Bone Sickness

I love horror movies and in general: Zombieflicks. Then one beautiful day I read about this film here on IMDb and it had a score of 5,3 points on the rate-o-meter. Well...I rent or buy movies after looking at this rate-o-meter because 95% of the time,I agree with it... Not this time!!!! This film is so bad that it's only.....bad. OK!There's much gore and some nudity here,but the gore is so bad made that even my brother,who's 10,can make it better. We get a lot of references to evil dead,dawn of the dead etc.etc.,but hey; Sam Raimi and Romero knew what they were doing and I think they had a lot of fun making their movies. These people didn't! Bad acting,bad editing,bad fx; in general: It's all bad. Even the nudity is bad! This movie makes "Day of the dead" look like a Oscarwinning film. 0 out of 10. Go and see "Shaun of the dead" instead!!!

I'll keep this review generally informal, just to get across what one would likely want to know about this film before viewing it.

First off, this film is an absolute piece of garbage by the conventional standards of mainstream cinema. It is poorly acted, poorly scripted, poorly lit (ex. green dollar store light bulbs), the story is quite weak, etc. I also warn you, this film is ultra low budget, and it LOOKS low budget. Yes, this is one of the ones that you can tell was shot on a cheap digital camera. It has that video feel and atmosphere, so don't expect even B movie quality video, as this one's Z grade all the way.

With all that said, this film is very enjoyable for the right audience. It is an absolute gem for horror fans that can look past, or even enjoy a film that has that low budget charm. If you want to watch a film that puts gore before everything else, this is a great choice. We get many gore gags throughout the first chunk of the film, and then towards the end, we get a massive (MASSIVE!) payoff of cheap but very well done splatter. The zombies are of the slow, clunky, Fulci variety, and the gore is slimy, dirty, gooey, bright, splattery, etc. It gets really gross.

To wrap this up, this is a film for low budget splatter fans who have already experienced the likes of all the classic gore films. This one is for those who want to dig a little deeper and explore cheap, low budget splatter by the lesser known and established film makers. It's for people who highly regard the classic gore (not that it's all about the gore) of a Romero, Jackson, Raimi, Argento, Fulci, etc, but can also have a lot of fun with the likes of Olaf Ittenbach type splatter flicks.

This starts out normally with a twenty-something woman in New England taking care of her husband who has some kind of debilitating bone ailment with no known medical basis. Through failed trial and error the wife gets desperate enough to seek out her husband's mullet sportin' friend who brews up his own concoction from body parts of the recently laid to rest in the nearby graveyard that he works at.

"Bone Sickness" gives its obvious cues and nods to Fulci's "City of the Living Dead" and "House by the Cemetery." This is the kind of account that only "makes sense" to those neck deep in the horror genre...and with a history of mental disorders to boot. If the audience really attempted to sit down and think about if point A matches up with point B, or if their anatomy teachers were lying to them, madness will probably take over. Can creepy crawlin' bugs really nest inside peoples' faces underneath easily ripped off skin and also come vomiting out of mouths, who knows? It can make for interesting visuals, but as more and more time goes by, the events taking place seem to get more and more diluted and a little more adventurous than the filmmakers can scurry to handle.

"Bone Sickness" is an excuse for carnage and catered towards surrealism. The atmosphere drips, slimes, smells and ultimately disgusts like any old school horror movie enthusiast would crave--myself included. This is about excess and exaggeration, though the pacing is something that needed tweaking as the flow--even with all its head slicings, neck gashes, gut munching and nudity going on--doesn't steadily captivate one's attention span or put one right there in the mix. Though it's still more effective than, say, "Das Komabrutale Duell."

The sound effects range from Italian horror style to stock haunted house. The special make-up effects can be effective, plenty and downright juicy; though due to budget limitations you might see the occasional recognizable food item as well as more "frozen" victims than you can count that just stand or lay there ready to be taken alive through premeditated gore traps. This is unconventional cinema on the low-budget end--shot on video, poor lighting, camera humming--though this isn't, for instance, like "Tetsuo," "Premutos," "Schramm," "Naked Blood," "House on Tombstone Hill" or "Bad Taste" where the production values were pitiful, but the out-there stories were translated with more refined and captivating creativity that could lock you in without looking back or questioning why this or that was done or if you should hit fast-forward to speed it up.

This film looks bad, sounds bad, acted bad, edited horribly and even has the worst gore i have ever seen. The blood was like kool Aid. I have no idea how this movie was ever sold. Brian Paulin can't write, direct, edit, act or even light a scene.

You can always hear static and the sound of the cameras motor.

Stay away from this film. It is no better than some 12 year old's youtube movie.

He can't edit a film the movie has no L-Cut and terrible scene changes.

Don't think this is some unfair review by some jerk. I love b-movies i am a fangoria fan (JasonVoorhees665) this movie was just plane bad.

Again, one of those low budget gore movies. The movie clocks in more than 90 minutes and that's way too long. The reason is simple, there isn't any storyline in it. The zombies appear without any reason. And the gore scene's with the zombies are too long. Sure, the effects are really good and the zombies are looking great except for their hands. The acting isn't that good at all, especially when the SWAT team arrives, it's a bit ridiculous to see. This movie was also pushed for the frontal nudity, well there is indeed a bit of that in the flick. It could have been much better if they worked out the script and shortened the movie, that's the reason that I gave it a 3 out of ten.