I watched this film with my daughter and her college friends. I think that there is a significant difference in how you'll like it base on your age. Among teens and college students, this is a very hot film. Among older viewers, it's a bit incomprehensible--though I was surprised that Leonard Maltin gave such a positive review for the film. Several of the teens watching with me were singing along while my daughter kept covering her eyes at the goriest moments. Me, I just sat there and felt that the plot was awfully convoluted and had a lot of gaps, though I did admire the uniqueness of the film. I guess this is a sign that I am just getting old!
The film is a rock opera unlike any other. The music is certainly NOT the type you can hum along with or you'd expect to hear on the radio. Instead, it's as if they merged traditional opera with THE ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW, the stage play "Les Misérables" and a traditional slasher film--with gallons and gallons of blood and tons of gore. Because it's such an odd combination, it's a truly surreal experience. And speaking of surreal, think about the strange casting--Paul Sorvino, Anthony Head, Sarah Brightman and....Paris Hilton!? Despite the oddness of the cast, it did work pretty well. For the first time ever, Hilton seemed well cast as a self-absorbed lady who is addicted to plastic surgery. Her singing, while not great, was certainly NOT an embarrassment and she was more than capable.
As for the plot, this is one of the weakest points. In many ways, it seemed like it was never truly complete and it left me a bit confused here and there. I know they are talking about making a prequel, but I really wish that had been made first in order to fill in the gaps. In order to fill the viewers in on the back story, graphic novel-style graphics are inserted here and there to fill in the gaps and explain the characters. However, some (such as Sorvino's demented children) seemed to have no discernible motivation and I also was left wondering who and where there mother is and why they were total psychos. Also, the cities appear to have been blown to pieces and you wonder what has happened to the government and society.
The film begins near the middle of the 21st century. Apparently some sort of plague hit a few years back and caused widespread organ failures. In the midst of the death and carnage, Sorvino's company created a "cure"--synthetic organs for the masses. However, because many could not readily afford them, a "buy now-pay later" scheme was created. But, because some defaulted, "repo men" were created to repossess the organs if they failed to pay.
In the midst of this, there is a concurrent plot that never really seemed complete. A character named "Graverobber" and others have begun harvesting some sort of drug from corpses. You see this guy here and there and he's obviously been inserted in the film to please the ladies, but he is never really explained and the drug angle is never really realized. My daughter disagrees, as she sees him as an archetypal Fool--like a combination narrator, comic relief and the only character who seems to know what's going on in the film--sort of a literary device. Regardless, he just seemed to appear randomly and I wish there'd been some back story for him or necessary reason for his inclusion.
The main plot involves a sick relationship between Sorvino and Anthony Head (who, secretly, is a Repo Man). Years earlier, Sorvino's girlfriend left him and married Head. She died and left a daughter who Head adores but also smothers in his own little cocooned world. There's a lot more to this plot than this, but I don't want to introduce spoilers.
If I were scoring this film only on how much I enjoyed watching it, I probably would only give it a 4 or a 5. It was a bloody, disjointed and disgusting film. However, this is a hard film to rate and I need to consider how innovative and unique the film is as well--and in this department, it certainly rates a 10. Overall, my score of 7 seems like a reasonable compromise. I would love to see similar style films in the future, but with the blood and senseless violence toned down a bit.
The film is a rock opera unlike any other. The music is certainly NOT the type you can hum along with or you'd expect to hear on the radio. Instead, it's as if they merged traditional opera with THE ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW, the stage play "Les Misérables" and a traditional slasher film--with gallons and gallons of blood and tons of gore. Because it's such an odd combination, it's a truly surreal experience. And speaking of surreal, think about the strange casting--Paul Sorvino, Anthony Head, Sarah Brightman and....Paris Hilton!? Despite the oddness of the cast, it did work pretty well. For the first time ever, Hilton seemed well cast as a self-absorbed lady who is addicted to plastic surgery. Her singing, while not great, was certainly NOT an embarrassment and she was more than capable.
As for the plot, this is one of the weakest points. In many ways, it seemed like it was never truly complete and it left me a bit confused here and there. I know they are talking about making a prequel, but I really wish that had been made first in order to fill in the gaps. In order to fill the viewers in on the back story, graphic novel-style graphics are inserted here and there to fill in the gaps and explain the characters. However, some (such as Sorvino's demented children) seemed to have no discernible motivation and I also was left wondering who and where there mother is and why they were total psychos. Also, the cities appear to have been blown to pieces and you wonder what has happened to the government and society.
The film begins near the middle of the 21st century. Apparently some sort of plague hit a few years back and caused widespread organ failures. In the midst of the death and carnage, Sorvino's company created a "cure"--synthetic organs for the masses. However, because many could not readily afford them, a "buy now-pay later" scheme was created. But, because some defaulted, "repo men" were created to repossess the organs if they failed to pay.
In the midst of this, there is a concurrent plot that never really seemed complete. A character named "Graverobber" and others have begun harvesting some sort of drug from corpses. You see this guy here and there and he's obviously been inserted in the film to please the ladies, but he is never really explained and the drug angle is never really realized. My daughter disagrees, as she sees him as an archetypal Fool--like a combination narrator, comic relief and the only character who seems to know what's going on in the film--sort of a literary device. Regardless, he just seemed to appear randomly and I wish there'd been some back story for him or necessary reason for his inclusion.
The main plot involves a sick relationship between Sorvino and Anthony Head (who, secretly, is a Repo Man). Years earlier, Sorvino's girlfriend left him and married Head. She died and left a daughter who Head adores but also smothers in his own little cocooned world. There's a lot more to this plot than this, but I don't want to introduce spoilers.
If I were scoring this film only on how much I enjoyed watching it, I probably would only give it a 4 or a 5. It was a bloody, disjointed and disgusting film. However, this is a hard film to rate and I need to consider how innovative and unique the film is as well--and in this department, it certainly rates a 10. Overall, my score of 7 seems like a reasonable compromise. I would love to see similar style films in the future, but with the blood and senseless violence toned down a bit.