Mr D's No Thing Tales is described as a horror anthology. This is misleading This movie is a series of scenes of naked and semi-naked women being terrorised and tortured. We're it outright pornography, it would probably be banned for sexualising violence against women. And yet it clearly is meant to be titillating, otherwise why would every 'horror' story contain female nudity? Frankly, I'm stunned that anyone had the gall to make a movie containing stories such as these.
But not as stunned as I am that someone had the courage to release a movie containing such inadequate VFX as are displayed in here. Mr D himself is as egregious a piece of CGI as you'll ever see, surrounded by CGI female torture victims who are equally unconvincing. CGI blood is especially distracting. I understand that the movie was probably made on a shoestring, but how much does a few bottles of ketchup cost? This is particularly noticeable as some of the 'stories' in this anthology are purely CGI.
This is almost as bad a movie as I've watched. Yet I did watch it. I've stopped watching many more competently made, higher budget movies after twenty minutes or so. There's a fascination with what schlock and bad taste they'll try to get away with next. And, if there'd been sequels, I'd have watched those, too. Right up until they started actually not being atrocious quality, because when the cartoonist aspect of this dross is lost, the emphasis on sexual violence against women suddenly becomes extremely disturbing. I think this production gets away with what it does because it's too bad to be taken seriously.
This movie's a curiosity, and entertainingly bad. For that accidental entertainment value, I've got to give it two stars, as long as it's understood that neither of those stars are for its production values or its morality (or lack thereof), or indeed anything that was intended by the filmmakers.