Tweet
Sheesh, I should have read up on this before renting it. It starred Ashley Judd ( whose work I usually like ) and Harry Connick Jr., and was directed by that Exorcist guy, Friedkin, so I was expecting a horror flick about bugs. But this was based on a stage play ( the film itself almost gave me claustrophobia ) and the horror was the story itself about character disintegration. Were the bugs real or imagined ? You tell me. Anyway, I'm sure there are art film folk out there who loved this. As for me ( aside from seeing Ashley nekkid ) : fuggaddabout it. :twisted:
-
I also thought it was a horror film until a show that was doing reviews made a statement about it being more or less a psycological thriller or hitchcock like movie.
Not great for horror fans expecting something scary or a insect scfi film.Robert -
Ashley was nekkid?? (calls video store to reserve copy)
I may well check this out as I'm a much bigger fan of psychological thrillers than of typical horror movies.Comment
-
Not sure I'd call it a psychological thriller myself. More of a movie about a girl and a boy losing thier minds. There were times when you wondered what was real and what was imagined. But really. The one set thing almost drove me as mad as the actors. :roll:Comment
-
You don't like claustrophobic, stagy films, then, I take it.Comment
-
This one was filmed as if all the action was taking place in one room, like a stageplay. This probably worked well on stage but not on a film you're showing in your HT and relaxing in a big comfortable chair where you can easily fall asleep :Z . Some stage plays ( like A Streetcar Named Desire, The Caine Mutiny,etc., ) transform well to the screen. Bugs is not one of them.Originally posted by OvationComment
-
Pardon me,
Did you say nekkid,Ashley(my,GOD has answered)LOL.
I think I might give this some of my time(well)Comment
-
Yeah, I have to say, BUG did have that particular redeeming quality.Originally posted by avrtRick
Comment
Comment