Would You Rather

Sadistic wealthy people always spell trouble for the downtrodden or down on their luck. 13 Tzameti, Hard Target and Hostel are all good examples of the wealthy torturing and killing the less fortunate for the purpose of their own entertainment.

The latest such cinematic example is Would You Rather. Starring Brittany Snow (Pitch Perfect), Sasha Grey (my personal hard drive), Robb Wells (Hobo with a Shotgun), and John Heard (Home Alone), Would You Rather gathers a group of strangers for a wealthy aristocrat, played by Jeffrey Combs (Re-Animator) who pits his guests against each other in sadistic games where they have to choose between two options – each of which can either cause pain or death to themselves or another guest.

So guests are put in awkward positions of having to decide whether to electrocute themselves or someone else or whether to whip a guest or stab another. Attempt to leave the game and you will be shot. Take too long to decide on the lesser of the two options and you will be killed. The goal is to become the last person standing and the reward differs on the needs of each individual.

The main character to which the movie focuses around the table is Iris (Snow). She agrees to be part of the unrevealed game in an effort to provide for her ailing brother. She is the first to be tested with an offer to eat portions of a steak in return for $1,000 (being a vegetarian, it was a tough decision). But as the evening draws further, Iris and the others will be forced to make decisions inflicting unspeakable pain towards the other participants.

Stealing the movie is Combs. He commands a presence at the top of the table and his evil is believable in large thanks to his charismatic and demented portrayal of sadistic Shepard Lambrick.

The movie doesn't offer a lot of 'What would you do in the same situation'? There is little hope or much choice as the game progresses. Still, the script by Steffen Schlachtenhaufen (Primal) is interesting enough in various character developments.

Not likely to make many Top 10 lists by year's end, Would You Rather still offers valued entertainment and a few good self-inflicted wounds along the way.

www.killerreviews.com

People don't seem to really like this movie, but I think that's because it shows us a side of human nature we don't really want to see. In the ultimate position of chosing to help others or throw them under the bus for our own sake, most people don't want to admit which choice they'd take. An excellent film that shows us that our morality is ultimately as flexible as our circumstances dictate

Demented underrated horror movie about a group of people play a game of Would You Rather to try to win money. I've only seen once before and even then it disturbed me; very effective treat I'd say! Delectable twisted game that is shocking and fairly entertaining!

Would you rather has a great idea, bad execution.

Acting is just plain bad, at Sachas part, terribly, even though she has a lot of 'acting' career.

The story starts off well, but then it just becomes awful, it still keeps you interested if it's your kind of movie.

Even though, its good late night entertainment, i liked the ending.

Good for small money production !

Would You Rather takes an interesting look at a common children's game, playing it for the delight of a rich man with far too much money. The plot tells a story of a young girl whose younger brother lives with her after her parents have passed on, leaving nothing but mounting debt. Her brother is dying, her house has been sold, and ever job lead seems to fall through. One day somebody offers to pay for everything and find her brother a donor, at a price.

This being said, the piece was decently acted, standouts being that of Sasha Grey and the always delightful Jeffrey Combs (Re-Animator). The movie found ways to make you cringe without ever resorting to full on sight gore, the worst parts were left heavily to the imagination. This was a film that actually benefited from a lower budget, seeing that in a heavy budget one might be forced to see the over usage of all the stunts.

The movie is certainly not without its faults, first and most prominently is the lack of a decent score. The film never really utilizes music to draw you in, which is especially noticeable at the beginning and end of the film. The ending also felt so flat that it could hardly produce sympathy from the audience, an attempt to cater to the twist-necessitating crowd that has been delved since Saw's low budget first film hit our eyes. Unfortunately, it is such a negative that it makes one wonder if the whole damn first 30 minutes of the film were worth anything. This also repeats itself with a worthless subplot involving the doctor. The amount of filler placed within this movie alone degrades it, and unfortunately tampers an otherwise great horror gem to unnecessary viewing.

For all the gripes, though, the film does its job when it finally gets there. If I were to simply judge the 2nd act of this film it would get an easy 9, however, that being said, I believe a 6 is not only fair but accurate.