Anarchy Parlor

Grim, amateurish little torture porn bauble set in a Vilnius tattoo parlor, only slightly elevated by a menacing performance from Robert LaSardo as "The Artist." He's the only thing worth watching here, despite the lovely location, which this film wastes. The other performances are so appalling and the dialogue so unimaginative that it's hard to tell how much of it was improvised -- on one hand, I can't imagine anyone writing this garbage out and thinking, "Yeah, that sounds right;" on the other, all the characters (The Artist excepted) sound exactly alike, even with multiple accents, each as aggressively unlikable and inarticulate as the next. A film called "Anarchy Parlor" might reasonably be expected to deliver some inkling of wild imagination, some hint that the filmmakers understand transgression. This predictable, mundane mess fails to deliver.

I'm a gore hound, I have and will always love graphic horror films. So I pretty much knew what I was getting when I went into this film. Wasn't expecting a good story, good acting, etc but I was still a little disappointed.

So right off the bat you can tell this is pretty much a lower budget version of hostel, just replace the "Hostel" with a tattoo parlor. It really does copy a lot of aspects of Hostel, even has a group of misfit local kids that don't have much to do with the story just like in Hostel. So I'll try to focus on the things that this does different. One is that we actually have a killer, played by Robert LaSardo, he does a decent job but I just didn't find him creepy or intimating. In fact in the film he comes off as a pretty nice guy and the parts where is suppose to be sinister just seem forced.

So outside of LaSardo there isn't really much to say about the cast, all the actors who played the victims were pretty meh but it didn't really matter since the whole point of the film is to watch them die not watch them talk. I think my biggest complaint when it comes to the cast would have to be the character of Uta, played by Sara Fabel. She is just a really corny and unrealistic character, they take the whole "Tough Chick" thing way too far and it really takes from the grittiness of the film.

OK so now lets focus on the one good aspect of this flick, and that is the gore. Like I said I am a massive gore hound, and this movie did deliver when it came to that. The kill scenes are pretty brutal and they really don't hold back from showing you everything. The only bad thing is that there really isn't a lot of variety in the killing so it gets kind of dull.

Overall this isn't a horrible horror film. It has it's moments but if you are not a fan of gore than this film really won't have much to offer you unless you really want to see some soft-core sex scenes, in which case you would probably be better off watch some skinemax.

Not the worst but still not very good 4/10

This is What i have to say about this movie, interesting premise and painful acting. Its trying to make a cross between saw and hostel but the result ends up a mess there Is nothing that stands out besides some gory scenes and a bunch of cliché characters its a very generic.

The only actor that's stands out Is Robert Lasardo if you seen a lot of 90s action movies you probably stumble with him as a henchmen he Is that guy full of tattoos with one liners( a discount Danny Trejo if you will)i have to admit this guy can actually act and his passion for tattoos can be shown this role was meant for him and he nailed it.

Honestly don't waist your time even if Lasardo Is good in this, its probably the only good thing in it.

This film is about a shady tattoo parlor you don't want to visit.

This isn't a top notch film but you kinda know that going into it. I'm gonna review it as such. I've seen better but this film is not as bad as some are making it out to be. I think the biggest problem is that it is lacking depth.

The character builds aren't that great. They fall short on really making you invest in the characters. You want to feel concerned for their well being and this don't get the job done. The story should have been played up a bit more. Understanding the "whys" is a big thing for me and I wasn't satisfied. I also wanted to see more evolution in the ending and we were only given a taste of that.

One of the good things about this are that it has the blood and gore that you want from horror. It is also well filmed by that I mean that it has decent quality for a low budget film. I also thought the pace of it was on point.

I liked it but I am willing to give credit where it is due. For a B movie this deserves more credit than it has been given. Don't be horror snobs. You may find that there is a lot of decent low budget films out there if you can stop holding them to such high standards. I'm sure there will be disagree with my review but watch it and judge it for yourself.

A very simple 'lure tourists into a dodgy place in order to do despicable things to them' type of horror.

Overall the acting is poor but Robert LaSado is the saving grace here (you might not recognise his name but you've most likely recognise his face).

I mean he can't make you care for the other characters fate of course (being that most of them are such poor actors and very duchy you kind of feel like they deserve to die... in the movie that is) and it doesn't ever really get scary for the same reason (and plot and directing etc of course as well) but Robert LaSado is an effective bad guy and with any lesser actor this could have flunked completely.

But the Gothic atmosphere is pretty cool as well, and plenty of eye-candy (the women most likely got their roles for their willingness to appear nude more than their acting-abilities... but then they are no worse than the other guys).

So yeah definitely nothing you need to see but nothing you have to absolutely avoid either, if it's on TV one late night or so.