Defenceless: A Blood Symphony

Sadly this film left me a little disappointed. It was quite tame with regards to violence and the supposed quotes stating it was nasty were far from the truth imo.

Not much is seen at all.

One woman is supoosedly (you don't see amything) stabbed in the privates with a knife and theres zero blood!? And she's beaten in the face (out of shot again) with a baton and when next see her face it has slightly purple blemishes on her face and no blood! Poor.

The lead actress is gorgeous so that helps a lot and she can act until directed to walk like filled her pants after spending 9 months in the sea!? Wah!?

Which is never explained. (A remnant of what the movie was going to be.....called The Deep).

The young director (24 at the time I believe) appeared very restrained with what he showed for a supposed uncut and vicious revenge film ......I guess the final scene although badly choreographed throughout did have one gory bit and partly made up for it .

Shame wasn't more though, felt restrained, especially the torture of the pedophile.

The lack of dialogue throughout was a good move. Less an artistic statement than a careful way to not show the low level of acting. (Even if they say otherwise)

Seems they had no one doing any make up FX throughout. Later in the film they must have had a whip around and bought some fake blood and chicken fillets so that was used more and helped a little.

Then it gets surreal.

Dolls heads on sticks. Random girls finding junk on beach finds lead actress and immediately hits her with a branch for some unknown reason? Ha ha. I think to see if alive. Flesh eating. Sleeping underwater.

Stock music is not used well and distracts at times. Not as emotional as they believed it was. Especially the classical parts.

Lot of long drawn out padded scenes, strange costumes.

Some artistically shot scenes seem out of place.

For a first real film I guess its forgivable.

Watch if nothing else on.

Did I mention the lead actress was gorgeous? Ha ha.

Art for arts sake. It's an original film that's weird and sexy and spooky. Mark Savage knows how to make a feature. I like that he pushes the envelope.

For those of you who enjoy venturing deep into the nastier things the horror realm has to offer, I think you may enjoy this. A film with some ultra-violence, VJ stabbin, penae mutilation, rapeyraperape, cannibalism....it's got the "good" stuff. A film that revolves around themes of revenge and "staying true to oneself in rough times"....(what's a word for that?....perseverance?). The kicker is, there isn't a word spoken in the film, besides I think a couple "Nooooo!"s. No dialogue in the film. And to come across as powerful as it did, is pretty commendable.

Personally, even though it's got everything I enjoy in horror I'm not going cuckoo over it. The acting, camera-work and length all bothered me. Basically because it is slightly amateurish. But overall and most importantly it's unique, and it'll be some time till I have difficulty remembering it. Definitely worth a view for the right viewer

Nope. The arty pretentiousness of this movie does not make it an original horror film. Neither does its brutality (much of it poorly simulated) make it a edgy art film. But the combination of the two certainly makes it something - pure drudgery. This murder/revenge drama strains to be unique offering nothing more on its soundtrack than a musical score and some rather awkwardly dubbed screams. A prolonged and arduous torture sequence might stir some guilty giddy pleasure in those fond of exploitation, but by the time it occurs, it is likely such viewers will have long given up on watching. And those who might have appreciated its deliberate pace and elongated romance scenes are likely to be turned off by the sudden burst of graphic violence. Defenders of the film might argue that Defenceless does not play by the standards that have been set by horror films of the past and therefore is to be appreciated for being different. But originality is not a sufficient substitute for a well crafted drama.

This is going to polarize audiences because half the population out there hate nothing more than someone with a personal vision. The other half admire it. Reviews on here are positive so far, but this was slammed by Variety, and i can understand why. It's an unapologetic blend of high art and grotesque exploitation. You can't categorize it. The wife threatened to walk out of the Monday afternoon screening, but didn't make good on her threat. It took me a while to get comfortable with its dialog-free narrative, but I emerged a true admirer. The set-up is quite straightforward, although the complications mount. A woman, played by a beautiful Australian actress named Susanne Hausschmid (who was new to me), is murdered by real estate developers. She then takes revenge on them -- while dead. Yes, dead! Director Mark Savage hasn't made a film that will please all fans of bloody revenge movies because he's working from his own formula, not one thirty years old. The film has a strong French influence (a very Eric Rohmer-like seduction scene) and isn't possible to categorize. Is it horror? Partly. Is it art-house? Partly. For God's sakes, does it really matter? Do we have to know what it is? It's very different. And very explicit at times. Most importantly, it's highly individualistic. That's why it won't be loved by many. Nobody loves an orphan.