film: "CHAOS"-2005 Is this the WORST Movie Of All Time

[cydonorb]

Last weekend I was walking by The Pioneer Theatre, a VERY indie theatre here in the East Village (Manhattan, NYC). There was a throng of people leaving the theatre angy & upset. I hyeard more than one person say "If this is the type of shit they're going to program then I am NEVER coming to this place again". I looked at the poster & saw that it's a film called CHAOS & I was struck that the tagline "Just keep repeating 'It;s only a movie, it's only a movie'". This is the EXACT same tagline that was used for LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT.

I looked the film up online and HOLY FUCKING SHIT!! I have NEVER, EVER seen such bad reviews for a movie or have ever seen a movie get "0%" on Rotten Tomatoes.com.

Below I've reprinted the reviews from Roger Ebert & the New York Times. yeah, I know they're mainstream critics, but even the underground press has rejected this one. I'm just reprinting Ebert & the NY Times as they encapsulate the best.

Chaos
'Chaos' is no 'Devil's Rejects'

Release Date: 2005

Ebert Rating: Zero stars

BY ROGER EBERT / Aug 12, 2005



"Chaos" is ugly, nihilistic, and cruel -- a film I regret having seen. I urge you to avoid it. Don't make the mistake of thinking it's "only" a horror film, or a slasher film. It is an exercise in heartless cruelty and it ends with careless brutality. The movie denies not only the value of life, but the possibility of hope.

The movie premiered in late July at Flashback Weekend, a Chicago convention devoted to horror and exploitation films. As I write, it remains unreviewed in Variety, unlisted on RottenTomatoes.com. As an unabashed retread of "Last House on the Left" (itself by Bergman's "The Virgin Spring"), it may develop a certain notoriety, but you don't judge a book by its cover or a remake by its inspiration.

A few Web writers have seen it, and try to deal with their feelings: "What is inflicted upon these women is degrading, humiliating, and terrible on every level" -- Capone, Ain't It Cool News; "Disgusting, shocking and laced with humiliation, nudity, profanity and limit-shoving tastelessness" -- John Gray, Pitofhorror.com; "What's the point of this s--t anyway?" -- Ed Gonzalez, slant.com.

But Moriarity finds the film "highly effective" if "painful and difficult to watch." And Gray looks on the bright side: DeFalco "manages to shock and disturb as well as give fans a glimpse of hope that some people are still trying to make good, sleazy, exploitation films." Gonzalez finds no redeeming features, adding "DeFalco directs the whole thing with all the finesse of someone who has been hit on the head one too many times (is this a good time to say he was a wrestler?)."

I quote these reviews because I'm fascinated by their strategies for dealing with a film that transcends all barriers of decency. There are two scenes so gruesome I cannot describe them in a newspaper, no matter what words I use. Having seen it, I cannot ignore it, nor can I deny that it affected me strongly: I recoiled during some of the most cruel moments, and when the film was over I was filled with sadness and disquiet.

The plot: Angelica and Emily (Chantal Degroat and Maya Barovich) are UCLA students, visiting the country cabin of Emily's parents, an interracial couple. They hear about a rave in the woods, drive off to party, meet a lout named Swan (Sage Stallone) and ask him where they can find some Ecstasy. He leads them to a cabin occupied by Chaos (Kevin Gage), already wanted for serial killing; Frankie (Stephen Wozniak) and Sadie (Kelly K. C. Quann). They're a Manson family in microcosm. By the end of the film, they will have raped and murdered the girls, not always in that order, nor does the bloodshed stop there. The violence is sadistic, graphic, savage and heartless. Much of the action involves the girls weeping and pleading for their lives. When the film pauses for dialogue, it is often racist.

So that's it. DeFalco directs with a crude, efficient gusto, as a man with an ax makes short work of firewood. Kevin Gage makes Chaos repulsive and cruel, Quann is effective as a pathetic, dim-witted sex slave, and the young victims are played with relentless sincerity; to the degree that we are repelled by the killers and feel pity for the victims, the movie "works." It works, all right, but I'm with Ed Gonzalez: Why do we need this s--t?

Cast & Credits

Chaos: Kevin Gage
Angelica: Chantal Degroat
Emily: Maya Barovich
Swan: Sage Stallone
Frankie: Stephen Wozniak
Sadie: Kelly K. C. Quann
Sheriff: Ken Medlock

Dinsdale Releasing presents a film written and directed by David DeFalco. Running time: 78 minutes. Rated NC-17 (adults only).


August 10, 2005
Looking a Lot Like 'Last House on the Left'
By LAURA KERN
More shocking than any of the sadistic carnage and degradation found in "Chaos" is the staggering audacity of the filmmaker David DeFalco's crediting the idea behind his brain-dead film as original.

It's an unabashed rip-off - right down to the poster taglines - of Wes Craven's 1972 "Last House on the Left" (which in turn was inspired by true events and by Ingmar Bergman's "Virgin Spring").

"Chaos" focuses on the grisly torture and murders of two teenage girls, Angelica (Chantal DeGroat) and Emily (Maya Barovich), by a group of depraved sickos - and the subsequent vengeance sought by Emily's parents.

Aside from the surprising omission of the most chilling element of "Last House" - that the brutal crimes take place just outside shouting distance of one of the girls' home - "Chaos" unspools its thievery of the earlier film with only minor details slightly altered. The ineffectual, idiotic cops are more bigoted, fueled by the fact that Emily is half black. The girls are on their way to a rave, not a concert, and are looking to score some ecstasy, not pot, before making the final mistake of their lives, following the harmless-enough-looking Swan (Sage Stallone) to the hideout of his father, known as Chaos (Kevin Gage), his father's partner and groupie/girlfriend. "Chaos" also tosses in a twist ending so preposterous that even if the action leading up to it had been effective it would have served to ruin it.

To justify making a film this gruesome and repugnant, it's essential that it be at least well crafted. But the script and the characters are cliché-ridden and the acting is atrocious, though Gage is convincingly repulsive as the lead psychopath. The girls' performances are especially laughable, making it difficult to really care about them, and watching them struggle to pull off a simple exchange of small talk is more excruciating than witnessing their graphic demise.

Unless you enjoy viewing senseless, extreme acts of rape and mutilation, stay far, far away from this one. The only thing this so-called cautionary tale will inspire audiences to do is to never sit through another insultingly awful piece of exploitative trash "conceived" by David DeFalco.

Chaos

Opens today in Manhattan.

Directed by David DeFalco; written by Mr. DeFalco, based on an idea by Steven Jay Bernheim and Mr. DeFalco; director of photography, Brandon Trost; edited by Mark Leif and Peter Devane Flanagan; production designer, Freddy Naff; produced by Mr. Bernheim; released by Dominion Entertainment. At the Two Boots Pioneer Theater, 155 East Third Street, at Avenue A, East Village. Running time: 74 minutes. This film is not rated.

WITH: Kevin Gage (Chaos), Stephen Wozniak (Kevin), Sage Stallone (Swan), Kelly K. C. Quann (Sadie), Chantal Degroat (Angelica) and Maya Barovich (Emily).



Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Contact Us Work for Us Back to Top

 

[Tanuki_23]

Well, Im not gonna lie, these reviews make me wanna see it. Im sure the directer had a purpose such as push the boundaries beyond anything released in a theater ever, and see the response.

 

[cydonorb]

In case anyone thinks Ebert is a complete wimp, below is his THREE AND A HALF star review of the film that CHAOS rips off, LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT.

Last House on the Left

Release Date: 1972

Ebert Rating: ***½

By Roger Ebert / Jan 1, 1972

LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is a tough, bitter little sleeper of a movie that's about four times as good as you'd expect. There is a moment of such sheer and unexpected terror that it beats anything in the heart-in-the-mouth line since Alan Arkin jumped out of the darkness at Audrey Hepburn in WAIT UNTIL DARK.

I don't want to give the impression, however, that this is simply a good horror movie. It's horrifying, all right, but in ways that have nothing to do with the supernatural. It's the story of two suburban girls who go into the city for a rock concert, are kidnapped by a gang of sadistic escaped convicts and their sluttish girlfriend, and are raped and murdered. Then, in a coincidence even the killers find extreme, the gang ends up spending the night at the home of one of the girls' parents.

The parents accidentally find out the identities of the killers, because of a stolen locket and some blood-stained clothing in their baggage. Enraged, the father takes on the gang single-handedly and murders them. Does any of this sound familiar? Think for a moment. Setting aside the modern details, this is roughly the plot of Ingmar Bergman's THE VIRGIN SPRING.
The story is also based on a true incident, we're told at the beginning of the movie, but I have my doubts; I think the producers may simply be trying one of those "only the names have been changed" capers. What does come through in LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is a powerful narrative, told so directly and strongly that the audience (mostly in the mood for just another good old exploitation film) was rocked back on its psychic heels.

Wes Craven's direction never lets us out from under almost unbearable dramatic tension (except in some silly scenes involving a couple of dumb cops, who overact and seriously affect the plot's credibility). The acting is unmannered and É natural, I guess. There's no posturing. There's a good ear for dialogue and nuance. And there is evil in this movie. Not bloody escapism, or a thrill a minute, but a fully developed sense of the vicious natures of the killers. There is no glory in this violence. And Craven has written in a young member of the gang (again borrowed on Bergman's story) who sees the horror as fully as the victims do. This movie covers the same philosophical territory as Sam Peckinpah's STRAW DOGS, and is more hard-nosed about it: Sure, a man's home is his castle, but who wants to be left with nothing but a castle and a lifetime memory of horror?

 

[cydonorb]

Well, Im not gonna lie, these reviews make me wanna see it. Im sure the directer had a purpose such as push the boundaries beyond anything released in a theater ever, and see the response.

I know what you're saying as the negative reviews are what drove me to such enjoyable craptaculars such as CAN'T STOP THE MUSIC, MOMMIE DEAREST, CRIMES OF PASSION, SHOWGIRLS & PLAN 9 FROM OUTERSPACE. Searingly bad reviews also drove me to such "controversial" epics such as CALIGULA, IN THE REALM OF THE SENSES, THE NIGHT PORTER, LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT & THE BROWN BUNNY as they so outraged the mainstream critics & caused such an uproar that I had to see what all the buzz was about. To a certain degree I enjoyed all of them--CALIGULA may be a complete pice of shit but it was SO depraved & it was so odd seeing actors like John Gielgud, Helen Mirren & Peter O'Toole acting beside porno actors while hardcore sex (& even harder core gore) was happening around them. There was an odd fascination about it--I kept thinking "Jezus H Tapdancing Christ, who the hell made this shit & can I get some of what he's on!"

But then there are movies like I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE, THE GUTS OF A VIRGIN, CANNIBAL FEROUX and now CHAOS that seem to be bad porno films made by bad pornographers who have subsitutued hardcore sex with hardcore violence. We've all seen porn films that are so bad, so badly shot & the performers so ugly & so unconvincing that we shut off the DVD or VCR after a few minutes. The sort of artistic sensibilitites that motivate low grade porn (read: nothing but profit, profit, profit) seem to be the ones that motivate films like these. I can't speak for CHAOS as I haven't seen it yet (nor plan to) but I have seen the others that I listed & all ended up being one giant bore. To me that was the worst thing about I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE--along with being sick, misogynistic, amoral, ameteuristic & sadistic it was boring. Just one violent scene after another with no suspense whatsoever. Likewise the Japanese film THE GUTS OF A VIRGIN, a film that combined VERY harcore gore & sex & had members of both sexes dismembering & cannibalizing eachother while fucking ended up being painful to watch more for the tedium than anything else. And this is a flick where a woman sticks a dismembered arm slowly up her pussy! There is no way to connect with what's happening onscreen as there has been no effort to make the characters human because the creators just don't care. It's shock for shock's sake because the director & writer cannot do anything else.

I guess what compelled me to spend THIS much time on this film was the reaction of the audience coming out of the Pioneer Theatre. These are jaded & hardened East Village types who truly have seen it all, from nasty gore films It wasn't so much that they were shocked & appalled as they were angry that a theatre with a rep like The Pioneer showed something so worthless.

 

[cydonorb]

the Fangoria review

OK, last post on this...but even the hardcore horror sites are trashing it. Here is the Fangoriareview

from http://www.fangoria.com

Reviewed by MICHAEL GINGOLD

Mike sez…


Here we go again—another movie whose sole selling point is how “brutal” and “shocking” it is. After three decades or so of extreme gore in horror cinema, is there really still an audience for a film whose only appeal is the explicitness of its bloodshed? And more pertinently, since “shock” suggests “surprise,” can a movie engender that reaction when everything about it is derived from a cult favorite of the past?

From every detail of its plot to its advertising and promotional campaign, CHAOS is a—oh, let’s not use that nasty term “flagrant ripoff” and call it a “total homage” to Wes Craven’s LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT. Most horror fans will know the plot: Girls headed for concert meet boy, boy promises drugs, girls meet boy’s evil “family,” family tortures and kills girls, family meets one girl’s parents, parents kill family. But some films’ notoriety and/or classic status is inextricably tied in with the times in which they were made, and LAST HOUSE is one of them. That movie felt like a direct reaction to/reflection of the violence rising in early-’70s society, when parents feared that anything from those drug-addled hippies to the Vietnam draft might wrest their children from them, and presented a scenario in which even the most mild-mannered suburbanites could descend into savagery.

But CHAOS behaves as if there haven’t been countless similar films made in the 30 years since LAST HOUSE, and does little to update either its themes or its action. Yeah, the girls are going to a rave rather than a typical rock concert this time, but the only promise of a fresh angle involves the spotlighted parents being an interracial couple. Yet the film never really goes anywhere with this idea beyond setting up a tension between the two and a racist cop (itself an idea that seems left over from the ’70s). Apparently, writer/director David DeFalco (the credits have the gall to claim his script is “based on an original idea by” DeFalco and producer Steven Jay Bernheim) believed that the only ploy necessary to up the ante for modern times was to make the specific acts of violence even more extreme.

Depressingly, he chose to do so in the basest and least imaginative way: by sexualizing them. One girl’s nipple is cut off and fed to her in graphic detail, while the other is violated in her nether regions with a large knife; that scene isn’t as explicit, but it is no less queasy. So what separates this film from good movies like THE DEVIL’S REJECTS and WOLF CREEK, which are just as vicious and relentless in the way they treat their onscreen victims? Simply this: CHAOS couldn’t care less about its characters except as pieces of meat to be violated. As hideous as REJECTS and CREEK become, they also allow us to get to know both the villains and victims as people, whereas in CHAOS, it’s only their sadism and suffering that matter.

DeFalco hasn’t even bothered to come up with an original plot to serve as a framework for the acts of butchery; he has simply appropriated wholesale the plot of another film and called it a day. And CHAOS’ colors really show themselves when the parents discover the crime and set out to avenge it, which should at least somewhat justify the girls’ murders by allowing some kind of catharsis for them. Instead, DeFalco rushes through the final action (the movie is only 68 minutes long, plus credits), which is risibly conceived and awkwardly staged—as if now that the girls’ violation—the true point—has been wrapped up, nothing else really matters.

All that said, why am I giving CHAOS slightly higher than a one-skull rating? Well, in the name of objective criticism, I should note that the movie is not badly put together on a craftsmanship level, and that Kevin Gage, as the eponymous lead villain, gives a scarily convincing performance. It’s evident that a certain amount of technical and performance effort has been put into a film that is empty at its core. The sole aim seems to have been to sicken people out of their seats, and advance publicity has gleefully noted the number of viewers who walked out on the premiere screening. But anyone can point a camera at staged atrocities and get audiences to bolt; DeFalco clearly has yet to learn that the real trick is making a movie dramatic and intriguing enough to keep people watching no matter how horrifying the sights on screen become.

 

[DarthMom]

I know it has been said already, but can't believe DeFalco is claiming it is an original idea. The similarities to LHOTL are shocking.

that said, I can't wait to see it. The gruesomer the better.

As a kid, I woudl go to the horror section and pick the movies that had a cover over em cause the picture was too bad to show :D Horror movies have always fascinated me. God bless Faces of Death