Budget Goth subculture movie is nothing more than cheap and cheerful. Well, without much cheer.
OK, so this one was obviously made on a shoestring budget, and the production values suffer as a result...
Laura Reilly (Who?) is Chrissy, a 'goth' who embraces the superficial nature of the culture. Aided and abetted by her boyfriend Boone (Dave Stann) she goes to a gig at a club and encounters Phoebe Dollar's (Your guess is as good as mine) 'Goth', a sadistic and sinister goth who delights in making people suffer. She takes the 2 on a trip of violence, sodomy, and drug-taking.
OK, first off, the acting is not good, but it's the type of movie where it's impossible to act well. The low budget cheap film-reel is more Blair Witch than anything else, with the difference being the movie isn't filmed as a documentary. So it does look like a group of film students have taken a day off college to film a project...
The 'effects' are truly appalling - the blood literally looks like tomato sauce, and no attempt has been made to create convincing wounds. Apparently smearing puree on someone's chest is enough to tell us they've been sliced open.
The plot itself is daft, but quite honestly it's not hopeless. It's *reasonably* entertaining, and not overly predictable. Sure, it's not especially original, but it doesn't have to be.
As for the question of the accuracies about goth subculture, well I find anyone defending goth culture to be mostly misguided. People become goths because they're trying to be different, yet because it's such a common route to take, by trying to be different, goths end up conforming just like the rest of us. Plus true Gothic culture is nothing like the film portrays, nor anything like what most people think it is.
But this is academic and irrelevant.
Ignore the factual discrepancies, the poor special effects, the awful acting, and purely focus on the strongest aspect, the story, and you'll find this vaguely agreeable for an hour and a half.
