Reviews

I have no problems with the explicit content in the film, go ahead and show whatever you like, just do it for a reason other than to push the boundries. There's nothing less interesting than watching a movie that is based on the premise of Let's Make People Accept Something New. That's lame. It's cheap. The movie is not interesting in the least. It never goes anywhere. It seems as though Larry Clark's ideas for characters were just him thinking he wanted to push the limits of sex on film, and so that's what the characters are doing. They are in no way representative of a real person as this film tries to convince us. This film would be boundry pushing if it was able to contextualize the behaviour and not just put it on a screen. At the film festival Clark answered a question about the inclusion of the character of Ken Park, who seemed to exist for no real reason other than to begin the film with a suicide. Clark responded by saying that he wanted to deal with teenage suicide in the movie, which is fine, but just showing someone shoot themselves in the head is not dealing with teenage suicide. It just exploits violence. There doesn't seem to be any thought, beyond the voyeuristic tendancies of the film makers, in this movie at all.

This is NOT a good movie. I don't know what you people are being fooled by. Is it all the breasts? Is it because it's dark subject matter that Paul Schrader is directing? I really don't get it, 'cause this is a bad movie. It's a boring story, that is not worth telling. It is not well acted, written, or directed. So, please, everyone remove your head from your posterior and realize that this is not a great, or even good film. It's mock-intellectual. That is all.

I've already commented on this movie, this entry is to deal with the outrageous fact the Peter Jackson is in the lead for best director according to this sites users. Do you people know what a director does? Is it clear to you how they work or what their primary function is? It is appalling to see that that hack Peter Jackson is being recognized and I don't believe this is a subjective matter. This is an objective claim: Peter Jackson did not direct LOFR well at all. I would love to find out what you people think his direction added to this movie. Let me know.

This movie was bad. I am baffled to see the praise it is getting. It was three hours of the same thing, over and over again. They would travel to a new place accidentally alert the enemy, fight, and run away. And people have told me that's what the book is. Well, I hate to tell you, but that sucks. That's not a good story. Don't see this movie. It's a bloated waste.

I don't understand why this movie is getting nothing but good press. The movie has a lot going for it but it never pays off. The acting is very good, and the premise of the people and the contest and the indoors stuff is good too. But it is totally tackled incorrectly. It's such a dull movie. It never goes any where. Nothing of consequence ever happens. Sure there is a winner eventually but by that time who really cares. I was too frustrated at the end of this to ever recommend it. I hope people actually know why they like this movie and they're not just following hype; hype that is inexplicable.

What's with everyone giving this flick such a bad rap? I see a lot of movies, art house and mainstream, and I consider myself to be a bit of a film buff.

This movie was good mindless fun. The story is an interesting twist on an old plot and the cast, for the most part, does a good job (especially Nick Stahl).

Also, this movie does not deserved to be compared to SCREAM because they are totally different and DISTURBING BEHAVIOR does not poke fun at itself like the superior SCREAM does.

Check this one out.

*** of ****

I hadn't expected to like this movie at all, but as it turns out I did. I attribute this largely to the performance of Nick Stahl. This movie won't challenge you in any sense of the word but I found it held my attention from the opening scene. Also, I found this movie fairly non-formulaic which really surprised me because most teen flicks are. I recommend this movie to any one who wants to give their brains a break while still being thoroughly entertained.

I rate this 7 out of 10

First off, this movie was terrible. Now I have to address another issue.

People do not understand how long it takes to get a movie made. VERY BAD THINGS was released about a year after STAG. ONE YEAR. And people are saying that VBT stole the idea from STAG. WRONG!!! Peter Berg wrote VBT in his trailer during the filming of COPLAND. How could he know or care to know about the making of a lame direct-to-video movie? He wouldn't. VBT is far superior to this slow, plodding, poorly acted, poorly directed, poorly etc. movie. I can't even remember if there was a score in this movie. It doesn't matter because it was brutal. I want to know how semi-famous people like Mario Van Peebles and Ben Gazzara got roped into this trash heap of unoriginality.

1/2* (out of 10)

There is not one single solitary original idea in this film. None. It drags from the opening. The editing is terrible. The acting is lame and the story was so bad that I didn't even finish watching it because I didn't care about the outcome of the characters.

I know that while the guidelines say I should not comment on other reviews I feel I must in this case. I came to review this movie right after I stopped it. To my disbelief people are actually praising this film as being thought provoking. The only thought it provoked in me was that I could make a better movie than it. The only person with a decent comment was the guy from England.

This movie was also compared to VERY BAD THINGS. A fair analogy because they both have the same basic idea. But, STAG fails to entertain. I laughed for an hour and a half straight during VERY BAD THINGS. But, during STAG I caught myself thinking of VERY BAD THINGS. VERY BAD THINGS was shocking. STAG was boring. Pass on this one.

I give it 2 out of 10.

A great concept for this movie and for anyone who is a fan of screenwriter Andrew Kevin Walker's other movie SE7EN it is a must see. Unfortunately, I suspect that Director Joel Schumaker had a lot to do with the changes to the script. It seems as though the Walker script was muted in parts that it didn't need to be and that certain aspects of the movie didn't ring true. Don't let this deter you however, there is a great deal of suspense generated where it should be and there is great acting and music. Check this one out for sure.

Telling you the plot would kinda take away some of the suprising charm of this movie. Basically, the Drew Barrymore character is supposed to be killed by the son of the dead man she was sleeping with. But the guy starts to like her. There are several other twists thrown into the story. The screenplay by Vince Gilligan of the X-Files is unpredictable and the dialogue isn't stale like in so many other Hollywood films. Great performances by all.