It would be regrettable enough if the film had an average length, but with a runtime of under one hour the disjointed nature of the storytelling comes across as extra messy. Thanks mostly to the flatly presented exposition it remains possible to cobble together some vague notion of the narrative, yet the plot such as it is, the scenes, the characters, and even the dialogue mostly present according to a rhyme and reason that we viewers can only glimpse as through a heavy veil, or otherwise only guess at. Without more concrete foundation for the scenes and characters presented to us they simply come off as sloppy, outlandish, and so poorly written as to sometimes be laughable. By the time the picture is about three-fifths over enough information has been imparted, weakly and piecemeal, that we can make sense of most of what we've been shown so far - though of course, by that point it's already time for the flick to shift gears toward the climax.
I'm not saying that 'Cyclops' is bad, because that's definitely not true. Moreover, if you want blood, gore, violence, and creature effects you'll absolutely get them. They look great, and are genuinely horrific, as they populate the last ten to fifteen minutes; it's obvious not only that these tangible creations are the centerpiece of this abbreviated feature, but that they comprise the entirety of the value that it has to offer. Effects artists Shuichi Kokumai and Yuichi Matsui are to be congratulated for their incredible, gnarly contributions; major studio releases can only dream of churning out monstrosities this convincing, and this ghastly. What I am saying is that I've seen smaller movies do much more with much less. Everything else about the title ranges from serviceable to great: cinematography, editing, acting, art direction, direction, costume design, hair, makeup, music, and so on. I assume, without specific writing credit, that filmmaker Joji Iida is the person who wrote this, or maybe producer Iyo Suzuki. What is their excuse for letting the story be so rough?
What worth this offers becomes self-evident, and I would unreservedly recommend it to anyone who appreciates body horror and creature romps like those we've gotten from Brian Yuzna, David Cronenberg, Shinya Tsukamoto, or John Carpenter, among others. That recommendation comes with a caveat that it's all too clear what was heavily deprioritized in the process of making 'Cyclops,' and since the writing is the first tawdry anchor that the audience has to grasp onto for a preponderance of the length, the viewing experience suffers in kind. Find this, and watch it, and you will not regret doing so. I just wish the filmmakers hadn't let slide so major a facet of their work from the very start.
I'm not saying that 'Cyclops' is bad, because that's definitely not true. Moreover, if you want blood, gore, violence, and creature effects you'll absolutely get them. They look great, and are genuinely horrific, as they populate the last ten to fifteen minutes; it's obvious not only that these tangible creations are the centerpiece of this abbreviated feature, but that they comprise the entirety of the value that it has to offer. Effects artists Shuichi Kokumai and Yuichi Matsui are to be congratulated for their incredible, gnarly contributions; major studio releases can only dream of churning out monstrosities this convincing, and this ghastly. What I am saying is that I've seen smaller movies do much more with much less. Everything else about the title ranges from serviceable to great: cinematography, editing, acting, art direction, direction, costume design, hair, makeup, music, and so on. I assume, without specific writing credit, that filmmaker Joji Iida is the person who wrote this, or maybe producer Iyo Suzuki. What is their excuse for letting the story be so rough?
What worth this offers becomes self-evident, and I would unreservedly recommend it to anyone who appreciates body horror and creature romps like those we've gotten from Brian Yuzna, David Cronenberg, Shinya Tsukamoto, or John Carpenter, among others. That recommendation comes with a caveat that it's all too clear what was heavily deprioritized in the process of making 'Cyclops,' and since the writing is the first tawdry anchor that the audience has to grasp onto for a preponderance of the length, the viewing experience suffers in kind. Find this, and watch it, and you will not regret doing so. I just wish the filmmakers hadn't let slide so major a facet of their work from the very start.