IMDb RATING
4.9/10
1.9K
YOUR RATING
A modern 80's slasher in which six "lucky" contestants appear on a game show where they'll face the Slashers (in house homicidal maniacs) to win millions of dollars. All contestants have to ... Read allA modern 80's slasher in which six "lucky" contestants appear on a game show where they'll face the Slashers (in house homicidal maniacs) to win millions of dollars. All contestants have to do is survive the night.A modern 80's slasher in which six "lucky" contestants appear on a game show where they'll face the Slashers (in house homicidal maniacs) to win millions of dollars. All contestants have to do is survive the night.
- Director
- Writer
- Stars
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
A true work of Genius. I found "Slashers" to be a magnificent film. It's social comment was fantastic. I loved the concept of people killing one another for money. I also liked the idea of the women having to remove their clothes to become more popular, a great satirical comment about today's "Big Brother"/Jodie Price generation. Some of the dialogue was so clever, for example lines like "those dollar bills that you worship do not bare the face of the lord" really reflect the true intellect of the writer. This film was a great piece of social satire, reminiscent of George A Romero's "Dawn Of The Dead."
10/10
10/10
What I admire most about this movie is its sheer audacity to be so openly, shamelessly, and unapologetically terrible.
It doesn't even pretend to aim for quality. Almost mocking you for expecting anything decent, and it'd probably roast you if you suggested it made any real effort at all.
Either dive into the dumpster fire and soak in its complete lack of quality, or pick literally any other movie on your list to escape the relentless trainwreck that is Slashers.
And if that's not enough, on top of the awful writing, acting, editing, and directing, it serves up a nice cesspool of juvenile sexism. So yeah, it has that working against it, too.
It doesn't even pretend to aim for quality. Almost mocking you for expecting anything decent, and it'd probably roast you if you suggested it made any real effort at all.
Either dive into the dumpster fire and soak in its complete lack of quality, or pick literally any other movie on your list to escape the relentless trainwreck that is Slashers.
And if that's not enough, on top of the awful writing, acting, editing, and directing, it serves up a nice cesspool of juvenile sexism. So yeah, it has that working against it, too.
i have to admit, amongst all the overabundance of reality shows and reality rip-offs i.e. Blair Witch Project; Series 7; The ST. Francisville Experiment..i more than expected, i automatically assumed, that $LA$HER$ would be completely a waste of time after reading it's review in Fango. I mean, with lame character names like PREACHER MAN and CHAINSAW CHARLIE, i was sure this was going to be as horrible, if not worse than, THE DEAD HATE THE LIVING. However, i came across a screener and sat down to watch it less than 3 hours ago and was surprisingly impressed. As a whole, the movie isn't the best thing i've ever seen but it had some unexpected charisma (one being the commercial break situations).With the exception of Chainsaw Charlie, who could possibly be a descendant of Jar Jar Binks, the villians or slashers, if you will, were at times over the top but not too annoying. The story played out quite frantically and the actual contestants weren't bad actors at all. Don't get me wrong, i don't see OSCAR knocking on any of their doors for this one, but they were pretty good for a B-movie cast. What i found to be the best part of $LA$HER$ was the fact that it focused on the characters more than the actual hunting. Most B-movies attempt to do this to keep their films from being gorey fluff, but fail because the dialogue is as bad as the frights. This one captured something special though, perhaps it was because there weren't many stereotypical characters. All the blue prints were there to elaborate on, but instead we see these characters for who they are through their stories told in between being hunted. They could have had the "token" personalities but they didn't. The writing could use some touch ups, but for a B-movie it's better than most. Who knows, you may watch this movie and totally hate it. Maybe, ultimately, i'll be the only one that considers $LA$HER$ a few notches above the usual camp. That's fine by me.
This is a fine little exploitation film made on a shoestring budget (approximately $150K, according to the maker). There's enough humor and panache to keep it interesting and reviewers who've criticised it's production design and performers are somewhat out of line, when you consider the budget and amazingly short shooting schedule. The sets and performances actually tend to work, when you compare them to the insidious TV shows being lampooned. Frankly, the actors here do just as well as Neve Campbell, David Arquette, Freddie Prinze, Jr., Jennifer Love-Hewitt and the rest of their ilk ever do in big-budget counterparts. I personally appreciate the enthusiasm of filmmakers like Maurice Devereaus and his crew for putting out personal little productions like SLASHERS, and look forward to what they might do with a studio-style budget.
6 people (Sarah Joslyn Crowder, Kieran Keller, Tony Curtis Blondell and more) have agreed to be a part of a Japanese reality show in which they are locked in a creepy house and stalked and killed by 3 sickos (a wonderful performance by Neil Napier and an alright job by Christopher Piggins). Whoever gets out alive wins millions and millions of dollars. But who will get out alive? Maurice Devereaux does a much better job at writing than directing. The script is surprisingly original and smart.
The film is filled with bad actors. However, there are a few gems in here: Kieran Keller, who has done nothing and has nothing planned was actually pretty good IMO, and Tony Curtis Blondell is up and rising. But the best, IMO, was Neil Napier, who played 2 killers very well.
Out of all the "Reality Show" horrors, this is one of the better ones, along side with "My Little Eye" and Kolobos.
The film is filled with bad actors. However, there are a few gems in here: Kieran Keller, who has done nothing and has nothing planned was actually pretty good IMO, and Tony Curtis Blondell is up and rising. But the best, IMO, was Neil Napier, who played 2 killers very well.
Out of all the "Reality Show" horrors, this is one of the better ones, along side with "My Little Eye" and Kolobos.
Did you know
- TriviaThere will not be a Slashers sequel as Maurice said it's not possible due to legal issues.
- GoofsWhen Michael stabs Devon in the back, you can see the person who squirts the blood in the bottom left hand corner of the screen.
- Quotes
Michael Gibbons: The longer the waitin' the better the lovin', as they say.
- Crazy creditsThe closing credits end with mock advertisements for Black Lung ("Twice the tar, twice the flavor"), Coffin Nails ("You know we're bad, but isn't it good to be bad..."), and Cancer Man ("Go out in style") cigarettes.
- Alternate versionsThere was a 2 hour version that premiered at the Fantasia film Festival in July 2001.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Playing with Your Nerves: The Making of 'Slashers' (2002)
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $165,000 (estimated)
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content