Pink Eye (2008) Poster

(2008)

User Reviews

Review this title
7 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
I still don't know why it's called Pink Eye...
DrBlood200629 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I was sent a screener of "Pink Eye" last week and really looked forward to seeing Melissa Bacelar in all her glory. I wasn't disappointed either. Not only does she have a wonderfully toned (and tanned) body to look at but she is quite a charismatic presence on screen too.

Unfortunately, the little girls in the film steal every scene they are in and actually do a much more credible job than the seasoned pros here. It's obvious that, in spite of the ultra low budget, "Pink Eye" actually contains some decent actors but the overly slow pace does tend to spoil their performances from time to time.

Melissa's legs also tend to be a major distraction. I'm not entirely sure what her relationship is exactly to the children (or to the hero for that matter) but her skimpy shorts are probably inappropriate attire for babysitting. I just found myself gazing at her legs more than paying attention to the dialogue but then that's probably always going to the case when it comes to Melissa Bacelar.

The story itself is somewhat confusing. Things really aren't explained too well and there are a few red herrings along the way which really do more to hinder the plot rather than help it. The whole thing reminded me of the huge annoying pause you get on quiz shows like "Millionaire" where you end up shouting, "Just get on with it!" In particular, the scene with the Russian woman telling the story of how Brandon had "Pink Eye" when he was younger just felt like padding.

The special effects, on the other hand, are quite well done. Most effects appear to be the practical kind although there are also a couple of dodgy camera effects which are overused. Whereas I thought that the various eyeball gouging and belly cutting effects were good, I really didn't like the scenes which looked like a double exposure.

I absolutely hated the use of music throughout the film though. Not only did most of it outstay its welcome by overlapping from one scene to the next but it was often inappropriate. No background music at all would perhaps have been a better option although strangely enough there were a couple of scenes near the end where it actually worked.

The real star of this show though was Joshua James who plays the Poe quoting lunatic "Edgar". Big plot holes mean that I'm not sure why he was so special as a patient but he certainly has a very eerie voice somewhat reminiscent of James Earl Jones mixed with Vincent Price if that makes any sense. He certainly managed to convey an air of menace.

I was disappointed by the scene in which Melissa removes Edgar's mask mainly because I wanted to see the total extent of his deformities. Alas, either the budget didn't run to it or someone thought it would be best left to the imagination but in a film so previously full of gore it was odd.

Overall it was quite entertaining but very flawed. There were some nice boobs once or twice (sadly not Melissa's) and enough blood to satisfy most independent horror film fans. It's not really any worse than "Beyond Re-animator", which it reminds me a lot of, but it's equally not at all scary either.

I'll give it 3 out 10. I wish I could give it more but it needs some more editing in places before it would be totally pleasing. I also wish that Melissa hadn't disappeared for three-quarters of the film as, from the order of the credits, I really thought she was going to carry the whole thing.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Did this movie make any sense??
dschmeding16 October 2008
I should have known from the title screen onward that this was a bad movie. Come on... this cheap public domain horror font is used on amateur Halloween cards but not in the opening title of a horror movie. The best in this movie is the beginning of a girl in an asylum that goes nuts and rips out her eyes. You won't see any equally gory scenes for the rest of the movie. Basically it starts out with an asylum and some strange experiments and misuse of the inmates, one of them a tall guy with a deformed face (you never see it anyway) who soon escapes and goes on a ridiculous revenge ride.

The first part with the asylum and the experiments is the central idea of the movie which gets picked up at the end again. In between you got a real lame take on the Halloween/Friday the 13th theme with a masked tall killer stalking victims and then killing some. No suspense here, the killer gets an uninteresting back story (which is the only link to the movies title) and talks some poetic gibberish and stalks a woman that you never quite understand why he is around her.

It just is a really lame movie with some ideas thrown in a pot that just don't fit. The psycho killer character must be one of the most ridiculous in movie history and the acting is most of the time pretty bad. The only good scene in this movie is in the beginning, so basically you can save a lot of wasted time if you stop before the opening title appears.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Short film, obviously low-budget, wouldn't watch it again
accauditor27 November 2008
If you enjoy horror movies, this movie wasn't scary at all, so pass on it if scary moments are the main reason you like horror films. There also wasn't much gore so again, if that's why you like horror movies, pass on this one.

The film was short, and 2 characters entered briefly, one to talk about a main character's pink eye as a kid, and the other to talk about his painting (which as it turned out resembled the killer). The killer was annoying. He wasn't scary, and every line of his was quoting poetry and speaking with an accent to make him sound snooty. It didn't really make him seem more deranged and interesting. It was just annoying.

The first few minutes really had me thinking the movie was going to be worth watching, but I couldn't believe I actually finished the movie because it really just had very little to offer as far as keeping me interested. It was clearly low-budget and a good effort, but it's not a movie I would strongly recommend in any way.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
What did I just watch?
mercer-john16 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
OK I am not one to hate on independent Horror especially since some surpass Main Stream big budget horrors, but I have to take the time to say that this Movie is dire.

I was mislead into thinking that this would be an interesting story from the opening scene but I was more than wrong, in fact the film doesn't really have a coherent storyline at all. It jumps from one scene to the next containing irrelevant characters who really serve no purpose to the thin story line the film does have.

The characters that do feature have no clear Character traits and little if no back story meaning that you can't relate or care what happens to them. As for the main baddie Edgar, he seems to be a Mix of several other horror baddies and does his best to mimic Tony Todds Excellent performance in Candyman (Vocally I mean) which for me was very distracting.

In my humble opinion this doesn't really feel like one solid cohesive movie but like a bunch of Trailers for several Horrors edited to appear as one film.

I would never tell anyone to stay away from a movie because we all have different emotional responses to what we watch, but be warned this will leave you confused and wondering 'what did I just watch?'
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
no suspense
trashgang28 April 2011
There are a few names in this flick that attracted me, I already had contact with Alan Rowe Kelly and I knew Raine Brown via Joe Zaso. So I thought this was going to be good. It starts of pretty well and in fact even a bit gory with the self removal of eyes. But then the opening credits come in and after that it's downhill. The killer's face is never shown even not when his mask is removed but also his one liners didn't work. It reminded me of Freddy or Pinhead but here as I said it just didn't work. There are a few bloody shots involved but mostly the effects are so cheaply done or some killings are off screen. Some girls do show their juggs but it was all to late. Nothing really happens and for me their wasn't any suspense. It's sad knowing that so many famous names in the genre were involved in it.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Horror fans will appreciate this one
demontaurus20 October 2008
Within the first five minutes, your jaw will hit the floor.

I write for a major horror review publication and see them all. Pink Eye is not for Hollywood buffs. But its the froth of the horror indie slaughterhouse floor, and its reminiscent of the 80's when horror was low budget and raw, without trying to be.

The combination of director James Tucker and writer Joshua Nelson has hit the monkey for dinner on the head before - Aunt Rose, Addiction, and Skinned Alive are titles you cant go wrong with on a blind purchase. Also, Melissa Bacelar frequents these parts. Although she's not nude in any of them (DAMN DAMN DAMN!!!!) there are ample alternatives in the T&A department. On top of it, Melissa can act, and can carry your eyes through 90 minutes of ANYTHING.

If you can appreciate good low budget horror, don't pass this one up.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
BHM review
bridgetb122 February 2008
Release: Premier January 8, 2008 Directed by: James Tucker Written by: Joshua Nelson

Starring: Melissa Bacelar as Delilah Joshua Nelson as Brandon Joshua James as Edgar Emma Hinz as Daisy Bridget Megan Clark as Holly

Savage Rose Pictures and Lost Angeles Films have teamed up before, notably on the project Eat Your Heart Out starring the ravishing Melissa Bacelar. The projects coming from this team keep getting better in terms of gore, story and effective use of limited resources.

Pink Eye is the story of an insane asylum where ghastly drug experiments are conducted. There are other things going on in this nut house as well that include orderlies wearing shrunken-head masks while they rape the female patients - Remember those machines that would dry out a carved apple to make a prunie little head with a face on it? You could get them from the huge Sears catalogue when I was a kid – and I think director James Tucker got one for Christmas one year and based the mask on the memory.

The visual of the prune-face mask becomes relevant when one of the crazies, Edgar, escapes and dons the mask before embarking on a murderous and pillaging rampage that ends in an abduction of Delilah (Bacelar) and the quest for her rescue by boyfriend Brandon (Joshua Nelson).

There are several notables to Pink Eye, and most of them are amplified considerably by the fact that the budget for this one was extremely low. First is the gore. I already knew after watching Eat Your Heart Out that there was a love of over– the– top gore inherent in this film-making team, but a few scenes in Pink Eye took this to a new level. You haven't lived until you've seen a young woman graphically rip her eyeballs out because she thinks there are ants behind them…AWESOME!!

The acting is very good, especially the performances of boyfriend Joshua Nelson and the two child actors Emma Hinz and Bridget Megan Clark. My only complaint is that there wasn't enough Melissa Bacelar. She is set up as the romantic interest and child caregiver early on, but ultimately her part is pretty minor until the end. I would have liked to have her character developed more so that the impact of her abduction packs a bit more punch. Still, the scenes of Melissa tied up and screaming while surrounded by mutilated bodies just about makes up for it. I could have done without a few of the ancillary characters, especially the stoner dude…he was fine, but ultimately pointless. Less stoner dude, more Melissa…that's what I say, but my crush on Melissa Bacelar is well documented so who am I?

The villain in Pink Eye is a complete drama queen, which I like. A skin disease that makes him a monster, the vicious way that he rips rats apart, the shrunken apple head mask and the James Earl Jones voice work together to create a credible monster worthy of nightmares.

Tons of punch on a shoestring budget is the beauty of Pink Eye. This independent horror creation proves that tons of money and big studios cannot eclipse real movie-making passion. Questions or comments about Pink Eye? Contact us!

Update: I spoke with Melissa Bacelar today and voiced my concerns regarding her lack of screen time. She told me that the filming location was so cold that the cameras were freezing, requiring that many of her outdoor scenes be cut. I reminded her that "cold girls in tube tops make good cinema" according to Kaufman of Troma, but unfortunately there was nary a tube top in the house.

Take me to Independent Horror Reviews!
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed