unnecessary female nudity. I return to my original question; when did this become a regular addition in horror films to the point where few people address it anymore? Is it just assumed from the start that audience members who will eventually pay a nice amount of money to see a horror film couldn't care less about depth and structure but more about shallow and pointless nudity? When we are finally met with consistent kills, everything happens so fast, lacks credible suspense, and becomes no different than a number of slashers that already exist. When the film does start to get mildly deep and interesting is when dialog starts to come into play during the last act, but again, the film prefers to go the way of many other low-budget horror films. That way is quick cuts, no build-up, and relentless monotony.

The characters we are supposed to sympathize with are flyweight mannequins who talk in a way that perfectly mimics stuck up girls; with a sarcastic tone in their voice and a pause between every three or four words. The dialog is solely crafted either off of redundant swear words or miserably contrived efforts to be hip in such childish insults, uttered, again, by the flyweight mannequin characters.

Girls Gone Dead could definitely be rendered as an effective piece of horror by those searching for some cheesy escapism. More power to them and I wish them a pleasant evening of viewing. The film is certainly more surprising and a tad more interesting than most straight-to-DVD titles, not to mention, the special effects work is fitfully satisfying in some parts. Its problems stem from how easily distracted it gets with scantily clad girls, its lack of suspense, how long the entire thing takes to get going, and the indifferent methods it takes to try and engage the viewer. And don't get me started on the abundance of credit cookies the film breathlessly throws at the audience after the show should be long over.

Starring: Katie Peterson, Caley Hayes, Shawn C. Phillips, Ron Jeremy, Beetlejuice, Sal the Stockbroker, and Jerry Lawler. Directed by: Michael Hoffman Jr. and Aaron T. Wells.

What possessed me to rent this flick?I'm not per-say a T&A fan nor do I dig the current trough of contemporary,no-budget comedy/thrillers that pop-up on Thriller channel (say like "Andre the Butcher"-utter dreck which also features the ubiquitous Ron Jeremy).Or maybe it was Howard Stern regulars Beetlejuice and Sal the Stockbroker,a little but not really. Actually it was one-time scream queen Linnea Quigley that drew me to this,being a loooooong time fan of hers. She barely makes a cameo but it's nice to see her having a good time with her sparse material (playing a dive-Tiki bar owner with a fake Austrailian accent).I thought I would turn the disc off at that point,but I was pleasantly surprised.

The plot's pretty slasher-flick formula stuff.A straight-laced Christian girl joins her much more rowdy gal pals on a jaunt to a sparsely-populated Daytona for spring break.All the while,the hot-to-trot girls a stalked by a monk-like serial killer with a cherubic mask(a reference to "Valentine" maybe?).

Even someone with Beetlejuice's intelligence can figure out the killer's identity,even the weak plot twist at the end(a reference to "Scream 3" maybe?).But what matters is that you'll have fun getting there due to some truly inspired comic timing.Could this have been a better movie? Sure,with 60 x's the budget....but don't let that detract you,believe me,I've seen worse.

Like I said,a bigger budget would've improved this and the performances,while not Oscar caliber,are at least tolerable.The lead actress Katie Peterson is attractive and likable and the tantalizing Stewart and Whitford are hilariously bitchy.Other notables include ex-WWE great Jerry Lawlor as the goony sheriff,and the aforementioned Sal the Stockbroker,Beetlejuice,and as himself,Ron Jeremy,who curses aloud that he won't get his paycheck after the mayhem starts.

So rent this,get some brews,invite your frat bros to your dorm room and have a blast. I guarantee this'll put a smile on your face and it's 500x's better than "Piranha 2DD",which is more deserving of a 3.6% rating(no,actually lower)than "Girls Gone Dead".

Is this the worst flick I've ever happened to view? no is it good? no. The very beginning seems promising enough(confusing shameful church sacrifice dream) there's some gore, but then we play into the rest of the movie.

What's good about it - the production value is pretty decent but only slightly better than some late night skinemax weekend movies. there's cameos by Ron Jeremy and beetlejuice(which even lowbrow his lines are funny) and Jerry the King Luller from WWE fame

Okay, so what's not good about it. Other than the opening sequence, it takes damn near half an hour for anything sinister to remotely happen. the girls' acting ranges from mediocre to subpar(even for a bmovie) I kept having to tell myself I'm too far in an need to just power through. this is even with gratuitous shots of breasts mixed in. No spoilers but the killer to me seemed easily identified to anyone who cared to wonder who's actually doing all the killing (I mean they didn't even throw in an obligatory red herring!) I want the last hour and a half of my life back.

As a life long howard stern fan i had to watch this movie after spotting beetlejuice on the cover. for those of you that don't know he is the black midget with the tiny head on the cover and he is a beyond retarded person.

So right off the bat i am gonna tell you this movie blows big time. i am sure you already suspected that but you are reading the reviews to find out just how much it sucks and if it is so bad it ends up being good. sorry that is not the case.

the movie is about an hour and 45 mins but it feels like 4 hours of torture. honestly i didn't see the whole movie because at 1 point i started reading a magazine then later i was browsing the internet. it was all i could do to get through the movie.

im gonna list a few things that weren't bad because that's easier. the soundtrack, although it had no recognizable songs (except shack your ass bitch, from the stern show) the ones i heard were good. jerry lawler's performance was passable. not great but much better then everyone else. lots and lots of titties but they are porn stars so who really cares? the special effects aka the blood and guts were the only thing done right in this movie considering what it cost to make.

now the really bad. the sheer amount of head shaking in this movie makes me want to shake my head. and there is a part at the end (if you make it that far) where the girls are squatting repeatedly in fear, i am not sure anybody really directed this movie. the background or ambient music is stock or public domain because i know I've heard it in other bad low budget movies. horns and flutes and so on. there is nothing original or special about this movie.

i say skip it unless you got some buddies over and you want to play a drinking game involving drinking when you see head shakes or boobs.

I have a friend who believes that bad movies have to be ignored when it comes to writing a review, advising me numerously: "Don't glorify junk". I used to disagree with him, debating that even the junkest movies have to be reviewed; to learn about the different faces of "bad", to chronicle a movie despite its low quality, to spread awareness, or to register your opinion anyway.

This round, I swear, for the very first time in my life as a reviewer, I feel that he's right. Because just writing about (Girls Gone Dead) seems like a glorification of junk, rather filth!

So it's a slasher. And there are the forever usual goods: naked girls + cruel murders. Namely: nudity + gore. In more pure words: sex and violence. BUT made in the worst worst worst Z-movies' traditions!

The production is surreal. The sex factor is beyond inhuman. The performance is extremely painful. Long story short; the artistic everything is what really "Gone Dead"!

After Quentin Tarantino's (Grindhouse - 2007), as if a wave of so proud nonsense was born through many independent companies. They thought that they were making the genre badly, yet in a respected self-parodying and honoring manner. However, they impudently forgot to do anything right in the way!

The wicked subtlety was replaced by stubborn primitiveness. And parodying the stupidity was done by frank true stupidity. For little instance, some of the special effects look gross-out, not because it tries to cinematically look gross-out, but because they're actually gross-out!

The cyclopean marathon of "which was the worst?" doesn't end. I mean, was it the black midget?, was it the comedy?, was it the girls? No, it was my status while watching all of that, where "great" is deserved being said about one thing, and one thing only, in this movie: its superpower to make you vomit!

This is incredibly poor, abysmally dirty, and deadly ugly. As a horror, horror-parody, or even too-bad-it's-good movie; IT'S LOUSY. Though, to find any appropriate definition for it; I can say that it's a parody of the horror-parody, so horrifically bad, and no comic at all!

It kills you by ugliness; and what a cruel killing that is.