Text: I'm a little torn on this movie. On the one hand, it very definitely glamorizes the killer and the violence done. On the other hand, it's not really believable enough to feel too close to home.
I will say that for a film with an estimated budget of $1,000, it's VERY well done. I figured it was low budget, but I would never have guessed it was THAT low.
This film dances very close to the line of being truly exploitive. The killer is sexy. The victim is sexy. The dead bodies are sexy.
There's an LSD trip sequence that I didn't think was really necessary. I didn't think it added much to the film. If the wanted to show the villain doing drugs, or forcing the victim to do drugs, they should have showed that at it might have been equally or more effective. At the very least it could have provided some character insight.
So, I'm gonna say... 5? It's an impressive effort for such a low budget flick. The acting is... not terrible. My conundrum is really... Is this "exploitation" or just exploitive?
I will say that for a film with an estimated budget of $1,000, it's VERY well done. I figured it was low budget, but I would never have guessed it was THAT low.
This film dances very close to the line of being truly exploitive. The killer is sexy. The victim is sexy. The dead bodies are sexy.
There's an LSD trip sequence that I didn't think was really necessary. I didn't think it added much to the film. If the wanted to show the villain doing drugs, or forcing the victim to do drugs, they should have showed that at it might have been equally or more effective. At the very least it could have provided some character insight.
So, I'm gonna say... 5? It's an impressive effort for such a low budget flick. The acting is... not terrible. My conundrum is really... Is this "exploitation" or just exploitive?