'Bachelor Party in the Bungalow of the Damned' - What a title, huh? How could this fail with at least being really fun? I don't know, but it did.
The story focuses on a group of thirtysomething guys who head up to the Hamptons to a buddy's bungalow to throw a bachelor party for another friend. Once there, a group of middle-aged, overweight hookers (who look nothing, NOTHING like the girl on the cover. . . not even a little bit!) stop by randomly and give the boys a show. Unfortunately, they're possessed by some type of evil/demonic force and they started to kill the guys off (mostly during sex) one by one.
There isn't much to expect from a film like this. Technically, the film isn't the worst I've seen, but it's far from good. The cinematography is strange, it goes from steadicam to shakicam, uses random different filters for no reason whatsoever, doesn't focus properly, etc. It's often too dark to see what's going on, especially in some of the outdoor action sequences. The acting was, for the most part, bad. Sammy (Gregg Aaron Greenberg) was probably the only actor that I could really compliment, mostly because he reminded me of Jeff Anderson from the 'Clerks' movies. But, the flick only cost twenty grand to make and it's a film not made looking for great story or acting or anything of the like. It's basically a way to show off some gore effects, nudity, and have a few laughs. Unfortunately, the gore was really not good at all and looked like something out of a crappy 80s TV show. The nudity was, well, nothing we wanted to see as all three of the hookers/strippers really had nothing to offer (actually, they had TOO much to offer for the most part). There were a few laughs, mainly caused by the ridiculousness of it all, but sometimes the dialogue actually gave a giggle. The movie ran about a half-hour too long and around the 40 minute mark, I was merely counting down the time. I mean, if you're going to put most of the story into the first half, why even have the second half? Give us a break and just cut the movie down and make it a quick watch that we can either enjoy or, if we don't like it, just get over with faster. Since they didn't, it's mostly a bore with very little redemption.
Final Verdict: 3/10.
-AP3-
The story focuses on a group of thirtysomething guys who head up to the Hamptons to a buddy's bungalow to throw a bachelor party for another friend. Once there, a group of middle-aged, overweight hookers (who look nothing, NOTHING like the girl on the cover. . . not even a little bit!) stop by randomly and give the boys a show. Unfortunately, they're possessed by some type of evil/demonic force and they started to kill the guys off (mostly during sex) one by one.
There isn't much to expect from a film like this. Technically, the film isn't the worst I've seen, but it's far from good. The cinematography is strange, it goes from steadicam to shakicam, uses random different filters for no reason whatsoever, doesn't focus properly, etc. It's often too dark to see what's going on, especially in some of the outdoor action sequences. The acting was, for the most part, bad. Sammy (Gregg Aaron Greenberg) was probably the only actor that I could really compliment, mostly because he reminded me of Jeff Anderson from the 'Clerks' movies. But, the flick only cost twenty grand to make and it's a film not made looking for great story or acting or anything of the like. It's basically a way to show off some gore effects, nudity, and have a few laughs. Unfortunately, the gore was really not good at all and looked like something out of a crappy 80s TV show. The nudity was, well, nothing we wanted to see as all three of the hookers/strippers really had nothing to offer (actually, they had TOO much to offer for the most part). There were a few laughs, mainly caused by the ridiculousness of it all, but sometimes the dialogue actually gave a giggle. The movie ran about a half-hour too long and around the 40 minute mark, I was merely counting down the time. I mean, if you're going to put most of the story into the first half, why even have the second half? Give us a break and just cut the movie down and make it a quick watch that we can either enjoy or, if we don't like it, just get over with faster. Since they didn't, it's mostly a bore with very little redemption.
Final Verdict: 3/10.
-AP3-