The Anatomy of Monsters

Audience Reviews

View All (2) audience reviews

Audience Member The beauty of Tabitha Bastien keeps you hanging on and glued to an already steady of blah but the movie bleeds too long in the premise of the chances you'll bring to bed an extra killer besides yourself. But, at least I stayed until the end unlike her victims. Rated 3/5 Stars •  Rated 3 out of 5 stars 01/23/23 Full Review Audience Member Possibly the worst movie I've seen. Commits one of the worst sins of film making by leading with incredibly dull scenes for the first fifteen minutes. Cliché shots of a man waking up and getting dressed, followed by him meeting an over eager woman in a dive bar to have an unrealistic conversation involving obscure literary references. They go to a motel afterwards, where the film begins taking form... finally. The lead character we're supposed to be invested in gets discarded to a secondary role, as the woman he meets takes over. Unfortunately, this woman offers nothing interesting. We learn she is a serial killer through flashbacks - stomping a homeless man to death in an alley, choking a taxi driver, etc. But her motivations are never explained beyond a short scene of her as a child killing a cat and enjoying it. Evil for the sake of evil... Saturday cartoon villains have more depth than this. And making it worse, almost all her lines are spoken with flat arrogance - leaving her increasingly unlikable and grating as the film progresses. The original character - who we watched get dressed in the beginning - is also an aspiring killer. This leads to a power struggle in the hotel room: Who will kill who? But with him having a no real background and even less motivation than his opponent, it's more a question of, who cares? More flashbacks from the patronizing killer lady reveal an unnecessary female-friend-character involving pointless shots of them having mundane conversations over the phone or in front of a cafe. And a male love interest is also thrown in as an attempt at a redemption plot line. But being flashbacks, we can see redemption didn't work. So what's the point? The male love interest is played as an average goober who follows his deadly lover like a lost puppy until getting poisoned by a plate of spaghetti. By this point in the film, it's impossible for the viewer to care enough to laugh at how stupid that is. Or to have sympathy for the victim or the one-dimensional killer. Which sums up the film... "Who cares?", would have been a more accurate title. Certainly not the writer, director, actors, or whoever was in charge of the worst murder scene I've ever seen in a movie. They took footage of the killer lady in a hoodie running past a couple in a park. And with this footage, they added two flashes, two gun shot sound effects, then cut to the couple laying on the ground... I guess we're supposed to assume our annoying killer was holding a gun? Besides that being incredibly lazy, how do you shoot from the hip with that much accuracy while running? And we're supposed to believe this is from a murderer who we see lifting five pound weights with awful form in an attempt to be a stronger killer. Dumb action movies can get away with that because it's a core part of their appeal for their entire running length. But it doesn't work as a three second afterthought in an already terrible film. It's obvious that no research was done for this film. Not on guns, basic weight lifting, appealing characters, film making, set design, or camera technique - as the shots are oddly framed and poorly thought out. Distracting backgrounds and claustrophobic angles set on random street corners or ordinary apartment kitchens litter the film. The tell-tale low-light noise of a cheap camera covers most shots. Yes, this is an amateur film, but one that never strives to be good. Who made this, and why? Maybe there's a clue in the over-long shot of a taxi ride set to poorly performed goth music, or the detail of the killer lady being a DJ in an EDM goth night club - giving the movie a 'made-by-an-edgy-teenager' vibe. Then again, the average teenager doesn't have the money to produce a full length film. The trailer explains how the movie will take us into the mind of a killer, but instead I imagined I was in the mind of a hipster film maker with no talent. And I see him as delusional, pretentious, and living in a bubble. Rated 1/5 Stars •  Rated 1 out of 5 stars 01/24/23 Full Review Read all reviews

The Anatomy of Monsters

My Rating

Read More Read Less POST RATING WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW