Avaliações de usuários

New 2015 "Horror" slash Thriller. "Muck" This was very strange and odd and I didn't really like the acting or the story line, if any? I didn't really get it?

They started off with 5 teens in the middle of a swamp running from someone or something and 2 of them dead and 3 of them tired and wounded badly. One of them took 45 minutes to die despite having a bad cut across his chest and leg.

Most of the killing took place off camera so you don't see what happened to them, we are just told they are gone and dead.

The acting was poor, story was poor, and for 1 hour 20 this could have been a good movie but in the end was very disappointing!! I see others saying it was bad movie too?

Well, that was ... different! Firstly I thought I'd missed the start of the film. It just jumps right in with a group of half naked, injured, young people staggering through a marsh in the dark outside the town of "West Craven" (get it?) to an empty holiday home seeking refuge. Only when you're a couple of minutes in do the title credits start to roll and you know it's supposed to be that way. Refuge from what? Well, mute, psychopathic, albino, half naked zombie "creepers" of course. That really just about does it for the storyline. I read it's a kick starter funded sequel to a former film that didn't get made (?) and it's got that feel about it. Some of the script lines also support that. The girls are attractive (several ex beauty queens) and they scream, run about and get naked and wet pleasantly often. The guys are, well, guys. All of them are expert in the do's and don'ts of horror films. Always go into the dark cellar; always leave any weapon you find behind; always, if you're a girl, get naked and take a shower in a strange house; never, ever, phone the police even when you eventually get a phone that works etc. etc. etc. Overall I'd say that, as it stands, it's an exercise in style over substance. The style, to be fair, isn't at all bad but the lack of substance really kills the entire effort. Written, produced and directed by newcomer Steve Wolsh, a sequel,"Muck: Feast of Saint Patrick", (It'll make more sense after you've seen this one) is already in the pipe for 2016. Unfortunately, the film ends just as abruptly as it starts. Steve actually makes a cameo appearance in an end credit scene that, you guessed it, bears no relation to anything in the movie. The end credits just come out of nowhere. Take an adequate B movie horror film, miss the opening 20 minutes and walk out 20 minutes before the end, and you've got "Muck". Checking on the net there's a level of background chaos that appears to go deeper than this film. A prequel that was never made, plans to release the first part in the trilogy after the second, and maybe even after the third. Different names given for the different films. Different answers given to people making enquiries. I'd be tempted to write the whole thing off as a shambles but ... there's something there. On the basis of watching Muck I'd say that, if Steve actually gets enough money to make an entire film, (with a beginning, a middle, and an end), it might, just might, be worth watching ... but this isn't it. My score 4/10, mostly for the girls. Steve, I envy you. It was probably way more enjoyable to make than to watch. If you ever make the sequel, or the prequel, or any movie, I'd still give it a watch.

What the... I have no words.

So lemme get this straight. You're 2 best friends were killed, you run for help, you decide hey - there's a bar, and there's a hot girl right there.. let's have a shot, and hey, I'm just gonna wash my face whilst I'm here because it's not like anyone is in any immediate danger of being savaged to death whilst they wait for me to save them. And the nudity... well my Husband loves a bit of T&A in a film (he's a guy,duh!) but even he couldn't understand why every girl in the move was flashing her silicones when they should perhaps be concentrating on , um I don't know..survival maybe?

We couldn't understand if this was a horror, comedy, or an audition for porno for the lovely leading ladies. That being said, the only thing they could do was take off their clothes as their acting skills left a LOT to be desired. Where did they find these girls?! In the back pages of a magazine me thinks.

How on earth this film got the green light for production, I have no idea. And we were so outraged by the sh*tness of the overall film, I signed up to IMDb just to warn others about not only wasting time watching this spaff, but actually destroying braincells by watching it.

How people have given this anything over 1* I don't know. I can only assume that there are a couple of 15yr old boys banging the bishop to the boobies.

So in short...I just died inside after watching this ..erm...'film'

(Oh, and the girl in the club bathroom changing her underwear 20 times???? WHY???)

DO NOT WASTE 1 SECOND OF YOUR PRECIOUS LIFE ON THIS FILM!!

Muck is a lot of things... poorly lit... lacking plot... full of character dialogue that's trying way too hard to be Whedonesque... a shameless means to show various women naked.

The one thing Muck is not is a good movie. In fact, it's barely a movie.

We are thrown into a story mid-way with a cast of characters we get no introduction to. What little dialogue they have before they get killed doesn't do much to endear us to them, so why care about them being killed? Instead of characterization and backstory, Muck gives you extended scenes of a woman showering and a woman who apparently keeps a Victoria's Secret inventory in her purse putting on a one woman lingerie fashion show in a dive bar bathroom.

But wait, the movie has Kane Hodder! Surely that must give it some cred, right? Not as such. Kane Hodder as Hatchet under a ton of make up? Scary. Kane Hodder under a hockey mask? Scary? A shirtless, aging Kane Hodder splashing around having what is essentially a wrestling match in the climax of the movie? Not so scary. Kind of sad actually.

Muck wants to be Cabin in the Woods, but it's not funny or invention enough. Muck wants to be a softcore porn, but the movie's lighting is so bad you are better off watching scrambled porn channels. Muck wants to be a horror movie gorefest, but most of the kills happen JUST off camera and we're shown, instead, the killer or a nearby witness just getting karo syrup tossed on them.

Muck wants to be a movie but it isn't. If the excuse is "Well, it's the middle part of a trilogy released first," then that shows the director/writer/guy who clearly likes boobs had no original idea other than "Let's just show the movies out of order to confuse people."

There is so much wrong with this movie I don't even know where to begin. You're dropped in the middle of a story, and meet up with boring two-dimensional characters who are not developed even a little bit during the movie. Something else that was awful was the camera work, shaky is a big understatement. The lighting for the movie is also terrible, it's actually absent. This movie is supposed to be the 2nd in a trilogy, I don't know why you would make the 2nd movie first, but i'm really not looking forward to the prequel or the sequel. I'm excited to put this movie on the back of my shelf and forget about it. The marketing for the movie was really exciting and this is for sure one of those cases where something is hyped up and made to look watchable and when it comes out it's unbearable. The final complaint is going to be the fact that the director decided that putting a pair of breasts every 40 seconds in the movie might redeem it from being bashed online but that's not the case whatsoever.

Normally I only review slasher movies but I just finished watching this and I feel an obligation to the horror genre to expose this director's work as the fraudulent attempt that it is.

First off, this is not a horror movie. In fact, it's not even a movie at all. I've complained about story in the past many times, or lack there of, but nothing, and I mean 'nothing' comes even remotely close to this on absence of story. We're thrown into the middle of something happening and not only do they not tells us what's happening, they choose to develop their characters by making them pose in front of mirrors. Don't get me wrong, I'm no prude, but this was just lame. Nudity comes 'after' you set up the story and characters. This just felt like I was watching some sixth-grader's wet dream after he stayed up too late watching QT and Rodriguez's "Grindhouse."

And when I talk about exposing the fraud here, I'm talking about two things. One, this is not a horror film. This has no right calling itself a horror film. It's like Kanye West trying to call his last album "metal." This is a stylized action movie reject written and directed by person with the mind of a child who has an embarrassingly overactive sex-drive. And secondly, the back of the movie says "Muck is packed with old-school gore effects and brutal stunts without any CGI or apologies." It may not contain CGI, but it most certainly does 'not' contain "Old-school gore." The kills were lame as f#$%. You don't see anything except for a little blood spraying here and there. Very, very cheap gore effects. I can honestly say that I have officially seen a movie that has absolutely nothing to offer. And why should it contain something that would interest me, it's not even a horror movie. This is the kind of "movie" that makes you want to go back through all your old reviews and raise the ratings up.

Keep my ten bucks, Steve Wolsh. Something tells me you're gonna need it.

0/0 F- (fail) two thumbs down

I was so excited for this film. I really wanted it to be good. Billed as a "love letter" to the slasher genre. Not at all, it was an insult. I think other reviewers have summed up what's wrong with this film. No need to repeat how bad the flow or acting was. It has nothing to do with the fact that it's the second part of a trilogy. We get it, this film starts in the middle. We are smart enough to deal with that. It was just bad on every level. It wasn't poking fun at the genre or even "so bad it's good". It was just bad. Period. Even bad or cheaply made horror films can still be good or lots of fun. This was neither. Also, the nudity wasn't an issue for me. It's a staple of old school slasher/horror films. Yet somehow even they "mucked" that up too.

So many films where portraying naked girls, running around screaming and then getting killed are being produced and don't these producers and directors know that it is getting old, mundane and just totally stupid.

I watch a film for its good plot, fine acting and some shocks here and there but this movie fails in everything a film should be. The girls seem like dumb bimbos, the lighting is too dark and you get to see many off them scream and run around like chooks without heads trying to escape some madman. It is one of these senseless films where there is poor dialogue and the acting could be so much better.

I feel a little ill knowing there are people who love watching half naked girls getting slaughtered and if this is to their taste, so be it, but I would be embarrassed releasing this sort of garbage.

No talent here!

The most awful movie I had the bad luck to watch!

Starting off the movie itself is anything but a movie in the first place. No plot no story setting nothing at all!!!

Secondly the actors were terrible and lacked the basic skills for acting. No expressions, lame jokes around, over touched conversations and dialogues. Disgraceful!

Then comes the horror. I never felt the tinge to be scared at anything at all in the movie. Nor spooky nor a proper slasher and nothing in between either!

Lastly, the director had to be a pervert so he had directed some girls to show off their assets without any reason whatsoever.

Not recommended at any cost, at any situation or for any purpose!

Or "Another Deadly Weekend" as it was renamed in Germany for its release. Maybe a better title than Muck, but I'll leave that up to you. I am shocked though at the level of hate this receives here. Don't get me twisted, this is not a masterpiece (and I reckon some felt they had to vote this a 10 because so many scored it low), but this is fun.

And when I say fun, I mean that exactly like that. Yes this is not exactly Horror and yes there is quite some erratic character motivation and decisions ... but while the script feels like it could have done with a bit more work, the actors and parts of the dialogue is really good. The timing of the jokes works mostly. There seems to be no CGI, which works for the movie and the low budget.

Now onto one of the biggest criticisms (besides this not being entirely horror and the beginning of the movie): mirrors and flesh. The director might have a mirror fetish, but he uses it for men and women characters in this. Yes there is some nudity in this, but this should neither bother you nor excite you (there are other sources for that). Yes the main cast is mostly pretty, but is this something you find appalling? Try not to concentrate on being negative if possible.

And lastly the beginning. Thrown into the action, into a weird world. I loved that - there is almost nothing more sufficient than keeping the viewer on the edge of their seat. And not knowing what's going on or where we are, how we got there ... is quite satisfying. It's mostly how every great TV show works/begins.

Yes the movie is riddled with flaws too (planting and payoff for example of a certain location, characters/decisions), but the cinematography, the acting and some of the script work nicely together. Believe me there are way worse movies out there ... I've seen them

The biggest spoiler I can mention about this film is that the Director, Steve Wolsh, is a graduate of Georgetown University with a major in marketing and management.

So his concept went like this: 'What does a horror flick need to sell?'

Now veterans of the horror genre would say story, story, story.

Steve's answer: Tits and Ass.

Apparently the film was funded via Kickstarter. All I can say to potential contributors for the 2nd round of funding for this series is: PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DON'T. This man doesn't deserve your money. Mr Wolsh doesn't have the necessary skill set to make movies - nor will he ever have.

Well, perhaps only ones that don't need plot, sensible dialogue or actors that can actually act. Ones that come out of the San Fernando valley.

Hey Steve, I hear there's a lot of money to be made exploiting women in that particular genre!

If I could give this film a negative rating I would.

I stopped watching this film after about 30 minutes. It was that crappy. In fact its one of the worst films I think I've ever seen in the horror genre. For example a guy is seriously injured but instead of trying to tend to the guys injuries his pals stand around making small talk in front of a house they have just broken into because they were in dire need of shelter and a way to help their injured friend. The bigger horror story here is that this film even exists. It makes crap movies like Piranha 3D look like masterworks. Truly a waste of time. Apparently its the filmmakers first effort-lets hope its his last. Not to be overly cruel the Turkish adaptation of Star Wars is still a worse film-but not by much. Plenty of dumb broads in the film but no sex-which is a weird combination. Sex in a movie isn't a forbidden territory. Anyway-total joke of a film. Stay away from it completely.

I'm not sure what the hell I just watched...but I liked it. It's hard to review, mainly because it's part of a larger story. (Or so they say). I'd recommend, but I do have two small issues: one, too much time is spent showing off the camera and what it could do, and two, enough with the women in various states of undress. In small doses you tend to expect it in these types of movies to be sure. Unfortunately the amount here is akin to Cinemax soft core porn.

I wish I could say more, but I honestly have no idea what I just watched.

I can't wait for the sequels!

'MUCK': One and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

B-horror/comedy flick from debut filmmaker Steve Wolsh. Wolsh wrote, directed and produced the movie; on a mere $250,000 budget (and it shows)! It's the first in a planned trilogy and tells the story of a group of friends trying to survive the night in an abandoned Cape Cod vacation house; after being almost killed by something sinister, in the swampy marshes nearby. It stars Lachlan Buchanan, Puja Mohindra, Bryce Draper, Jaclyn Swedberg (who was named Playboy Playmate of the year, in 2012) and horror legend Kane Hodder. Despite the filmmaker's admirable (and somewhat ambitious) intentions, the movie sucks.

The film begins with a group of friends emerging from the marshes of Cape Cod. They're bloody, wounded and frantic. They also apparently already lost a couple of their friends, to something evil in the marshes. They break into a vacation house; as one friend, Noah (Draper), runs to a local bar for help (it's also St. Patrick's Day). Noah calls his cousin, Troit (Buchanan), and asks him for a ride; not telling him of the danger he and his friends are in. Whatever was after them is still hunting them, and killing them off; one by one. Troit, and his friend Chandi (Mohindra), unwittingly venture into the chaos as well.

The movie thinks it's a lot more clever than it actually is. There are a lot of tongue-in-cheek, inside jokes; that aren't really funny, or witty, at all. The acting is also really bad, and the dialogue and story are horrible. There is some decent nudity and gore, but that's about it. Wolsh was apparently trying to make a fun B-horror flick; that's an homage to other classic and popular B- slasher movies, but it doesn't really work. I admire what he was trying to do but I'm just not very impressed by the end results, and I don't think most other horror fans will be either. I really wanted to like the movie, though!

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3bbh5F6Mfw

A group of friends—Noah (Bryce Draper), Kylie (Stephanie Danielson), Desiree (Laura Jacobs), Billy (Grant Alan Ouzts), and Mia (Lauren Francesca)—emerge from a swamp having narrowly escaped from unseen assailants. Stumbling upon a deserted house, they break in and try to survive the night, Noah phoning his cousin Troit (Lachlan Buchanan) for help, who arrives with friend Chandi (Puja Mohindra) in tow.

Muck is not so much a horror movie as it is an excuse to fill an hour and a half with hot, firm, nubile young women in varying states of undress. Barely a minute goes by without a flash of T&A, writer/director Steve Wolsh missing no opportunity to home in on the girls' impressive attributes; for this I am grateful, because without the constant supply of eye candy, Muck would be an almost unwatchable mess of a movie, with a wafer thin plot, dreadful performances and virtually no gore, most of the deaths occurring just off-screen. Wolsh also opts for some really irritating editing techniques during his so-called scary scenes; thankfully, the excessive visual gimmickry is not used whenever the lovely ladies are undressing.

As if to further prove that Wolsh had no agenda other than to show sexy women in their scanties, he offers up zero exposition, leaving the origin of his attackers a total mystery and ending the film with a cliffhanger that suggests a distinct lack of ideas.

The only people that would enjoy this movie is 13 year old boys, who find it on late night cable. I love a good Bad movie. Numerous Troma Films come to mind. Muck is just a bad Bad movie. Muck, that's exactly where this movie belongs.

MUCK is an appropriate title indeed for this cheap, mucky, no-budget horror wannabe. The film starts off as if it's halfway through the plot of a different film, with a group of survivors escaping through the swamps and being pursued by some nameless evil. What follows on is more of the same: characters bickering, exchanging insults and profanities, and being killed one by one by some weirdo types.

Oh, and I forgot to mention the nudity. With at least a couple of Playboy Playmates in the cast, this is a film all about the nudity. Random characters parade in front of mirrors and strip out of their bras at regular intervals. The sheer scuzziness of it has to be seen to be believed. It gives the film a really sleazy feel which is about the only thing it does have going for it.

Elsewhere, it's a poorly-edited and misconceived monstrosity, wasting the talents of an effective-looking Kane Hodder playing one of the villains. Hodder enlivened the likes of the HATCHET trilogy but is sorely wasted here, although he's the only actor I liked in the whole thing. Cheap gore effects and incessant action only serve to induce a headache in the viewer.

Whilst this is not one of the best movies I have seen, it is also a long way from the worst 2.7 seems an awfully low rating for a movie whose cinematography,audio,soundtrack and effects are all good, the storyline not so much and whilst the acting is not great it is adequate and this movie has a lot of style, perhaps too much time is spent admiring the physical attributes of the undoubtedly attractive young actresses, it is not the worst way to err. Overall I found it an enjoyable way to spend a couple of hours, even if I did shake my head a couple of times at the choices made by our heroes. If Steve Wolsh gets adequate funding for his next project I for one would be happy to see it. Well done to all and good luck for the future.

One star for the t's, one star for the a's...

A bad attempt on making a slasher movie in my opinion. There is a lot of blood, beautiful women showing of their bodies, smart-ass one-liners and a wide array of weapons being used. But the acting, directing, writing etc. is really poorly executed. It's not provoking, it's not scary, it's not erotic, it's not exciting, it's not worth one hour and 38 minutes of your life!

If you're looking for a slasher movie, there are many better ones out there... And it doesn't even help to watch it as a B-movie, it's not even worthy of a letter from the alphabet...