Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA giant alien mosquito-type insect, drawn to earth for blood, kills Del, a government agent, while Dr. Kempler helps cleanse the earth.A giant alien mosquito-type insect, drawn to earth for blood, kills Del, a government agent, while Dr. Kempler helps cleanse the earth.A giant alien mosquito-type insect, drawn to earth for blood, kills Del, a government agent, while Dr. Kempler helps cleanse the earth.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Brandon NeSmith
- Rusty's Coworker (as Brandon NeSmith)
- (as Brandon Tretiak Nesmith)
Recensioni in evidenza
There is a lot going on in this movie, if everything had been worked out a bit more it could have been a TV series with a bigger plot and more realistic fleshed out characters than netflix daredevil.
But I was very tempted to stop watching a minute in to the movie. For some reason they opted to make it look as if the movie was shot on worn out VHS tape. Lucky for me I got over that, somehow they managed to do everything so wrong in a manner that kept me interested, entertained and in wonderment how they managed to get people to play and the roles they played.
I enjoyed it.
But I was very tempted to stop watching a minute in to the movie. For some reason they opted to make it look as if the movie was shot on worn out VHS tape. Lucky for me I got over that, somehow they managed to do everything so wrong in a manner that kept me interested, entertained and in wonderment how they managed to get people to play and the roles they played.
I enjoyed it.
Okay, every other reviewer here has gone into the story, so I won't do that here. And YES, it appears once again that we either have dubious gushing 10 star reviews, or people completely dumping on the film, as usual...
Sooooo... Look, the 'movie' such as it is is very, VERY silly. And, the only real criticism that I have is that if the film makers had simply trimmed away about 15-20 minutes of the parts that weren't so funny, THEN you would have really had a great film! (Well, maybe 'great' is a bit strong...) But, you would have had a really tight, fast paced, MUCH more funny film in my lowly and wretched opinion. There are entire sequences that I thought didn't work that well and could have easily been eliminated (like the segment with the plane, and some of the military stuff, and more) I get it though... You are a first time film maker and you are all excited to put in EVERY bloody idea you can think of into the movie. Sure, understandable. But, that is part of ultimately being a good director, is KNOWING exactly how the movie comes across to your audience and how to maximize the entertainment value of it. Just takes experience, I guess.
Anyway, some of the parts were just hilarious, especially with the doctor. He had such a GREAT deadpan delivery. And good ol' Del... Man, WHERE the hell did they find these people?! There were honestly some VERY good conceptual shots and atmosphere here too, which I feel really shows the talent and potential of these guys. I mean, there were some REALLY lovely shots and some great little snippets in there, such as the 10 second part about how the doctor got the name for the creature. Awesome! But, unfortunately, by keeping in so much additional blah material, I felt that it sadly diluted the excellent parts of the rest.
So, I would say, that first of course, if you 'get' what they are doing here and accept that at face value, that is a good start. But, if you like really serious-faced, deadpan, SILLY humour, then there is a chance that you might find this little film kind of fun.
(Honestly, I really feel like going in there and editing out about 20 minutes of it myself, because I'm pretty SURE that after doing that, you would have a truly great, funny little movie here!)
Sooooo... Look, the 'movie' such as it is is very, VERY silly. And, the only real criticism that I have is that if the film makers had simply trimmed away about 15-20 minutes of the parts that weren't so funny, THEN you would have really had a great film! (Well, maybe 'great' is a bit strong...) But, you would have had a really tight, fast paced, MUCH more funny film in my lowly and wretched opinion. There are entire sequences that I thought didn't work that well and could have easily been eliminated (like the segment with the plane, and some of the military stuff, and more) I get it though... You are a first time film maker and you are all excited to put in EVERY bloody idea you can think of into the movie. Sure, understandable. But, that is part of ultimately being a good director, is KNOWING exactly how the movie comes across to your audience and how to maximize the entertainment value of it. Just takes experience, I guess.
Anyway, some of the parts were just hilarious, especially with the doctor. He had such a GREAT deadpan delivery. And good ol' Del... Man, WHERE the hell did they find these people?! There were honestly some VERY good conceptual shots and atmosphere here too, which I feel really shows the talent and potential of these guys. I mean, there were some REALLY lovely shots and some great little snippets in there, such as the 10 second part about how the doctor got the name for the creature. Awesome! But, unfortunately, by keeping in so much additional blah material, I felt that it sadly diluted the excellent parts of the rest.
So, I would say, that first of course, if you 'get' what they are doing here and accept that at face value, that is a good start. But, if you like really serious-faced, deadpan, SILLY humour, then there is a chance that you might find this little film kind of fun.
(Honestly, I really feel like going in there and editing out about 20 minutes of it myself, because I'm pretty SURE that after doing that, you would have a truly great, funny little movie here!)
ANOTHER MACROTIGER MOVIE REVIEW !!!
Insectula (2015) MT Rating: 9/10
Executive Summary
An encyclopedia of sci-fi/horror genre. Joins Macro Tiger's list as one of the top four films ever shot in Minnesota. Some sound problems and perhaps excessive CGI marginally reduce watchability. Altogether, very funny, with tons of obscure genre references and inside jokes. The attention to detail that went into the film must have been humungous. Acting very solid. Some very fine camera set- ups, some less-so. Every indie producer/director/writer/crew should watch this film several times. At least one of the cast, A. Cezanne is a potential star.
Plot:
Giant insect from outer-space plops into White Bear Lake and starts stabbing people to death. Apparently some victims become zombies but that's left a little uncertain. Some psychological stylistic elements are introduced, especially with the two main scientists - one of them good, one of them bad, both troubled. This is in keeping with the genre, back then people had great hopes and faith in psychology. I am just old enough to have watched the films upon which Insectula is based on TV as a kid, and I watched them then without irony. I genuinely was concerned with the stomping of a town by the Man Who Grew 7 Feet a Day or the horrible monster destroying Tokyo. I was NOT old enough to have seen these films in the theater.
Actresses :
Yeah. Now you're talking. Others have mentioned the skimpy attire. Peterson et co instincts are on-the-money here. Trying to be a prude with a sci-fi/horror film? No way. I think I might have pushed this even farther, but all in all, Peterson hit the nail on the head here. All the actresses looked great. Arielle Cezanne was gorgeous as lead female. I would not give her an A+ on acting (yet) but she's got charisma and commands the viewers attention, more than can be said for a lot of Hollywood actors. She is a superb choice for this role. I recall an old girlfriend who would pan any movie if the lead female was not absolutely beautiful. Another angle on this is once you've seen the director is not afraid to have his actresses sexy then you know he is capable of doing anything, and that's when you start thinking you might need another bag of popcorn. Nuff said here. Sarah French (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2720796/) and Hannah Hudson receive a lot of air time and look great on film.
Actors :
Sufficiently eccentric and creepy. Well-developed given the restrictions of the genre. I recognized several of these from my films, the great Edel, Thingvall, Gilmer to name a few. All were effective ... and more fully clothed than the ladies. In my films I have all the men fully nude. Some of us go there for our art. Some of us don't. Acting was solid and engaging.
Cinematography :
A lot to be admired here. A lot of clever angles and lighting. Camera movements nice and in keeping with genre. It is evident crew spent a lot more time on some shots than on others. This is understandable. I have no idea what the budget for this film is but without Hollywood money corners have to be cut. I liked the camera work and will study it for my own films. In particular I liked very much the scene in which Dr. Kempler (Harrison Matthews) plays a piece by Rachmaninoff on his piano and contemplates his career. Also the shot of Gen. Ripper at his desk (John Edel) was beautifully-done. I noticed Jon Springer has made a documentary about the Mekons, a group I've been in touch with about a couple things. Give my regard to Ms. Timms, I love Ghosts of American Astronauts.
Costuming :
Very nice. I think I would have dressed the army men in WW2-style uniforms and given them M1 Garand rifles, in keeping with the spirit of the film. Scientist garb is excellent. John Edel as Gen. Ripper (a la Dr. Strangelove?) and Jeff Gigler as Gen. Erickson are superbly outfitted. Of the actors I didn't know I was especially impressed by Christian Hanson's short screen-time as Dr. Banning, a rival scientist.
Set Decoration :
Superb. The laboratory equipment is first rate. I like the old phones. Ihought perhaps the mobile phones should have been dispensed with. Also would have preferred 1960s cars.
Music and Sound :
The music was spot-on. Only complaint is that, on the version i watched, the dialog is sometimes difficult to hear over the music.
SFX and Editing :
I liked a lot of the special effects. Here budgetry concerns bite hard, but I would have liked more physical modeling and less CGI. Editing: now here I will be a hypocrite given the snail's pace of a film I've been part of - the editing appears solid but I would have liked a faster pace in places. A couple more close-ups here and there could have been an improvement, but Im not complaining. Editing on the original scifi/horror films was often spotty.
Miscellaneous :
I liked very much the dancing girls at the end, although really that's a 1970s thing and violates the genre, but I'm not complaining. I engaged the same ending in Land of Sky Blue Water. I can't help adding one nagging issue, I really wish the film had been shot using actual film, perhaps in b&w 16mm, however I realize I am in a small minority here and there may be cost advantages to digital. In short, thanks for the film, Michael Peterson. I enjoyed it greatly and hope to catch it on the big screen. I hope you make a whole lot more!!!
Insectula (2015) MT Rating: 9/10
Executive Summary
An encyclopedia of sci-fi/horror genre. Joins Macro Tiger's list as one of the top four films ever shot in Minnesota. Some sound problems and perhaps excessive CGI marginally reduce watchability. Altogether, very funny, with tons of obscure genre references and inside jokes. The attention to detail that went into the film must have been humungous. Acting very solid. Some very fine camera set- ups, some less-so. Every indie producer/director/writer/crew should watch this film several times. At least one of the cast, A. Cezanne is a potential star.
Plot:
Giant insect from outer-space plops into White Bear Lake and starts stabbing people to death. Apparently some victims become zombies but that's left a little uncertain. Some psychological stylistic elements are introduced, especially with the two main scientists - one of them good, one of them bad, both troubled. This is in keeping with the genre, back then people had great hopes and faith in psychology. I am just old enough to have watched the films upon which Insectula is based on TV as a kid, and I watched them then without irony. I genuinely was concerned with the stomping of a town by the Man Who Grew 7 Feet a Day or the horrible monster destroying Tokyo. I was NOT old enough to have seen these films in the theater.
Actresses :
Yeah. Now you're talking. Others have mentioned the skimpy attire. Peterson et co instincts are on-the-money here. Trying to be a prude with a sci-fi/horror film? No way. I think I might have pushed this even farther, but all in all, Peterson hit the nail on the head here. All the actresses looked great. Arielle Cezanne was gorgeous as lead female. I would not give her an A+ on acting (yet) but she's got charisma and commands the viewers attention, more than can be said for a lot of Hollywood actors. She is a superb choice for this role. I recall an old girlfriend who would pan any movie if the lead female was not absolutely beautiful. Another angle on this is once you've seen the director is not afraid to have his actresses sexy then you know he is capable of doing anything, and that's when you start thinking you might need another bag of popcorn. Nuff said here. Sarah French (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2720796/) and Hannah Hudson receive a lot of air time and look great on film.
Actors :
Sufficiently eccentric and creepy. Well-developed given the restrictions of the genre. I recognized several of these from my films, the great Edel, Thingvall, Gilmer to name a few. All were effective ... and more fully clothed than the ladies. In my films I have all the men fully nude. Some of us go there for our art. Some of us don't. Acting was solid and engaging.
Cinematography :
A lot to be admired here. A lot of clever angles and lighting. Camera movements nice and in keeping with genre. It is evident crew spent a lot more time on some shots than on others. This is understandable. I have no idea what the budget for this film is but without Hollywood money corners have to be cut. I liked the camera work and will study it for my own films. In particular I liked very much the scene in which Dr. Kempler (Harrison Matthews) plays a piece by Rachmaninoff on his piano and contemplates his career. Also the shot of Gen. Ripper at his desk (John Edel) was beautifully-done. I noticed Jon Springer has made a documentary about the Mekons, a group I've been in touch with about a couple things. Give my regard to Ms. Timms, I love Ghosts of American Astronauts.
Costuming :
Very nice. I think I would have dressed the army men in WW2-style uniforms and given them M1 Garand rifles, in keeping with the spirit of the film. Scientist garb is excellent. John Edel as Gen. Ripper (a la Dr. Strangelove?) and Jeff Gigler as Gen. Erickson are superbly outfitted. Of the actors I didn't know I was especially impressed by Christian Hanson's short screen-time as Dr. Banning, a rival scientist.
Set Decoration :
Superb. The laboratory equipment is first rate. I like the old phones. Ihought perhaps the mobile phones should have been dispensed with. Also would have preferred 1960s cars.
Music and Sound :
The music was spot-on. Only complaint is that, on the version i watched, the dialog is sometimes difficult to hear over the music.
SFX and Editing :
I liked a lot of the special effects. Here budgetry concerns bite hard, but I would have liked more physical modeling and less CGI. Editing: now here I will be a hypocrite given the snail's pace of a film I've been part of - the editing appears solid but I would have liked a faster pace in places. A couple more close-ups here and there could have been an improvement, but Im not complaining. Editing on the original scifi/horror films was often spotty.
Miscellaneous :
I liked very much the dancing girls at the end, although really that's a 1970s thing and violates the genre, but I'm not complaining. I engaged the same ending in Land of Sky Blue Water. I can't help adding one nagging issue, I really wish the film had been shot using actual film, perhaps in b&w 16mm, however I realize I am in a small minority here and there may be cost advantages to digital. In short, thanks for the film, Michael Peterson. I enjoyed it greatly and hope to catch it on the big screen. I hope you make a whole lot more!!!
This movie was better than I thought it would be. Great special effects. A tribute to the old fashioned Saturday SCFY/Horror classics. It's got more cheese than the state of Wisconsin and more blood than Red Cross. At 1hr 44min its' a little long but other wise a great escape from COVID-19 and ironically, tongue in cheek a cautionary tale of nature gone off the rails.
The Plot:
A giant alien mosquito-type insect is drawn to earth from the CO2 pollution in search of blood.
Del, a government agent, loses loved ones to the creature and is on a personal vendetta while the Dr. Kempler is captivated by it and attempts to help the creature cleanse the earth.
The one bad review here is just idiotic. This movie is intentionally bad.
It's a throwback to Plan 9 and it does it very well.
A great late night find.
A giant alien mosquito-type insect is drawn to earth from the CO2 pollution in search of blood.
Del, a government agent, loses loved ones to the creature and is on a personal vendetta while the Dr. Kempler is captivated by it and attempts to help the creature cleanse the earth.
The one bad review here is just idiotic. This movie is intentionally bad.
It's a throwback to Plan 9 and it does it very well.
A great late night find.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizUses the Wilhelm Scream and the Howie Scream side by side, possibly for the first time.
- BlooperAgent Delbiondo mutilated his lip trying to insert his dead girl friend's lip piercing ring. Later when he visited Doctor Kempler's laboratory, his lip was undamaged.
- Curiosità sui creditiSPOILER: After the closing credits begin, there is a scene where Dr. Banning has revived Dr. Kempler's head and informs him that they will be working together after all.
- ConnessioniReferences La sposa del mostro (1955)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 41min(101 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.78 : 1 / (high definition)
- 16:9 HD
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti