Quench (2007) Poster

(2007)

User Reviews

Review this title
11 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
Imagine a film written and directed by the Ben Stein character from Ferris Bueller's Day Off. That's what this is like.
MBunge31 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
It looks like the budget for this film was roughly the same as the price of two McDonald's Happy Meals and a pack of Big Red gum. Yet it is not cheapness that defines Quench. It looks like most of the cast learned how to act by watching the Spider-Man segments on public television's old Electric Company show. Yet it is not the largely deficient performances which define this movie. No, Quench is defined by the awesome tediousness of Zack Parker's writing and direction. Imagine if the world's dullest man went to film school, graduated with a GPA of 2.76 and then made a movie that literally bored him to death while he edited it together. That's what Quench is like.

The story, which moves slower than molasses spilled on the surface of the ice planet Hoth, concerns scraggily-bearded college student Derik (Bo Barrett) hitchhiking his way to Richmond, Indiana to visit his childhood friend Jason (Ben Schmitt). Derik can't think of anywhere else to go after suffering a tragedy in his life, but he's put off by Jason's transformation into a small town wannabe goth, complete with black nail polish and a girlfriend who dresses and acts like a fat version of the lead singer of Evanescence. Jason and his girlfriend are involved in some secret group, something that alienates Derik as he sleeps on their couch and mooches off them for a couple of weeks. After Jason politely suggests Derik get off his lazy ass and get a job so he can help pay for basic expenses like food and utilities, Derik throws a fit like a first-class douche bag and storms out. He hooks up with Gina (Mia Moretti), a member of Jason's secret group. Like one of the psychotically lonely and desperate women from a VH1 reality show, Gina reveals the secrets of the group to Derik and asks him to join as her lover. After taking so long to get to that point that it felt like moss had started to grow on my eyeballs, it takes about 45 seconds for things to go bad with Derik and the secret group and the movie then ends with a twist that's more like a punch line from a basic cable comedy skit.

There is some female nudity in Quench, including the spectacular bazoombas of Samantha Eileen DeTurk as Jason's girlfriend, and Mia Moretti appears to have some acting talent. There's also a crude competence to the film-making and there are some ideas in the story that could have become genuinely interesting. However, everything in this film moves…so…very…very…slowly, as though writer/director Parker thinks tedium and dramatic tension are the exact same thing. It's not just that there are too many scenes that go on too long with nothing happening in them. It's that every single moment is stretched out and dwelled upon like the movie was timed out with a sundial. Judging from Quench, if Zack Parker were hired to direct a toothpaste commercial, he'd wind up making one that was 14 minutes long.

I'll be the first to complain about the hyperkinetic pace and visual blur of today's films that are made by people who have apparently never watched anything except music videos. However, it appears as though Parker has never watched anything except paint dry and grass grow.

It also doesn't help matters than Parker writes dialog like he's never had a fun or engaging conversation in his entire life. He also inexplicably has the main role in his movie portrayed by the least attractive guy in his cast. Bo Barrett makes Tom Green look like Tom Cruise. Even the male extras are all better looking than him. It may seem cheap and shallow, but the importance of having pretty people in your cast is inversely proportional to the production values of your movie. The better they are, the uglier your actors can be. The worse they are, the better it is to have the most attractive performers you can get, even if they can barely speak two sentences at a time.

Quench is a undeniable failure as a film. It is so stultifyingly languid that it might succeed as a cure for insomnia. If you do make the bad decision to watch it, be sure and not operate any heavy machinery afterwards.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
This was terrible...
mysticmerlin616 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
*SPOILERS!*

I'm sorry but I just don't get why this film is getting so much high acclaim.

Everything about this film was just so awful. The acting was so below par. There were so many annoying long pauses, like actors had forgotten their dialogue, and the character of Derrick's 'emotions' were just so random. Each scene had this horrible unnatural feel to it. There was no flowing dialogue or natural movement.

This could have also tied into the editing. The editing looks like your basic pre-school cut and paste job. Shots were too long and at one point Derrick managed to go from sitting at a chair talking to Gina to standing in a doorway without us even seeing him move. Thats just bad practice. And whoever shot the scene where Derrick leaves the house after hitting Ronnie, what the hell was up with that camera track? Invest in a steadicam or just use a zoom.

When it came to the final revelation all I could do was laugh. Yes its meant to solve the huge mystery of why he really came to the town, how Sarah died and why he doesn't want to be cut but I think the film missed the whole issue. I would have liked to have seen Derrick question Jason and Gina about their blood drinking. Surely as a carrier of HIV he'd think it was absolutely insane that these people would put themselves at risk but he just brushed it off as some weird stuff that they did. The scene where Derrick gets beaten up. Those SFX were awful not to mention the fact his face looked ridiculous. All that blood but no bruising? And where the hell did that little black towel come from?! And why is in in the middle of her living room?!

For me this film felt totally unsure of itself. I wasn't sure if it was trying to tell the story of his dead girlfriend, his broken friendship, the new love interest, his relationship with his parents, his HIV, a blood drinking cult or what. It was all kind of slapdashed together with an 'I HAVE HIV' slammed on the ending.

Definitely not a 'Modern Gothic Tragedy' as the tagline states. Surely the 'gothic tragedy' would have been Jason or Gina. Ugh, I just really dislike everything about this film.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Excellent attention to detail, but slow and boring
danvu817 November 2008
The amount of detail put into the scenes in this movie is great, but you can't make a movie out of that alone. The story and plot are simple enough to be summed up in a couple lines. The actors/actresses are, at best, average.

I found myself too impatient wanting to get to the end sooner. The filler and dialog feel extremely long winded. There's nothing wrong with the dialog - I wish they talked faster and also not move so slow.

There's a lot of quality in the movie: the artwork in the basement, the Gothic settings/themes, and the cinematography to name a few. The twist at the end was also very good.

If they squeezed the 90+ minute run time into a 60 minute time frame, I feel this would've been much more entertaining.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
My lord this was a bad movie
agent5998777411 November 2008
I've seen better acting in porn. In fact I've seen better plots in porn.

I can't find a single redeeming value in this movie. It was hands down the worst thing I've ever watched. How this atrocity of a film ever managed to get a rating above 2 I'm at a complete loss to explain. In fact it has completely removed any faith I might have had in a peer reviewed movie database.

I've you're thinking about watching it and you stumble upon this review. Do not walk. Run away from this movie. Go to Home Depot and buy a gallon of paint. You will get many more hours of enjoyment from watching that dry than this movie could ever hope to provide.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A failed expose of Goth culture
Young_WH7 February 2009
A supposed expose of Goth culture that exists--thrives--just below the radar in American culture, this indie fails miserably in its goal. The wooden performances on the part of all involved would not even suffice for a cheapie porn flick. Apparently shot in the rural Midwest, it purports to reveal the inner workings of a clan of young people brought together by a pair of adults who call themselves "mother and father," and lead their "children" to drink one another's blood in order to gain obedience within a secretive family. The word "bizarre" does not begin to do justice to this film; perhaps "awful," "god-awful," "terrible, "wretchedly acted," or just plain "wretched" would better describe this piece of horsepucky.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Horrible production/talent can't carry interesting concept
Mike231323 November 2008
It's sad to say something like this about a well written independent such as this film, but an idea as intriguing as this deserved to be surrounded by talented film makers who could not only avoid giving the image a cheap, film school quality, but could also draw in decent actors to portray these deep characters. Bottom line: you couldn't pay me to watch this piece of poop again. Just in case you weren't convinced the first time, here's a second chance to cement this into your brain. It's sad to say something like this about a well written independent such as this film, but an idea as intriguing as this deserved to be surrounded by talented film makers who could not only avoid giving the image a cheap, film school quality, but could also draw in decent actors to portray these deep characters. Bottom line: you couldn't pay me to watch this piece of poop again.
9 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bad.
lt_wangtron1 February 2009
Warning: Spoilers
*SPOILERS* This comment is probably the first and last one I will ever write on IMDb, but I felt the need to battle back against the grassroots conspiracy that is attempting to make this movie sound good. Simply put, this movie is terrible. The two gushing reviews on IMDb are obvious plants. It is not merely a matter of differing opinions, because there exists no realistic subjective perspective from which this film could be described as "a true Midwestern masterpiece." I wanted to enjoy this film. The DVD box spewed enticing praise like, "a thinking man's horror film" and "beautiful and frightening." There is nothing remotely frightening or thought provoking about this movie, and it left me feeling intentionally deceived. The acting is literally the worst I have ever seen. By the third scene, I found myself craving the performance quality of Sci-Fi originals or Oreo commercials with Eli Manning.

I found it impossible to sympathize with the slouching, whiny, androgynous main character, despite his tragic circumstances. His techniques for portraying a tortured soul mostly consisted of twisting his mouth around and staring downwards. During one of the cutting scenes, I was desperately hoping that the razor would be used to shave that disgusting strip of face-pubes trying to crawl off of his neck onto his face. That patch of facial hair was easily the most disconcerting part of this horror masterwork.

The rest of the characters are basically run-of-the-mill Goths with nasal congestion or speech impediments. Somehow, after meeting him for mere hours, one of them falls deeply in love with our round-shouldered hero, despite the fact that he has absolutely zero redeeming qualities. And then, after 88 agonizingly boring minutes of being mild-mannered and welcoming, the rest of the Goths inexplicably turn into murderous psychopaths, just to facilitate the shocking ending. It felt like someone decided to build a movie around a plot twist, but forgot to include a plot.

All in all, this movie really was awful. I wouldn't have felt the need to write anything about it, though, if I wasn't reading overtly ridiculous things like, "style carries subtle nuances of Kubrick, Polanski and Lynch." It is disrespectful to the audience to so deliberately exaggerate, especially when the comments are written in an elitist tone that suggests anyone who disagrees is a simpleton with a short attention span and poor taste in cinema. It causes everyone involved in the project to lose a lot of credibility, but I guess the movie did that too.

6.5/100
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Goth nonsense
billcr123 April 2012
Quench begins with an everyday sort of guy who has a best friend die suddenly, so he goes back to his hometown to visit a buddy from his high school days. His former classmate has changed into someone with jet black hair patterned after Billy Joe, the lead singer of Green Day. In fact, everybody other than the grieving lead looks like a pasty, goth castaway from Night of the Living Dead(apologies to George Romero).

He crashes with the vampire like dude and his girlfriend when things turn really weird with more anemic looking compatriots arriving and everyone is up for some sexual shenanigans. Are we having fun yet? The next chapter we see the really white people in robes, worshiping Satan; holy cow. The end can't come soon enough as Quench is a waste of time.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The Worst.....
forgotten_ragdollz27 January 2015
This movie was absolutely terrible. I laughed through most of it. Terrible acting, terrible script. Never could I respect this film maker. This was shot in my hometown. But this is terrible.I can't say anything else really. This was too much of an atrocity to watch. All of us watching had to pause to crack up. Not even getting drunk first would help with this piece of trash. Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. I wanted to pass out just to get away from it but I wasn't drinking! Too bad because I wanted to gouge out my eyes to get away from this. I need more lines but have nothing else to say. Don't waste your time. I am ashamed this got publicity at all in Richmond. Too much filth. It is a nice town.I don't have anything else to say. Just don't waste time, don't waste money. Don't even rent this it is that bad.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
An indie film powerhouse...
cinephreak19 March 2008
Quench is the latest endeavor from indie film maverick Zack Parker, who helmed the low-budget horror romp with a clever twist, Inexchange. And for a sophomore effort, I'm damned impressed.

The tale follows Derik (Bo Barrett), who's returned home after a decent hiatus in order to deal with some looming issues resulting from a recent personal tragedy. He looks up his old friend Jason (Ben Schmitt), in the hopes of finding both a place to crash and a soul to confide in. But Jason's changed since last they spoke – now a part of a very abnormal and rather foreboding "family" (a cult-like gathering that enjoys trading bodily fluids on an extreme level… crazysexygoth blood-drinking orgies). Derik is vicariously tossed into this new world as he tries to cope with his demons and accept the newfound affection of one of the family's young hipsters, Gina (Mia Moretti).

The production value is stellar, especially for a low-budget HD venture. The cinematography is deft, and refreshingly honed, unlike a lot of indie films that try to hide their lack of budget through camera-work that constantly shakes and weaves (an effect that often is arguably anything but intentional). Parker keeps his frame focused, unafraid to highlight the mise-en-scene he's so carefully littered throughout each scene. The score bears an intensely atmospheric vibe – ominous, ethereal and delightfully resonant.

The performances are generally solid. Schmitt proves effective as a sort of oil-and-water counterpart to Derik, and Moretti walks a somewhat shaky balance between heartfelt and hollow (for me, in some scenes she seemed spot-on while in others her delivery was rather stiff – a decent performance overall). The other notable role, Veronica, is played with impressive vigor by Samantha Eileen DeTurk. But the MVP award definitely goes to Barrett – his portrayal of Derik is all at once a wounded, intense, somber and pathetic visage of utter deconstruction.

The main draw of the film, which elevates this modern indie tragedy above its peers, is Parker's astute direction. His scene execution, narrative comprehension, and visual bravado show meticulous control. Parker crafts his tale with a profound ambiguity, offering a refreshingly unique perspective to what one would easily assume to be a strict horror binge. His style carries subtle nuances of Kubrick, Polanski and Lynch (with a dash of giallo), as he steadily and methodically builds his dramatic tension to somewhat of a low-level maelstrom.

Quench is a wake-up call to independent filmmakers – a force to be reckoned with and a true Midwestern masterpiece that can only make one clamor with anticipation to see what Parker might accomplish on his next filmic go-around. A cult smash in the making, it's aces all the way – definitely worth seeking out.
23 out of 60 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Not your "run of the mill" independent film.
colorfullydark16 November 2008
It would appear by the film's negative feedback thus far that the Michael Bay fans of the world have taken offense to what I consider to be a well crafted independent film.

After reading several favorable critical reviews about Quench over the past year, I was still a bit skeptic when it released on DVD nationally last month. So much so that I decided to rent it at Blockbuster.com, instead of taking a chance of losing my money buying "another" bad indie film. But, soon after Blockbuster notified me that there would be a wait(as all copies were checked out), I went ahead and bought it anyway, sight unseen, to see what all the hype was about. And now, having watched it several times, I must say that this is one of the best independent film experiences I've had in some time.

Quench is a slow burn...not a slow movie in the sense. The pacing is deliberate...always moving forward. The cinematography is beautiful...dark and rich in color. The story is well written and unique...stands out amongst those of other films. Under Parker's direction, nearly all of the cast turns in solid and believable performances. This is all quite an accomplishment for any film shot on such a meager budget. Again, this is a well crafted independent film.

I would like to be able to recommend Quench to almost anyone who loves movies. Unfortunately, I can't. In these days of countless sequels and remakes(some bordering on sacrilege), as well as television's contribution of mindless programming to the masses...people today have lost sight of(or have never experienced) what good cinema is. And that's really sad. Because Quench is just that...good cinema.
2 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed