Bitch Ass

This is a very low budget horror film. A riff on movies like Saw.

With an introduction by Tony Todd who name checks Candyman.

Q (Teon Kelley) is a disfigured man with a mask who like to play games. Such as Battleship and Jenga.

When some hoods break into his grandmother's house. Q cuts them some slack. They can leave if they can beat him. Only Q is too good for them.

There is a backstory how Q, a shy nervous young student was lured to be cut up by some nasty school bully.

The film presents Q as a sadistic anti hero. He takes his medicine when he loses a game.

You actually sympathise with him more than the others who have done bad things.

The movie has good production values despite the low budget. It also attempts to kickstart a black horror character.

A lot of negative reviews but I thought it was much better than a lot of low budget movies of this type that still spawned sequels- Sleepaway Camp ring a bell anyone? I also recall one of the best classics ever originally being panned by critical when it first came out, the original Evil Dead. While this is far from being in that category it still has its moments and may be a classic in the making, who knows? I'm impressed that it was as good as it was being the extremely low budget it was under, especially having a known celebrity as Tony Todd as part of the cast. I've come across so many horror movies on the streaming services where I couldn't watch any more than a half hours worth before turning them off, especially with the horrible acting involved, which was not the case here. All actors involved did seem to be much better than what you'd expect, that's for sure! But you can make your own decision.

This film manages to carve out a niche for itself with a story that showcases some inventive ideas despite its limited budget. While it's commendable how the film attempts to make the most of its resources, there are several areas where it falls short, leaving it more of a mixed bag than a standout feature.

One of the film's strengths is its approach to storytelling. The premise is intriguing, and it's clear that the filmmakers put thought into crafting a narrative that stands apart from more conventional fare. The story, while not without its merits, does offer a refreshing change of pace and keeps you engaged with its unique plot twists. It's evident that the filmmakers tried to make the best out of what they had, and for that, they deserve some credit.

However, the positives are overshadowed by several notable shortcomings. The performances, unfortunately, leave much to be desired. While the cast tries to bring their characters to life, the acting often feels wooden and unconvincing, detracting from the film's overall impact. This lack of strong performances means that emotional moments fall flat, and it becomes difficult to fully invest in the characters or their fates.

The cinematography is another area where the film struggles. The film suffers from inconsistent visual quality, with some scenes poorly lit or awkwardly framed. This uneven cinematography takes away from the immersion and can make the viewing experience feel jarring at times. Instead of enhancing the atmosphere, it often feels like a missed opportunity to elevate the film's impact.

Moreover, the plot contains a number of implausibilities that can be hard to overlook. The story takes several leaps in logic that stretch credibility, making it difficult to stay fully engaged. These implausibilities, combined with some clumsy storytelling choices, result in a narrative that, while ambitious, ultimately feels strained and unconvincing.

In conclusion, this is a film that showcases some creativity and makes an admirable effort with its limited budget. However, its shortcomings in performance, cinematography, and plausibility hinder its overall effectiveness. It's a mixed bag that might appeal to those who appreciate unique stories despite their execution flaws, but for many, it might be a case of good intentions falling short of a fully realized execution.

The year is 1999, it is 666 Night (whatever that is?), a gang of teenagers break into a house in their Los Angeles neighbourhood (or should I say "Hood"?). Bad news for them, a hulking masked killer called (insert the title of the movie, ironically if I were to type it myself my review would probably be rejected) lives there, he likes to plays games - deadly games! The maniac's childhood name is Seesaw, it doesn't take a genius to figure that this film borrows from the "Saw" movies. One by one he plays gory games with the gang, the first one is "Operation", only instead of playing with the regular board game an actual human body is used. I thought this was a clever idea but sadly, like much of the film, it is poorly executed. Another game played is Connect 4, hooked up to a guillotine. This film stars an all black cast and it sort of boasts of featuring the first black killer to don a face mask. I'm fine with this, I love to watch all horror movies, but needless to say it will not appeal to everyone. The quality of acting is a mixed bunch, overall it is pretty amateur though horror legend Tony Todd has a small but welcome part as a horror TV host. There are a few flashback scenes set in 1980, modern vehicles can be seen driving past characters who look fashion-wise at least 1990's. There are a few gory bits but nothing to get excited about. Looking at some of the reviews on here a number have obviously been written by people connected with the making of this turkey, take the high scoring ones with a large pinch of salt! Given that this movie was made on a tiny budget I will give the makers some credit, initially I thought that it was going to be worse than what it turned out to be. However a turd is still a turd no matter how much you polish it, know what I'm saying?

I was stuck for something to watch and I found this on one of many many streaming platforms here in the UK.

I checked the reviews on here and I can assure you this is a real review from a real person lol this is NO way as bad as people on here have made out.

I'm not gonna spoil it but if The People Under The Stairs is a 10 and Bones is a 1 this is easily a 6. With the late great Tony Todd playing the role as the "Crypt Keeper" I knew it couldn't be all bad.

The actual story is quite good. The acting is as really not that bad. It's cheesy like any anthology show of that era was.

The villain wasn't all that bad. He had a good backstory.

All in all was pretty good. Wouldn't watch it again, but definitely worth one watch.