IMDb RATING
5.4/10
1.7K
YOUR RATING
A doctor invents a resurrection formula and tests it by killing his assistant over and over and over again.A doctor invents a resurrection formula and tests it by killing his assistant over and over and over again.A doctor invents a resurrection formula and tests it by killing his assistant over and over and over again.
- Awards
- 1 win & 1 nomination total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
5.41.6K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
Well-worth seeing
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.
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.
The Simple Life
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.
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.
subject two....too long.
Here is what could have been an interesting movie for the Frankenstein/Re-animator fan.....Mad scientist living in the seclusion of a snowy mountain cabin seduces young, gifted, and rebellious medical student into his remote log cabin lair to work with him as apprentice to his experimentation on an unknowing test subject number "two". That is about the gist of it and number two is what this stinker of a movie is laced with from that point onward.... From the start to the end (if it can be called an end), it is too long, too slow, and filled with too much ridiculousness to maintain interest. Unlike Frankenstein's countless remakes each of (which could win an academy award compared with this movie), Subject 2 has no purpose.... oh, other than what the Professor states - "We have much more work to do"....???? What work? Vic's random note taking as he speaks into an miniature recorder? Unlike Re-animator, Subject 2 has no entertainment.....well, there is some minor laughter listening to the Professor scold his apprentice. The sad thing is that it wasn't meant to be a comedic scene. The shot of the subject wandering aimlessly through the mountains in hopelessness defines this movie...and is ultimately passed off to the viewer after watching - hopeless to get time or money back. Where, what, who, huh? At least it is over....
Don't say I didn't warn you.
Don't say I didn't warn you.
Almost Perfect modern take on Frankenstein with micro-budget of $23,000!!
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
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
It's Alive!! It's Alive!!! ... x50!
Two young men, isolated up in the mountains, performing bizarre and questionable experiments on each other
No, it isn't an early sequel to "Brokeback Mountain" but a new & clever independent horror film that I hope will be regarded as a minor cult gem within a couple of years! The screenplay of "Subject Two" is based on Mary Shelley's almighty "Frankenstein"-tale in which an intelligent but overly obsessed scientist brings back an unwilling victim from the dead. Only, times have severely changed by now and, instead of lightening storms or voodoo rituals, science now uses Nano-technologies, cloning techniques and loads of other hi-tech stuff I totally didn't understand! Dr. Franklin Vick (got it? Victor Frankenstein? Yeah OK, you get it
) lures the anti-social medical student Adam to his remote mountain cabin where he kills him repeatedly
but successfully brings him back to life every single time. These intense experiments have a severe impact on Adam, of course, and pretty soon he turns into an emotional and physical wreck. This film contains multiple praiseworthy elements that I haven't spotted in other, high-budgeted horror productions in a very long time already. First and foremost, there's the hugely original Aspen, Colorado filming location! The total lack of civilization and the false hope for rescue is perfectly illustrated by the snowy mountains and unbearably cold winds. The limited number of cast members contributes a lot to the power of "Subject Two" as well, also because the male leads give away great performances. Dean Stapleton (who tremendously resemblances Jack Nicholson when he was younger) is genuinely sinister as the doc and Christian Oliver is very convincing as the mentally unstable guinea pig. This isn't exactly a full-blooded horror film, but there's quite a bit of gore and raw violence on display. The dialogs are witty and entirely unexpected the plot takes an ingenious turn near the end! Just for that, "Subject Two" receives one well-deserved extra point. If you have the opportunity to see this smart film by Philip Chidel, don't hesitate!
Did you know
- TriviaOfficial Selection 2006 Sundance Film Festival.
- GoofsWhen "Subject Two" first arrives at Doc's cabin, there is just a bit of snow on his shoulders. When he starts to talk to the doctor in the cabin, there is a lot of snow on his right shoulder. After the second time the camera switches back to the doctor, the snow is completely gone.
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Subjekat broj 2
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $23,000 (estimated)
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content







