The Wizard of Gore (2007)

I find horror remakes absolutely fascinating; and it's usually the case that when it comes to the splatter fest horrors, the remakes are usually just a lot more blood, that looks less like ketchup. The Wizard of Gore, I thought focused more on the story and less on the gore. In a way, as a film by itself, it was fairly interesting. But when you call a film 'Wizard of Gore' and don't have a lot of gore in there, its kind of a let down. I find it hard to comment on my 'liking' of this film, but I found almost every aspect of it absolutely interesting. It created a vibe for itself, that I appreciated. The acting, especially that of Kip Pardue and Cripsin Glover was excellent. As the leads, they both capture the audience's attentions and don't let it waver for a second. As the wizard says in the film, 'The trick is me'. Filled with substance and captivating technique, 'Wizard of Gore' is worth a watch for fans of horror or psychological thrillers. It had a few loop holes, but the feel it creates and the aftertaste it leaves you with, make it an exciting ride.

The idea of remaking the classic 1970 Herschell Gordon Lewis movie "The Wizard of Gore" did have potential. But in its actual execution, this remake fails in just about every way you can think of. True, Crispin Glover does add a little life into his scenes, and the movie does boast some okay gore sequences. Other than those things, I can't think of anything positive to say about the movie. It's terribly shot, looking like it was photographed with a camcorder and with extremely bad lighting. (And just about every shot of the movie has the camera at an odd tilt.) The lead character is annoying and unsympathetic. And the story moves at a crawl, and often doesn't make that much sense. The movie is so bad at times that one could almost swear that the filmmakers were trying to do as bad a job as possible. Like when it comes to most remakes, stick with the original.

This movie started out somewhat promising, but after the Main character had his first nightmare and grabbing a paper bag from his bedside table..things went completely downhill.Sadly Kip Pardue ruined the film, which is a real shame too, because Glover, Phillips, combs, suicide girls and Dourif acted perfectly. This isn't even really about the Wizard of gore, but a psychological thriller of a weak pussy diving into his nightmares. If you want to see a poor excuse for a man constantly breathing out of a paper bag and forever repeatedly cracking his bones for no reason at all-then see this film. The writing for the in-depth speeches about hell sounded like a college poem with no backbone. If you manage to watch this entire film without turning it off it will just make you wonder why you didn't watch something else. They shouldn't have called it "The Wizard of gore", instead have called it something else for an actual remake with a decent plot and a 1/2 decent lead actor to come around.

while the gore is admittedly not all that impressive as far as realism goes (were those papier-mâché guts when Glover's character disembowelled the first girl ??? as for the burnt-alive blonde... no comment),the effect is however still cringe-worthy. And I did cringe. a lot. OK,at the beginning, the cringing had more to do with 'Montag the Magnificent's (sic)rather embarrassing insane laughter (nevertheless, I am happy to report that the rest of Glover's performance did not elicit any more what-the-hell-tell-me-he-did-not... *facepalm* reactions among the group of friends I was watching the film with. In fact, the manic cheerfulness of it contrasted rather nicely with the wanton slaughtering of strippers going on on stage. back to the cringing: freaks chomping down on maggots and rats are always a crowd-pleaser (And for those who are hiding behind a pillow, too bad it won't keep the sound effects away. Well, more pizza for the other viewers I guess...) The cringe-worthiness of the slaughtering is more in the wanton aspect of it than in its actual visuals (the girl that gets bits chopped off with the bear traps does not even bleed. However, Glover's suavely unconcerned delivery of the accompanying monologue makes the scene chilling enough).on a random tangent: could retro-boy (the "hero") have been played with an even more emo angle? and his girlfriend's nagging about his knowing the stripper's name, while ethically understandable, was just annoying. Not quite sorry to see that one die... but on to my main point: I guess my friends and I are a particularly clueless bunch, but I would be grateful if someone could explain who did what to whom and when (I got the why, but that's about it). Because I'm still trying to figure it out since we saw the movie last week. Still, the fact is that, despite the movie's numerous flaws, it manages (though, from what I've read, this does not apply to all viewers) to make you want to figure it out beyond the usual "what does it say in IMDb's FAQ ? nothing. oh, well." And that is why I give it a 7. Well, that and the fact that, while the plot line is terribly confusing - or maybe decided to leave on an extended vacation,I'm not sure - I was, for once, not bored into unconsciousness.) And the comedy value of the movie as a whole is not to be underestimated either...