The Captives

What an awful, awful, awful movie. I tried *REALLY* hard to find something worth while in this and came up empty. I did enjoy the ending of the movie immensely, but that was only because it meant my suffering was over.

The story (which is *completely* irrelevant to the actual movie) is that some guy rapes and kills a woman on his brother's property. The guy goes to jail and because his brother tried to help him cover up the act he goes in for accessory to murder. He then escapes, meets up with his girlfriend and then introduces her to the 'gifts' he has stored in the basement, which is just a couple of people that somehow wronged him at his trial. He intends to kill them and her, so she tries to escape, struggles with and then subsequently kills the brother.

She's now home alone with 3 people that incidentally also wronged her in the past, so it's payback time.

At this point the movie has finally reached the part that people watching this movie paid for. Problem is it took almost 40 minutes to get there, and a *LOT* of those 40 minutes were spent watching long stupid scenes of nothing shot like your dad would film something with his handycam while walking. The background noise during this was a bunch of annoying buzzes and shreeks. Guess even soundtracks cost a lot of money these days.

The acting... It's a stretch to even call what they are doing 'acting', but for argument's sake let's do so. It's terrible. There's a scene where one of the 'actors' actually laughs when he's clearly supposed to be in pain. My guess is these 'actors', if they were even slightly serious about their acting career, pretty much blew it by signing on for this movie. If they had an agent, he should be shot (or worse, be forced to watch this movie).

There's a whole bunch of nudity in the movie, and while the main subject isn't exactly ugly, she probably won't become Miss Universe anytime soon. I think she's also the most tattoo-covered girl I've seen on film ever. There's a pretty explicit up-close and personal masturbation scene with her too, but that's about it. When she then does a similar thing with one of her captives, there's a striking lack of close-ups of the act. If anything would've been considered shocking (which is probably what the movie was intended to do) *THAT* would've been it.

Oh yeah, to keep some sort of story going, every so often they cut to black and white segments of her moaning on about why who did what. Aside from the fact that absolutely nobody cares about the story, this monotonous monologue is about as interesting as listening to someone reading entries out of the phone book.

If you have any plans at all to go watch this, PLEASE DON'T! If you wanted to see it for the shock-value, watch either "I Spit On Your Grave (1978)" or the less sexual "Broken" video by Nine Inch Nails front man Trent Reznor. And if you wanted to just see the naked girl, rent a porno. I can guarantee you it'll be more interesting, have a better story, makeup, lighting, acting and BUDGET, and give you a lot more value for your dollar.

0 out of 10. Avoid at all cost.

I like B-grade horror movies. This movie does not merit a "B". Nor "C". Nor "Q". See where I am going? I'd give more details about what precisely was bad about this, but my mind is blocking most of this steaming turd from my memory as a defensive measure. (I defer to the gentleman's review above.

Well put, sir!)

The people who made this movie took a page from Ed Wood in that this movie is not about the details. It's about a 'big picture' that never seems to materialize. It is an amateur Goth/S&M piece that was scripted entirely by phrases beginning with "...and then wouldn't be sooo cool if...". A lot of nothing happens. It's like waiting behind a convenience store waiting for a blind date to arrive would be like if said date never existed and was merely a prank on you by people who hate you a lot. After you realized your mistake, the pain and ridicule are already firmly in place.

This was the least enjoyable movie...ever.

I watch bad movies.

This movie is not good enough to be a bad movie. Not an ounce of humor, not an ounce of talent throughout.

I am LAZY.

Usually, I see a bad movie and curse. This was so bad, I actually made a review to try and save others from the completely boring mess I fell victim to.

I am smashing my copy of this movie.

It's too lame even to use clear a room. So boring. Watch 'Bloodsucking Freaks' or 'Shock, shock, shock' for absolute crap that has some merit as entertainment. This sludge looks awful, is awful, and whoever made it should feel awful.

In director Eric Stanze's 'ISOYC, IPOYG', three men are subjected to torture at the the hands of a woman that they have all sexually abused. The first victim is forced to eat his own crap, before being axed to death. The next bloke ends up with a bullet in the crotch after refusing to have anal sex with the first guy's corpse. But it's the third man who gets it the worst: he has to watch the heavily tattooed 'star' Emily Haack get naked and masturbate with a broom handle (oh, he also gets the handle shoved up his butt too!).

And, unfortunately, so do we (get to see her masturbate, that is—not get a broom handle up our butts!).

Yes, 'ISOYC, IPOYG' is one harsh viewing experience, not because of its relentless violence, but because Haack, who is obviously under the misguided notion that she has the body of a goddess (as opposed to that of a roadie for Metallica) constantly gets buck naked for the camera. It ain't a pretty sight.

In addition to the non-stop nudity from an inked-up Haack, viewers also get to see dreadful direction from Stanze (who thinks that endless shots of tombstones and trees is entertaining stuff), some really bad acting, and a fat guy's penis.

Strangely enough, I give 'ISOYC, IPOYG' a rating of 3/10, which is actually slightly higher than its current 2.9 average. That's one point for the messy axe attack (which, being a gore-hound, I actually enjoyed); one point for the bit where the fat guy gets his face pushed in chocolate mousse masquerading as feces (hilarious); and one point for the sheer nerve to suggest that this film might somehow be a sequel to Meir Zarchi's superior exploitation classic I Spit On Your Grave.

Am I wrong,or is the 2007 version just a rip-off of the original? I have to ask because the DVD I just bought is one of the worst films I have ever seen.....bad acting,bad editing etc....the only "exploitation " aspect here is how we were ripped off for our money buying this piece of crap. It is nothing more than a light-weight porn flick...no real gore, no scary images, just a cheaply done bit of garbage. If anyone wants to see an excellent film with no name actors,some slimy gore and a decent storyline...get Baby Blood...also done on a cheap budget but well made...and an actual story too!I Spit was a waste of money but I'll keep it just for a laugh....it is pathetic! New comment....Sept 3.....I'll keep this film forever just because it it SOOOOO bad it's almost good....in a really bad way....the worst acting ever...a real crap-movie classic!