Eat

5 of 10. Had the post-credit scene happened at the end of the film, I'd give it another point. After a film like this, however, it's asking a lot for people to stick around through the credits and the film really needs some form of release after grueling gore and tension.

The main problem is that the writer really needed a skilled director rather than serving as both. While the actors did what they could with the script, the casting for several of the key characters was off and could have easily been switched.

The other part of it that wasn't setup well was the psychological element. Too often, it felt like unbelievably stupid characters rather than a mental disorder.

It's not a B-film because of the special FX, which was very believable and didn't look cheap. It's B because of the writing/directing that made many scenes feel like TV soap opera melodrama, unlike a recent smoother, more finished blood-gore film Julia (2014).

Novella McClure (Meggie Maddock) is like most struggling actresses in Los Angeles: she is in her early 30s, her fake name sounded cooler ten years ago, and she has not landed a role in three years.

This movie has a pretty low rating on IMDb. As of this moment (August 2015), it is sitting at 4.7, which is generally considered a bad movie. But it is not a bad movie. The problem is that it is just very difficult to sit through because the graphic imagery is disturbing and disgusting. But this is, of course, exactly what they were trying to accomplish.

Obviously this is a low budget film, but the acting is still decent and the plot is better than average. It makes an interesting companion piece to "Starry Eyes". And the gore... wow. Most of the time it is just blood, but when we get glimpses of more than that, it is some of the best out there...

Eat. What could I say about this movie. It's not well made. There's issues in everything. The script, the acting, the flow of the story. Even I could tell the lighting and production stuff was in disarray.

But I really really liked it. It's a really sick and disgusting take on Hollywood and I don't know. To be honest, I have no idea why I like this movie now that I think about it.

It just has a cool slow to it. The actress is attractive. And she's trying to make it in Hollywood. But she's kind of a slacker. And she eats herself.

It's cool. You gotta just watch it.

You might not like it. But it's truly one of my top ten favorite movies of all time.

7 stars

I didn't know what to expect from this film. I had seen the title and the synopsis - no reviews.

It was surprising from the start. A fresh style rather than the moody kick-off many horror films have. It brought you into the character's rather false and fluffy life, and that of many others trying to make it in Hollywood.

The acting is suburb by all of the case who portrayed their respective characters well - believably.

My only criticism of the film is that it should have had more of an explanation of why the main character, Novella McClure, develops the way she does. we have a clue that it is because she becomes stressed, but there wasn't much of a back story.

I felt for the character as she went through her ups and downs.

I don't think this film is a 'classic' but it makes a change from dark and moody horrors.

A little bit of body horror goes a long way. What begins as a small, unfortunate habit steadily progresses to more severe, cringe-worthy indulgence. In between instances of worsening blood and gore the movie is initially far more conventional - the portrait of a woman down on her luck, and struggling personally and professionally. As if that slant weren't enough of itself, the picture is pristine in its image quality, and seems at times to have a sheen to it - boosted further by the protagonist's impeccable makeup, and the very ordinary personalities of each character. These snapshots of Novella's life are unremarkable, but enjoyable - and almost give the picture a fairytale quality that contrasts sharply with the spiraling darkness the feature increasingly represents. It's not perfectly engaging, but 'Eat' is certainly good fun.

Filmmaker Jimmy Weber wears many hats here - writer, director, editor, composer - and he dons each pretty darn well. From a technical standpoint the movie looks great, including vivid blood and gore - kudos to the effects and makeup artists. Though not outstanding in the truest sense of the word, I really enjoy Weber's score. I don't think there's a specific weakness to cite. It's just that the mashup of story beats - the common and the grisly; the beauty and the beast, if you will - doesn't entirely jive in this screenplay. This isn't to say I think there's a particular deficiency; only that, however satisfying, 'Eat' doesn't come across as essential. That doesn't mean it isn't entertaining, because it certainly keeps our attention well.

Like the movie overall, the characters don't especially leap out in any way, but the cast embodies them well. Scene writing is solid, and the narrative further stirs a small measure of psychological horror into the mixture. While Novella's habit grows more demanding, the feature remains less about her state of mind, or what she does to herself, than about the life coming undone; the horror elements are just flavor on top. It's an interesting approach to a genre picture, and challenging to pull off with just the right ratio of the constituent parts. I think Weber definitely succeeds, if incompletely; 'Eat' just isn't as engrossing as it should be - the whole isn't quite the sum of its parts.

To be honest, though, I may be nitpicking. Ultimately the film does what it sets out to do, and it's a matter of a viewer's individual experience as to how invested one feels. For my part, I think Weber has made a fine film, with a strong approach to the narrative, that just doesn't wholly captivate. Still, 'Eat' is a highly enjoyable blend of genres, executed well, and if the premise in any way entices as a story to your liking, then this is worth watching if you have the chance.