An unsuspecting, down-and-out man in a washed-up hick town has his life turned upside down when a drop-dead gorgeous stranger walks through the door of the local bar.An unsuspecting, down-and-out man in a washed-up hick town has his life turned upside down when a drop-dead gorgeous stranger walks through the door of the local bar.An unsuspecting, down-and-out man in a washed-up hick town has his life turned upside down when a drop-dead gorgeous stranger walks through the door of the local bar.
Ron Rogge'
- Tommy
- (as Ron Roggé)
Matthew C. Temple
- Frat Boy #1
- (as Matthew Temple)
Christopher Tarantino
- Frat Boy #2
- (as Chris Tarantino)
Featured reviews
When I stumbled upon this 2009 horror movie titled "Animals", by random chance here in 2024, I picked it up on account of it being a horror movie that I had never seen, much less actually ever heard about. And given my life-long romance with the horror genre, of course I needed no persuasion to sit down and watch what director Douglas Aarniokoski had to offer.
The storyline put together cy Craig Spector was pretty straightforward and actually had some good parts to it. However, it was somewhat diluted and tainted by an excessive amount of nudity and sex scenes. Sure, I get the aspect of the animalistic side to the movie, with becoming a beast and all, but I have to say that writer Craig Spector was just paying too much attention to sexual scenes and nudity. While I am certainly no prude, then I just don't really want to waste my time by watching nudity and sex scenes in a movie. I am watching it to be entertained by a story, not by carnal scenes.
I was under the impression that it was a werewolf movie, but turns out that it wasn't. And that was actually a nice surprise, as it transcended being merely another werewolf flick in the bunch.
Of the entire cast ensemble, I was only familiar with Marc Blucas and Naveen Andrews. It should be noted that the acting performances in the movie were fair.
There were a couple of rather brutally violent scenes with some gory results. And as a gorehound and a life-long fan of horror movies, then that really spruced up the movie for me. Thumbs up for that accomplishment.
The effects in the movie are fair. Sure, you will not be blown away or bedazzled, but the effects served their purpose in the movie. However, I don't really understand why the scenes with the creatures had to be blurry and had smoke in them. For suspense? Perhaps. Probably to save money on the effects, I suppose. But come on, people want to see the creatures in movies, not just flashy glimpses.
Had director Douglas Aarniokoski opted to tone down the nudity and sex scenes, then the movie would have been all the more entertaining, enjoyable and watchable. However, I have to say that the movie is one that came and went without leaving a lasting impression on me.
"Animals" is hardly a movie that warrants more than just a single viewing, as the storyline just didn't have enough contents and layers to support multiple viewings.
My rating of "Animals" lands on a five out of ten stars.
The storyline put together cy Craig Spector was pretty straightforward and actually had some good parts to it. However, it was somewhat diluted and tainted by an excessive amount of nudity and sex scenes. Sure, I get the aspect of the animalistic side to the movie, with becoming a beast and all, but I have to say that writer Craig Spector was just paying too much attention to sexual scenes and nudity. While I am certainly no prude, then I just don't really want to waste my time by watching nudity and sex scenes in a movie. I am watching it to be entertained by a story, not by carnal scenes.
I was under the impression that it was a werewolf movie, but turns out that it wasn't. And that was actually a nice surprise, as it transcended being merely another werewolf flick in the bunch.
Of the entire cast ensemble, I was only familiar with Marc Blucas and Naveen Andrews. It should be noted that the acting performances in the movie were fair.
There were a couple of rather brutally violent scenes with some gory results. And as a gorehound and a life-long fan of horror movies, then that really spruced up the movie for me. Thumbs up for that accomplishment.
The effects in the movie are fair. Sure, you will not be blown away or bedazzled, but the effects served their purpose in the movie. However, I don't really understand why the scenes with the creatures had to be blurry and had smoke in them. For suspense? Perhaps. Probably to save money on the effects, I suppose. But come on, people want to see the creatures in movies, not just flashy glimpses.
Had director Douglas Aarniokoski opted to tone down the nudity and sex scenes, then the movie would have been all the more entertaining, enjoyable and watchable. However, I have to say that the movie is one that came and went without leaving a lasting impression on me.
"Animals" is hardly a movie that warrants more than just a single viewing, as the storyline just didn't have enough contents and layers to support multiple viewings.
My rating of "Animals" lands on a five out of ten stars.
I finally got to see the final cut of this film and although I still think it's a good horror film, with a few fairly intense sex scenes, it's a bit less effective than I expected.
It is much better than the IMDb rating indicates. Only the cartoonish digital "animals"(imagine Scooby Doo's angry ghost) weaken what could have been a well-above-average film. I find it interesting that Reno is listed first in order on locations. Nearly all of this was shot in Utah. But I know there was some controversy about the close to "soft porn" sex and the Utah Film Commission. Just filling in the long pause at the end of the first sex scene with talk I heard on set, I suspect that long cut leaves out a lot to be desired.
I worked four days on this film as Bart Johnson's banker buddy, mostly in the bar scene. I loved watching the director working. Animals had a strong cast and crew and the editing and "most" of the effects are fine.
It's certainly worth the price of rental from Redbox!
It is much better than the IMDb rating indicates. Only the cartoonish digital "animals"(imagine Scooby Doo's angry ghost) weaken what could have been a well-above-average film. I find it interesting that Reno is listed first in order on locations. Nearly all of this was shot in Utah. But I know there was some controversy about the close to "soft porn" sex and the Utah Film Commission. Just filling in the long pause at the end of the first sex scene with talk I heard on set, I suspect that long cut leaves out a lot to be desired.
I worked four days on this film as Bart Johnson's banker buddy, mostly in the bar scene. I loved watching the director working. Animals had a strong cast and crew and the editing and "most" of the effects are fine.
It's certainly worth the price of rental from Redbox!
I have to say that I enjoyed this film. I relished the stunning cinematography and dynamic acting skills of both the male and female leads, as well as the many, many, many, sex scenes (none of which contributed to the plot. Hey, who doesn't love gratuitous tits every now and then?) Though I feel the ratio of tits to man-ass was greatly skewed in the wrong direction.
In addition I really love how the director utilized the soundtrack to alert the audience of an impending sexual encounter. The throbbing beat really hammers home just how passionate the characters on screen really are. I also love that the viewing audience is made aware of the difference between the female villain and heroin by the differing elevator music. Nasty sex with bad girl=bow chicka bow wow. Good girl sex=bow chicka bow wow+ adult contemporary acoustic guitar. Well done.
I especially enjoyed the fantastic cutting edge special effects. Blue hyena werewolf hybrids? Check. Mighty morphing mouths with sharp teeth? Check. Glowing gold and blue eyes? Check.
I know what you're thinking, this movie sounds amazing. It has everything. And you're right, it does.
In addition I really love how the director utilized the soundtrack to alert the audience of an impending sexual encounter. The throbbing beat really hammers home just how passionate the characters on screen really are. I also love that the viewing audience is made aware of the difference between the female villain and heroin by the differing elevator music. Nasty sex with bad girl=bow chicka bow wow. Good girl sex=bow chicka bow wow+ adult contemporary acoustic guitar. Well done.
I especially enjoyed the fantastic cutting edge special effects. Blue hyena werewolf hybrids? Check. Mighty morphing mouths with sharp teeth? Check. Glowing gold and blue eyes? Check.
I know what you're thinking, this movie sounds amazing. It has everything. And you're right, it does.
In Reno, Vic (Naveen Andrews) and Nora (Nicki Aycox) form an unusual couple of predators between human and animals that feed of human blood and enjoy having sex. Nora decides to leave Vic and heads to Clayton Valley, where she meets the former football player Jarrett (Marc Blucas) in the bar Jules' Joint. Jarrett was in college with a scholarship, but he had an accident that interrupted his promising career and he had returned to his hometown. His best friend Jules (Andy Corneau) idolizes him and has many pictures and trophies of Jarrett exposed in his bar; the bartender Jane (Eva Amurri) has a secret crush on him. Presently Jarrett has a problem with his chief Vaughn (Bart Johnson) that persecutes him at work. Nora is harassed by Vaughn in the bar, but she refuses his invitation and goes to Jarrett's house; she bites him while they have wild sex. Jarrett feels his senses more accurate but he does not understand what is happening to him. When Vic arrives in town seeking out Nora, Jarrett discovers that Vic is not human while Nora and his friends are jeopardized by the cruel creature.
"Animals" is a horror movie that blends gore and eroticism like an erotic thriller. Nicki Aycox is very hot in the sex scenes and the director Douglas Aarniokoski abuses in the exposition of the beautiful body of this actress. But this movie is not as bad as the IMDb Rating indicates. The screenplay and edition are confused; the special effects are above average; but the story could be an episode of "Supernatural', with these demoniac beings. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "Animais" ("Animals")
"Animals" is a horror movie that blends gore and eroticism like an erotic thriller. Nicki Aycox is very hot in the sex scenes and the director Douglas Aarniokoski abuses in the exposition of the beautiful body of this actress. But this movie is not as bad as the IMDb Rating indicates. The screenplay and edition are confused; the special effects are above average; but the story could be an episode of "Supernatural', with these demoniac beings. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "Animais" ("Animals")
It's worth watching Animals for Nicki Aycox as the femme fatale. There is excellent colour, but the soundtrack is a bit dated and ordinary, including the animal sounds. There are moments of good cinematography, some of the interior car scenes or shots of industry at twilight for example, but the movie falls down somewhat when it comes to visual effects. Not entirely though, as I thought some of the lightening movements of the 'animals' were done well. I'll have to just out and say it however ... the 3D animations were simplistic and cheap, and could only have worked if the movie was 1999 rather than 2009. Animals is basically a vampire movie, and if you like vampire movies then this one is interesting and sincere, and certainly bloody, and at least deserves a much higher score than the 3.8 it currently enjoys here at IMDb.
Did you know
- TriviaNicki Aycox's first full nude scenes.
- GoofsAll entries contain spoilers
- ConnectionsReferences Frankenstein (1931)
- How long is Animals?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $5,500,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 33 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content