nashknight-1

I'm having a very hard time finding anything positive to say about this drivel.

Generic, unengaging stories with almost no historical consistencies (and quite a lot of modern-day liberties), bland design, choppy animation masked with cheap cell-shading...

This all seems like a quick cash-grab, or streaming content filler.

Since it appears that there's a mandatory requirement for a minimum number of characters in a review, and there's absolutely nothing more to be said about this content (for I can't in all honesty call it a movie or a show), I will end my review like this: booooooiiiiiioioioioioioioioioioing. Stupid, yes, but still less so than Predator: Killer of Killers.

I've heard about this movie in the context of "worst movie ever," "so bad it's good," and "a movie written and directed by Fred Durst and it shows," and I can only say I agree with the last one.

I think someone once said that this was a bad movie and that everyone just jumped on the bandwagon without even trying to have their own opinion.

True, the script is obviously a bit amateurish, but you can see that it is the fruit of love and passion and not a bunch of heartless Hollywood scribbling. I see people saying how the dialogues are terrible, while I would say that they are just natural, this is how normal people talk, sometimes stupidly and incoherently - not all people are as smart and eloquent as in most of American movies.

They also say that Travolta is a disaster, which I do not agree with again - he is very memorable and characteristic.

But even if are to admit that all these elements are flawed, photography and direction are really good still, with some very interesting and creative elements.

The only thing I can really complain about this movie is the ending felt a little rushed, like it's missing an act or 20min, but no biggy.

It's not a masterpiece, but it's an interesting and engaging film that's definitely worth a watch, head and shoulders above most of today's slop. 7/10 from me.

Feel free to ignore this poor rating on imdb, the movie only has it because most people won't watch anything horror-labeled that isn't greenscreen slop and/or cheap jump-scare galore.

In other words, this film has such a low rating because it is advertised as horror, and it is not, or at least not in the classic sense, but rather a depressing-disturbing psycho-thriller/drama, with hints of horror.

Apart from that misleading classification, I have nothing to complain about, it's beautifully filmed and fantastically acted - Sarah Paulson knocked it out of the park, and Ebon Moss-Bachrach (the goofy brother from The Bear) is not far behind. The direction and the script are generally good, there are some small kinks here and there, but really nothing terrible.

The setting - a dust storm in the backwoods of 1920s Oklahoma - is really something I haven't seen very often (outside of Courage the Cowardly Dog), and it gives the film a special atmosphere of hopelessness.

The movie is not light popcorn fun, in fact, it's really messed up and depressing, but it's also great, something I'd recommend to serious movie buffs as well.