The day in the life of a psychotic hillbilly and his captives, innocent people he has taken prisoner to indulge his violent fantasies.The day in the life of a psychotic hillbilly and his captives, innocent people he has taken prisoner to indulge his violent fantasies.The day in the life of a psychotic hillbilly and his captives, innocent people he has taken prisoner to indulge his violent fantasies.
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Adam Mason's "Pig" premiered free to all tonight, on bloody-disgusting, dreadcentral, and Twitchfilm. Mason was responsible for the mind-f*ck of a film "The Devil's Chair." as well as "Blood River." To call this a film would be liberal usage of the word. It's more of an experiment in the technical side of film making. There is no narrative, no character development, and honestly no purpose to the film. The bulk of the movie(70 minutes) was filmed in one take. If you explain this to the average movie goer, not only will they not care, but they most likely won't even know what you're talking about.
Now that I've explained that this isn't really a movie, but more of a talent showcase, let's delve into what worked for me. Knowing I was viewing one continuous take blew my mind for most of the film. The cinematography is nothing short of amazing after consuming that fact. Even more impressive is how they allow for F/X gags to be set up while the camera is running. A quick re-frame of the shot, allows for the off-screen crew to quickly set up the special effects. Some of the tricks used here were absolutely brilliant. Setting the kill in the bed of a pick-up truck, allows for them to make a quick cut to a wide-shot, while someone crawls on their belly, setting up the effects for the kill.
This isn't a movie to be enjoyed. In fact, I wouldn't recommend viewing this film to anyone unless they are not only an aspiring film maker, but interested in film making as an art form. It's hard to watch, and not because of the subject matter. While our main character prepares his "meal" the camera lingers on him, with his captive struggling in the background. This goes on for what seems like forever. A lot of the time, it made me feel like I was stoned. I knew something should be going on on the screen, but I felt so disoriented that I couldn't tell if I was missing something, or if that was just the way the movie made me feel. The acting is decent, considering there's not much coherent dialog, and that this is mostly happening in real time. The setting is believable, all-be-it a little bland. The music gets a tad annoying, with the same song being played in the back ground over and over.
If you're interested in becoming a film maker, and marvel at the technical aspects of a film, you may want to endure this experiment. You'll definitely be in for something original. But please, don't go into the flick expecting an enjoyable movie, because aside from marveling at the talent behind the camera, there's nothing to like here. Watch if you dare, and remember you've been warned.
http://liberaldead.blogspot.com
Now that I've explained that this isn't really a movie, but more of a talent showcase, let's delve into what worked for me. Knowing I was viewing one continuous take blew my mind for most of the film. The cinematography is nothing short of amazing after consuming that fact. Even more impressive is how they allow for F/X gags to be set up while the camera is running. A quick re-frame of the shot, allows for the off-screen crew to quickly set up the special effects. Some of the tricks used here were absolutely brilliant. Setting the kill in the bed of a pick-up truck, allows for them to make a quick cut to a wide-shot, while someone crawls on their belly, setting up the effects for the kill.
This isn't a movie to be enjoyed. In fact, I wouldn't recommend viewing this film to anyone unless they are not only an aspiring film maker, but interested in film making as an art form. It's hard to watch, and not because of the subject matter. While our main character prepares his "meal" the camera lingers on him, with his captive struggling in the background. This goes on for what seems like forever. A lot of the time, it made me feel like I was stoned. I knew something should be going on on the screen, but I felt so disoriented that I couldn't tell if I was missing something, or if that was just the way the movie made me feel. The acting is decent, considering there's not much coherent dialog, and that this is mostly happening in real time. The setting is believable, all-be-it a little bland. The music gets a tad annoying, with the same song being played in the back ground over and over.
If you're interested in becoming a film maker, and marvel at the technical aspects of a film, you may want to endure this experiment. You'll definitely be in for something original. But please, don't go into the flick expecting an enjoyable movie, because aside from marveling at the talent behind the camera, there's nothing to like here. Watch if you dare, and remember you've been warned.
http://liberaldead.blogspot.com
I'm not going to go into elaborate detail about the quality or goings-on of the story, because Adam Mason's press release warned/boasted that the film contained no plot...only brutality, gore & degradation. And it certainly lived up to that. As far as as a review is concerned, I agree completely with pretty much everything Shawn Savage said in his review.
I was pretty bored throughout the proceedings, especially after I noticed the first edit in the supposedly uninterrupted, single-take film. It occurred approx 20 min. into the film...the camera moves in on the truck-bed girl's dress, there's a dissolve (read: cut), and the camera pulls back to continue capturing the goings-on. Not that what Adam Mason & co. pulled off in long takes wasn't sometimes impressive, but if you're going to boast a 70+ minute, uninterrupted take, don't cheat. My opinion is if they decided to allow themselves "hidden" cuts (a la Hitchock's ROPE), they might as well have put some effort into some semblance of a storyline to make the whole thing a bit less monotonous.
I probably would have only given this 2 stars, but the film's score was really quite engaging and well-done throughout, and that's primarily what kept me watching.
I was pretty bored throughout the proceedings, especially after I noticed the first edit in the supposedly uninterrupted, single-take film. It occurred approx 20 min. into the film...the camera moves in on the truck-bed girl's dress, there's a dissolve (read: cut), and the camera pulls back to continue capturing the goings-on. Not that what Adam Mason & co. pulled off in long takes wasn't sometimes impressive, but if you're going to boast a 70+ minute, uninterrupted take, don't cheat. My opinion is if they decided to allow themselves "hidden" cuts (a la Hitchock's ROPE), they might as well have put some effort into some semblance of a storyline to make the whole thing a bit less monotonous.
I probably would have only given this 2 stars, but the film's score was really quite engaging and well-done throughout, and that's primarily what kept me watching.
As you will read in many other reviews here, the fact that the film is filmed in one continuous shot is very impressive, and Adam Mason should be applauded for this fact alone. The fact that he was able to get the film to run smoothly and all the special effects still worked is a marvel. However, that's where my appreciation ends. You see, Pig is an incredibly dull and boring film. It was marketed as being this incredibly disturbing and filthy movie with sadistic violence and deplorable scenes throughout. What we get is a whole lot of sub par acting, particularly that of the female antagonist in the movie. The film's portrayal of her being mentally disabled is extremely over the top, annoying, and frankly an offensive portrayal. The hur-dur dialogue and sounds that come out of her mouth are absolutely insufferable. The male antagonist is better, but it's like comparing excrement to expired food. One is clearly better but both are pretty awful. His performance is over the top, and not in a fun way. More of an embarrassingly amateurish way. The film is also an absolute bore, with there not being much of a plot at all outside of the 2 antagonists torturing a few people mentally in physically. Don't get me wrong either, I am a fan of movies such as the Guinea Pig franchise and other extreme cinema but here it is just dull. Nothing you see on screen isn't something you haven't seen before in countless other extreme horror films, or even many mainstream horror films. By nature, the fact that the film is shot in one take means that there are going to be some scenes where the actors do things that allow the special effects or set pieces to be set up while they talk or do something in the forefront. However, as I said before the acting is atrocious so really the only draw for the movie is the torturous acts commuted. And those aren't interesting either. So what we're left with is a movie that was shot in a cool way, but what is happening on screen is mediocre at best and unbearably annoying at its worst. A real shame.
I really, really did try to like this movie. I really wanted to enjoy this as sheer brutality, something that simply tried to be as vulgar as rating systems would allow. There's just. No. Plot. It's just a bad movie, plain and simple. Sure, it's got all the earmarks of a pretty, technically well-made film, but if you don't have that kind of film school background, it's nothing but torture porn, and within the first 5 minutes, you realize that it's not even torture porn: just sexist, reprehensible and filth. I'm fine with a good bit of Saw or Devil's Rejects fun, but when you're just beating the sh*t out of women for a good hour and a half, it's not fun anymore.
What a damn shame.
What a damn shame.
PIG is not a movie you're likely to put on for the family after a big Christmas lunch, but as an exercise in unrelenting brutality it's certainly worth checking out for any fan of extreme cinema.
Even at only a little longer than an hour PIG seems a bit too padded. If this was a 60-minute MASTERS OF HORROR episode it would have easily been the best one, but a certain numbness sets in to the viewer around 45-minutes in after such a protracted exhibition of frenzy, brutality and madness.
Technically the film's much-ballyhooed 'single take' technique is certainly daring. And the performances are committed, if not always entirely successful in some instances.
All-in-all this isn't a perfect film. But Adam Mason and his team have gone and done a left-of-field experiment in grueling extremity. And for a vast majority of its run time it most certainly succeeds.
Even at only a little longer than an hour PIG seems a bit too padded. If this was a 60-minute MASTERS OF HORROR episode it would have easily been the best one, but a certain numbness sets in to the viewer around 45-minutes in after such a protracted exhibition of frenzy, brutality and madness.
Technically the film's much-ballyhooed 'single take' technique is certainly daring. And the performances are committed, if not always entirely successful in some instances.
All-in-all this isn't a perfect film. But Adam Mason and his team have gone and done a left-of-field experiment in grueling extremity. And for a vast majority of its run time it most certainly succeeds.
Did you know
- TriviaWas only screened once at SXSW, and then was streamed online one more time before being essentially vaulted. No physical release was ever made, and there's no official place to stream it either.
- Crazy creditsThe closing credits run in the opposite way, starting with the copyright notice and the "filmed in" notice.
- SoundtracksFrozen Angels
Performed by Zoë Keating
- How long is Pig?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 10m(70 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content