Subject Two

Full disclosure: Re-Animator is one of my all-time favorite movies. So, Subject Two, about a "doctor" who lives secluded in the mountains of Colorado, and experiments with death and reanimation, with a willing subject to be killed and brought back to life for as many times as he pleases... That's gotta be good, right? Well, not particularly.

Save for possibly "the original" Dr. Vick, I found the acting in this to be pretty sub-par. And even he could've played it up more, he IS a demented, mad doctor, after all. (Oh, a mad doctor does show up... for one embarrassing performance). The "subject" is all too chill, and when things get dramatic, sappy, and/or philosophical, well let's say these 3 subjects are not this actor's strong suit. Does not help the musings on life and death are written poorly.

Subject has side effects, ceases to feel, ponders life outside of the cabin. Toward the beginning of the movie, subject catches a ride with a pretty girl... and asks for her number. They ride that horse for a while, as his sole motivation to get back out into the world. Then he loses the number. Oh well, that's it for him, I guess. They show him aimlessly wandering down the mountain under the closing credits.

Man, I really like a good premise. And they left this movie open-ended on a few fronts. A little ambiguity can be good, too. This could've easily spun off into a sequel, and the twist gives bearing for a prequel. (Of which I'm sure we'll never see).

One should not view Subject Two expecting a work of epic proportions and impact, as the film wishes to be at its core. Because it would only disappoint and maybe it just isn't worth any disappointments.

The story, well knit together, involves a failing medicine student and a mysterious doctor Frankenstein figure who try to redefine life and death. While this may not be such an impressively original concept, the film still works as a whole out of two solid reasons: up to the task acting and some thought-inducing (if not, once more, thoroughly innovative) ideas.

Given that the basics are there, 'Subject Two' is what I'd call a film with limited potential. I do not believe this theme can be exploited any better than it has been in the past and it'd have to show off something utterly brilliant to sweep me off my feet. A very gentle 6,5 from me.

I saw a screening of this indie film at the San Francisco Independent Film Festival and enjoyed it a great deal. Nicely done, especially on the low budget they had for this. I'm not generally a fan of "horror" (although this may be more suspense/thriller than horror), but found this film keeping me interested with both the plot and the editing that kept things moving. I hope "Subject Two" can find distribution so this filmmaker can bring us more. The choice of Aspen is beautiful to look at and well captured. The isolation the winter scenes promoted helped keep the story taught, and the visuals lovely. The acting is natural and well captured, and even the director has a fascinating part in this film.

What a surprise this film is! It's a quiet, get-absorbed-in-it sort of horror film, and properly light on gore. The story is similar to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, whereas life is created from death in the name of science. The acting is solid and moving; there is no mugging, no sly popular culture wink-winks. The focus is on the story, not special effects, not body count, and there's a steady sense of sadness and madness that made me not want to watch the bonus features afterward; I got so drawn into the characters that I did not want their effect on me altered by watching the actors goof around or discuss the film.

The actor who played Adam, the loner medical student, was wonderful -- and very handsome, to boot. He conveyed very well the pain and isolation that Adam felt, and it made sense why Adam would take part in Dr. Vick's experiment for, in part, he'd finally have a connection with another person, regardless of any personal consequences.

Any faults I found with the film were too minor for me to give them much consideration. It's too nice to finally see a low-budget film that obviously was a work of love and is dedicated to its story, not to getting its talent noticed by making yet another indistinguishable gorefest that is a checklist of a dozen other horror films.

And not once does a screeching cat leap out from a closed cupboard door. Mad props for that, guys.

I highly recommend this movie to aspiring film makers out there and to everyone else. It just goes to show what you can do with no budget, great atmosphere,some ingenuity, and a good script.

The movie itself is obviously not 'perfect' nothing is, but considering what was put into it to me its a hidden gem and while its not a total gorefest,it has some decent brutal scenes and shocking moments. It is definitely a great new take on an old tale.

The actors were great, the story had a nice even pace, was original, and everything else was definitely well thought out here. I gave this movie and 8 because it totally deserves it if only for the fact that these people did with a few bucks what Hollywood can't achieve for $50 million.

It obviously want for everyone who watched it after reading the reviews, but you can't please everyone all of the time.If you enjoy a nice independent ,atmospheric chiller. then check this out