Feast III: The Happy Finish

Ask the best chefs in the world and they will say that 'presentation is everything'; it's an old adage that I really wish director John Gulager had applied when serving up The Happy Finish, the final chapter in his Feast trilogy. Style and attention to detail are in short order, the film being dished up with all the finesse of a pig farmer with a slop bucket; if it was the third course in a meal, it would result in a severe case of indigestion.

Like Beluga caviar, Marmite and Spam, the film's main ingredients—extreme gore, female nudity, offensive humour, rubbery monsters, and random perversion—are an acquired taste, but Gulager's scatter-shot approach results in a chaotic mess that even seasoned fans of trashy horror will be hard pushed to stomach. There are one or two tasty morsels on offer—some decent effects and a couple of genuinely funny gags—but these are completely smothered by the irritating editing, half-baked ideas, unlikable characters, moronic moments, and truly bizarre directorial choices (an entire scene lit by a strobe?!?!) all of which serve to kill the appetite quicker than a short, curly hair in your mashed potato.

Yes, just a few short months after Feast II, here comes the happy finish to the trilogy. And while this one is not as good as the first one, it is a bit better than two. The focus of this one is comedy more than horror, though there is plenty of gore and once again boobs to keep me entertained, but then I am a pervert who likes a good gory movie. The story has our group of survivors right where they were after the last movie and like the last movie they have to do a lot of stuff to try and survive. They have no need to fear though as a butt kicking gun touting hero, a prophet, and a martial arts master come to the aid of our tired and beat down gang. They have to go through many obstacles on their way to finding a way past the deadly creatures that feast upon human flesh. From the rooftop where we left them, to the sheriff's office, and to a drainage pipe. You will get to see one person tired of the abuse get out of the film fairly quickly, lots of deaths, the use of gunpowder to stop the bleeding, and an ending that made me go "what"? It is far from perfect as the tunnel scenes were a bit dark and they used night vision camera's a bit to much. Still the cast is still funny in a strange way and I like the way it follows the first movies format of introducing the characters and the previous movies combined. It is nice in this entire series that the monsters are a combination of costume and makeup rather than the computer generated monsters of the science fiction channel too. I don't understand why the score is so low here on the same level with the abysmal "Automaton Transfusion" as that piece of crap had no sort of ending whatsoever and the effects were not good even for a low budget movie. Though people here probably took pity upon it because it was a beginner film maker who made it.

When it comes to a true relic it's hard to give a review. All I can say is that this (literally) piece of s**t is good cinema.

Where this lacks in structure it makes up in substance. The substance being not the cruelty or injustice of the world, but the driving force of all humanity: fun and love.

Kaufman said that the cinema is a dead art form. Pure hubris. Of course that was after the fact that he'd just created one of the more meaningful pieces of art: Synecdoche New york. Cinema just needs to go boldly where no one has gone before.

Beyond theater, no matter how much as it hurts. Saying farewell to Shakespeare causes physical pain, but sometimes the pain is good. Or like on tn the case of a modern human being, necessary.

In cinema there's nothing to bind us. Nothing to keep us apart. The cycle begins again when nothing is given. Well, except our endless appetite for sex and violence.

Better than II or worse then II? There is some debate on that.

At least we can clearly see the monsters in this one.

The gore is worse than ever with decapitations, and the monster eating the head whole, and then, I kid you not, eliminating the uneaten head.

If you have epilepsy, you might not want to watch the last 10 minutes or so. It flashes on and off and it made me dizzy.

It was better that Feast II, but not by much. It was a gore-fest with lots of action, but it was hard to follow exactly what was going on most of the time.

The ending was a real shock!

Let me start out by saying i am not a horror film fan. I've watched the classics but some how given up on a lot of modern day scary films,as they rely too little on plot and more on nudity,gore, violence and the latter.

Now by saying that, I've watched all three Feast films. I was skeptical,as the reviews had me expecting very little from the films. Let me say,they're not as bad as people give them credit for. A lot of it is gross,and some of the situations are tacky,but i believe the creators of this film are giving the audience the intelligence to know that it's meant to be gross,tacky and out of good taste. With that being said, the movie was quite entertaining. I liked the new characters added to this one,as it follows directly after the second film.

The movie's distasteful points I'm ashamed to admit i found a lot of humor in. I learned that comedy does not need to be intelligent or witty or even crafty to find it funny. If you're expecting Schindler's List or even The Ring, you're definitely not going to get it here. But if you're expecting entertainment packed in a horror-comedy film about disgusting monsters eating humans and killing everything in sight,you will not be too disappointed.

Movies are supposed to entertain,and i think sometimes we get caught up in what's considered a "Good" movie, that we forget that if bad ones didn't exist,we would have little to distinguish the two.

But overall,i'd give it a 7,i would've given it more had they given the new characters more screen time ;p