The Field Guide to Evil

This movie had an excellent concept and an exceptional introduction sequence.

But the stories... just didn't quite make sense.

Only three out of eight made complete sense - the American story, the Indian story and the Greek story.

The American story was laughable, the Indian story was vaguely creepy (probably the best one) and the Greek one was barely horror....

...much like the other stories, which came complete with bad effects, atrocious acting and incoherent storylines.

The concept was brilliant and I was so excited to see the movie... it's just a shame that I got all hyped up in the intro only to be let down by being downright confused throughout.

I have three stars. Two for the good stories (Greece and India) and one for the good concept.

If I were you, I wouldn't waste your time.

It was a cool idea to have a collection of folklore/horror stories from different countries made by and in those countries, but dear god, the execution on the majority of these short films is awful. For about 2/3s of these stories, the plot and acting is so poorly done that they're almost hard to watch. I wouldn't call it a complete waste of time, but don't go into it with any higher expectations than an extremely low-budget student film.

Good movie south by southwest, interesting concenpt bringing shorts together. Worked really well

Although the stories are somewhat interesting, they do become tedious to watch after a while.

The visuals are good but each of the stories really didn't engage me, or leave me feeling as though I had watched anything of any significance.

The concept was good but unfortunately it delivers little.

I'm no expert when it comes to myths and folklore, but the subject matter does interest me. I had never heard of any of these stories. That doesn't mean they aren't, but in eight tries I figured at least one would ring home.

Now whether or not these are familiar tales doesn't have any bearing on the quality of the movie representing them. However, all of the elements in movie making certainly have something to say about the movie's quality.

Some of these shorts were very lean on dialogue. That's not always a deal breaker though. There are a lot of great movies out there that use very little dialogue. The difference is that the good ones still manage to tell a clear story and captivate their audience. The silent shorts in this anthology were just confusing and distant. One segment traded dialogue for a baby crying sound effect on a loop. Hey movie maker, we get it. The baby is crying. Make the point and get off it. A constant baby crying is as distracting as when they have a phone ringing or a car horn going off for way too long. It just becomes an annoying noise.

I didn't realize how bad the acting was in this until the American segment played out. Wow, was that bad. That one played like a student film. The parents were just the worst. No chemistry with each other or their son. The boy was everything wrong with child actors all wrapped up in one.

And lets not leave out the gore. Why do inexperienced filmmakers and viewers, for that matter, think that gore and horror go hand in hand? Why? Being frightened, startled, psychologically tormented, or just creeped out are all valid aspects of horror. I don't know where or why gore seems to think it has a place here. If its done right and done with purpose, it can be very effective (Bone Tomahawk comes to mind). This entire anthology never once used gore to an advantage, but it used it in every segment. Just trying to gross someone out isn't horror.