User Reviews

Well, the title ain't lying. Lots of people die in this movie, either on screen or off, and one person comes very close to dying, and all of the methods used are pretty horrible.

"A Horrible Way to Die" brings an admittedly unique spin to the serial killer movie. It uses mixed up chronology to tell the story of a woman whose boyfriend, a convicted serial killer, escapes from prison and comes back to find her, and the efforts of a new love interest to help her and keep her safe. The wacky order in which the story is told makes it feel richer than it probably is, and there are some major plot twists toward the end (up there with some of the biggest) that are handled less than delicately (you can practically hear the gears grinding at one point as the movie shifts into an entirely new direction). And stylistically it feels like a film made by a film student who's been itching to get his hands on a camera and can't control himself once he has -- the camera is always, I mean ALWAYS, moving, randomly zooming, drifting off to the edges of the frame, going out of focus. It's exceedingly annoying.

But the film does have a morbidly grim appeal to it. I can't say I necessarily enjoyed watching it, but I can say that it was memorable.

Grade: B-

I'm clearly running out of movies to watch on Prime and Shudder, which is why I eventually gave in and decided to settle for A Horrible Way To Die. Before delving further into the review, to be fair, I should state that just a couple hours before watching it, I saw one of the most incredible films I've ever had the pleasure of watching-'Magic Magic'; so 'A Horrible Way To Die' had a lot to live up to.

I had been reading around about this movie for a while. After all, with a title like that, you can't help but wonder what it's all about. I, of course, presumed that AHWTD was just another B-Horror movie belonging to the 'torture-porn' genre, and therefor, most likely a waste of time. But after reading several reviews which hailed the film for it's magnificent writing and acting, I decided to give it a go.

The first thing that I'll say about this movie is that the cinematography is terrible. I mean, really, it's almost unwatchable-maybe the director had some artistic statement in mind (attempting to give the film a feeling of 'visceral reality'?), or if the camera man just didn't have a the ability to stay in focus or to keep a steady hand. Regardless, it didn't work. I'm a man that values aesthetic, and I like movies to look beautiful-and if they don't..Well, I expect there to be a reason for that (for instance, it makes sense that the camera work looks shaky in a movie like 'The Blair Witch Project'). I suppose some might argue that the hand-held shaky camera-work adds a flair of 'grit' to the film, but I would argue that it does not (after all, Bad Leutenant got it's point across while still staying in focus), and instead creates the impression that the cinematographer was relying on a corny gimmick to cover up his lack of talent. There is absolutely no reason that half the film has to be out of focus.

Secondly, I would have to disagree with the assertion that the writing in 'A Horrible Way To Die' is anything above average. In fact, I would say a lot of the dialogue seems forced. It's hard to tell in movies like this if this is the product of the script itself or bad acting, but I'm going to go with the latter. I've seen some of these actors in other films and they were capable enough, and at times their talent does shine through the dull dialogue.

Another thing that annoyed me was the depiction of Alchoholics Anonymous. Having struggled with addiction for many years, I know the format of a 12 Step meeting like the back of my hand. Now do not misinterpret what I'm saying-I am no 'Big Book Thumper', but I am starting to get really annoyed by how all these movies are depicting Alchoholics Anonymous/Narcotics Anonymous. To me it just shows sloppiness..After all, how hard would it be to approach a member and just ask, 'Hey, we're making this movie, and a central theme is alcoholism, so do you think you could help us out to accurately depict a 12 Step program?". Clearly that conversation never took place. I almost feel as if they got their impression of 'The Program' from other movies.

Anyway, I have to admit, I only watched 3/4 or the film, because quite frankly, the quality became to abrasive for my taste. I don't mind low-budget films if the film-maker knows how to work within that limited budget (a great example of this is Mark Flannegans' 'Absentia', or the Sci-Fi time travel film 'Primer', supposedly filmed with a $7,000 budget), but that is not the case with 'A Horrible Way to Die', which instead looks at best like an ambitious student film that despite it's efforts, fails.

I will say that for what they were given to work with in terms of the script, the acting was pretty good, and that's probably the movies' one redeeming quality. Still though, I wouldn't waste my time with this one. I see a lot of people making claims like it's a 'hidden gem', and I imagine if you went into the movie with the expectation that it was going to be the the worst film in the history of cinema you might walk away with that point of view, but in to me it was an incredibly mediocre, predictable thriller.

A Horrible Way to Die was in a 3 DVD movie box presented by Night Vision. I bought two of these boxes months ago, and I started the Psycho Killers box.

The name paints a totally different picture of the film than what it truly is. Most of the actually deaths in this movie don't seem that horrible when you only see some mild gore here and there. Yes, a horror movie doesn't necessarily need that much gore, but when a movie has a title like this, you're expecting that. Also A Horrible Way To Die is a very straight-forward title, but the movie is far from it. The movie is quite short yet it's very slow. It takes too long for anything to happen, which makes it seem more like a seriously boring art drama.

The "seriously boring art drama" feel was also enhanced by the way this film was shot. While it enhanced the creepy, haunting atmosphere, it also annoyed the hell out of me. That kind of shaky shots are good every once in a while, but not all through the movie. It's not easy to look at, and therefore not easy to follow. It wasn't just the visual side that was hard to follow. Of course I don't believe in chronological narrative anymore, because breaking the story with flashbacks work most of the time, but in A Horrible Way to Die it was sometimes really hard to tell when something happened. Of course this was enhanced by the cinematography, because you can't always see the characters and what they look like, and then realise when that scene took place and all that.

The writing of this film is good though. The dialogue is as amazing as it tends to be in horror movies, it's so real. The story itself is not bad, apart from the story being so slow. The good writing can be seen in little things, like amazing twist, dialogue and whatnot. The slowness itself is not a sign of bad writing in general, but when you watch a horror movie it's frustrating when everything happens at the last minute. But the story might work well as a novel.

A Horrible Way to Die is an interesting movie to say the least. While it's not actually good and I didn't enjoy watching it, it definitely stands out from the horror movies I've watched.

I saw this film as part of the "Imagine" film festival 2011 in Amsterdam. The festival synopsis sounded attractive, as did most of the reviews. We were forewarned about loose story lines that would combine eventually, but not until some 5 minutes before the end. That was indeed a fact, but it does not give the film makers any right to leave us guessing what the continuous murdering is all about, and where all this waste of human life is heading.

Something else that added to the confusion was the repeated switching between flash forward and flash back. We got some help from one of the main characters, who did us some service by shaving off his beard after he escaped from prison. This kept us on track to decide every time we saw him, whether it happened before or after his prison time. But that was all we got, as far as I know. If there were any other clues to bring order in the scenes, I certainly overlooked these.

Though my leniency was stretched to the limit for 84 minus 5 minutes, I still have a few positive comments. That concerns the casting and acting of the characters involved, and in particular the main role players who were assigned to carry the story. Needless to say that they got themselves into a mere Mission Impossible, but nevertheless did their best to create something watchable out of the confusing (for me, that is) script.

All in all, I could only give a "hopeless" rating for the public prize competition when leaving the theater. I see no need for watching a movie that has no consistent plot, no story line that we can derive from the events, and no underlying motive to see a series of people killed in cold blood. All these bad things, if necessary to show, should have an inherent meaning or some higher purpose. Even worse, after the final 5 minutes where everything was tied together, I still cannot explain the overload (or should I say: overkill) of dead bodies. If you want my opinion: do not go, or you will be disappointed.

A guy has a kidnapped girl in his trunk. He drives out somewhere during winter and chokes her to death. A girl assists an AA meeting. Another of the attendees introduced himself to her and slowly they begin a relationship although she's traumatized and repressed. How these two stories relate we come to find out in flashbacks as this movie progresses.

Turns out that the killer is a convicted serial killer who managed to escape while being transported somewhere. He steals cars and as the manhunt intensifies and his face is plastered all over the news, he threatens people to drive him across state lines.

The couple becomes intimate and she reveals her secret to the guy. She was the serial killer's girlfriend. She called the police on him after she followed him and discovered he had rented a storage unit to keep the bodies. But there is a twist in the relationship between her and the new guy.

A Horrible Way to Die is a good title for a horror movie, except that it doesn't have anything to do with this movie. The idea comes up somewhere when the killer asks his gf how she would like to die. But that's about it. We don't see any horrible killings. There is some after-the-fact gore, but nothing special. It's a small budget movie that doesn't look or sound like it is. Wingard knows how direct and he knows hot to tell a story. And this movie looks very nice and sophisticated. Wingard has to employ a variety of tricks to overcome the main problem- the short script. So we get a lot of different and strange camera techniques that may seem out of place but that give this film its unique tone and atmosphere. We get moving but not shaky camera, out of focus, odd placement of the camera, things in the way. And almost all of it works, except for the distracting Christmas lights that the girl for some reason has everywhere in her house. The story works, even the way it's told, the surprise. The actors all do a good job, in particular Seimetz. And the film transmits the closeness and intimacy of the characters. It's just not enough- not enough horror, not enough violence, not enough gore- after all this movie involves a serial killer.

Plain and simple, the cinematography looked as if the camera person had just walked in to the nearest Wal Mart and bought a point and shoot HD camera minutes before filming began! Honestly, I suspect that this may truly be the case here! Seriously, the "Blair Witch Project" appeared more professional! I've had less focus problems with my old Sony Handicam on auto-focus at family reunions!

And how about aperture control? Do they know that it is possible to have more than one subject in focus at the same time?

Then there was the sex scene with all the light spots on the lens! What the heck was that?

How about the lack of timing between the actors? If, in real life, I happened to be involved in any of the conversations in this film as they happened, I would immediately call 911 and have the nearest hospital check to see if somebody slipped me a roofy!

I don't even want to talk about the plot! Original much? They could've done another "Charlie Manson" artistic documentary and it would've been better!

"Deep Throat" was a better movie! At least that movie was in focus and had a solid plot!

Billing itself as a realistic portrayal of insanity in the mind of a serial killer, I was left bitterly disappointed.

Expecting something like "Tony : London Serial Killer" what I got was a very disappointing and shallow look at a movie that wants to be more than it is.

There are many problems. One of them being the irritating way that the film has been shot. Being a very shaky cam, at first I liked it and appreciated it for being different and gave it realism, but after a while it began to become a distraction. Deliberate out of focus shots were also contributing to the irritating value that the movie was rapidly growing.

The fact is, you never feel like you are getting into the mind of this killer. You simply feel as though you are following him. Neither investing time in anything he is doing. You know he is a bad guy because he kills people, but any depth to this killer as a person, is non existent.

The acting was fine and there were some genuine decent moments, but the film wants realism, and the biggest killer to the realism is in the ending. I am not going to spoil it, but I thought "no way, this is basic horror movie stuff". I thought that it was a cheap way to end what was a film that was lacking the positives that made films like "Henry" and "Tony" the films that they are in the Serial Killer sub genre.

If you want a good serial killer movie, check out the films I just mentioned. You could probably give this one a miss!

Refreshing as it is to see attempts made to reinvigorate the played out serial killer genre movie it seem that in this and to a certain extent in the ludicrously over rated Australian film "Snowtown" the only thing "new" the director can bring is annoying camera work. This movie is particularly irritating as

A) Between almost every scene change the picture fades out and then fades in again.

B) It would appear that even though some of the actors are portraying recovering alcoholics it is in fact the camera man who is drunk.

C)The doom laden score plays too often promising tension that is never delivered.

D)Although filmed in widescreen there is little scope to the cinematography - it may as well be pan and scan.

E) In the sorry end this is nothing but a generic serial killer movie and a poor one at that.

Yet again for the millionth time - DO NOT believe the hype. Avoid.

Other than knowing a brief plot outline of an escaped murderer on the hunt of his ex-girlfriend, I had no idea what I was getting into when going to see Adam Wingard's latest, A Horrible Way To Die. Just so you're aware, as far as plot goes, that is all you have to know before heading off to see this film. As for an overall visceral pleasing experience… well, as they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As long as the beholder isn't epileptic or easily prone to motion sickness, that is. Both of which I am not, enabling me to absolutely love this film.

Constant shots of close-ups and not just on the actors' faces but knuckles, waists and other body parts (get your mind out of the gutter) as well as random objects around them effectively brought me into the characters' personal space with an intimacy most other mainstream films lack. Never is the camera shaky either, it's more of a purposeful fluidity, like imitating the human eye as it occasionally wanders while in conversation with another person. A good example of a film to compare the camera movement to would be Gaspar Noe's Irreversible. I don't me to drone on and on about one technical aspect of the film, but when something even the most casual moviegoers can not ignore is applied in such a non-gimicky way it's praise can not go unnoticed.

So, now that my praise for the way in which the film was shot has gone on the record I'll briefly dive into other elements of the film, mainly acting, plot and score:

Acting - The two stars of the film, Aj Bowen and Amy Seimetz, both turn in a-list performances. Can't wait to see these two make the leap into Hollywood and gain the larger attention that they both deserve. Plot – Keeping the story simple and absent of any convoluted sub-plots might be too dull for some to sit through… sucks for those people. Personally, I was ready for it to be an hour longer. Score – Nothing too extraordinary here, but it works for what it's trying to accomplish. Overall I'd say A Horrible Way To Die is a great way to spend 85 minutes

AJ Bowen plays Garrick Turrell, a serial killer with a pathological need to kill. He escapes from custody, and while he is on the lam the story of Sarah (Amy Seimetz) plays out. Sarah is a recovering alcoholic just trying to get from day to day; she is romanced by a member of her AA group named Kevin (Joe Swanberg). Eventually the connection between these stories is revealed.

While absolutely no match for "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" (the high water mark for this genre), "A Horrible Way to Die" is an entertaining, and very grim, independently made film. It's noteworthy for the way it portrays average American folks living their lives, and for taking a fairly low key approach to its darker material. It's gory enough to suit certain tastes, but director / editor Adam Wingard doesn't concern himself with being overly stylish. He deliberately goes for a rather drab look for the film, and the only major annoyance that this viewer had regarding the technical aspects was the way that damn camera would refuse to stay still. The soundtrack choices are somewhat amusing / interesting, considering the choice of a choir at times.

The performances are naturalistic and absorbing. Bowen remains utterly calm throughout; you won't see any scenery chewing on his part. Seimetz, very attractive but in a non-flashy way, is very appealing. Swanberg is quite likable in his role.

The script isn't perfect, but it is intriguing the way that it jumps forward and backward in time. It might not be that easy for people to follow it. The tale does come complete with some "big" plot twists.

Overall, a decent attempt to take a look at the fascination - and even hero worship - lavished upon serial killers by some of society's individuals.

Seven out of 10.

I was terribly disappointed in this film by a director, Joe Swanberg, whom I had come to admire and follow quite avidly. I did not so much object to the wavy camera technique, the flashbacks making the narrative sequence a challenge to follow, or even the muffled dialog and confusing lighting. The story itself was utterly and totally inane, stupid, ridiculous. It was not that it had a "surprise" ending but that the ending was utterly absurd. Truly a disappointment and all the more so coming from Swanberg, who has done such great work. How Amy Seimetz agreed to participate I have no idea...she is truly one of the great actresses of our time.

This is an interesting and unique story that is DESTROYED by the single worst attempt at cinematography I have ever seen.

None of the interesting story has any redeeming quality and becomes completely irrelevant as every second of the movie is shaking, combined with random zooming, going in and out of focus, constant fadeouts and fade to blacks. Perhaps 20% of the movie is out of focus. The super cheap production and the at best tolerable acting does not help the matter, as it all combines to create what looks like a college project.

The entire movie is shot with cameras that are held in someone's hand, and sometimes, with no exaggeration, it looks like the camera is hanging on a rope and dangling around. When the shot is on faces talking, the camera will zoom in and out of their faces, and go out of focus. There are several scenes where the camera just drops out of the scene but the shot is still going.

A man who lost all hope in the world and becomes a psycho finally finds love but couldn't return from the path ended up in jail betrayed by his own soul mate only to return to save her ended up killing many innocent on the road.

I watched this movie because it was billed as 'Horror'. The only thing that was horrific was the cameraman and editorial department. They couldn't even afford fake blood - so they filmed all the murders off camera.

The only reason I did not shut the movie off after the first 15 minutes was twofold - first: a lot of the actors were actually decent. Second: the story was a pretty original one, albeit the film managed to make it really confusing from start to finish, if a semi talented director would have gotten this story it could have made for a really decent movie.

My Advice To You: If your not a film student - STAY AWAY!

There is a lot to admire here, mainly a great lead performance by Amy Seimetz as the alcoholic ex-girlfriend of a serial killer trying to re-establish a normal life. Also it's tough to pull off a naturalistic arthouse horror flick, and this attempt does better than most. For most of its running time this plays more as a drama (that happens to involve a serial killer) than as horror. But two elements nearly wreck the film. One, mentioned by many other reviews here, is the constant close-ups with a jerky handheld camera. A little of this would be fine but it never lets up, this movie is 87 minutes of random close-ups with a camera that won't hold still. It's too much and becomes a constant distraction. Second, there is a very ill-judged twist five minutes before the end that effectively undoes much of the naturalistic appeal the movie had until that point. I won't reveal it here, but will just say it was wholly unconvincing to me. Even with these serious flaws, I found this to be worth watching for Seimetz's performance and for the unhurried, reflective storytelling. What's good here will stay with me, which makes the misjudgments that much more frustrating.

A difficult movie to watch could be another title. At least for some this will hold true. AJ Bowen made a name for himself with other movies and has quite a few fans, though even they (most of them at least) would agree that saying "Enjoy" this movie might be a wrong word to use. It's not the time structure or the different stories that make it difficult to watch itself nor the fact, that it still is predictable, but that it is very grim, with actually almost nobody the audience can identify with. Therefor choosing AJ to play the lead was actually a very good idea, that helps the movie a lot.

The final resolution of the movie and some of the characters is too convenient and predictable as mentioned, but if you can overlook that, you will get a thriller that knows what it wants. It is beautifully shot, though that means that it looks dirty in this case and dark. If that floats your boat, you should check the movie out. Otherwise rent with care

I tried to watch it. Got nauseated. I refuse to watch any movie that looks like it was filmed with a hand-held cell phone camera which is exactly what this movie is like. Anyone who can't get a $10 tripod from Walmart to hold the camera still needs to just stop and get a new career.

Good action story. The filming is rather amateurish giving the viewer a headache watching the movie with so much camera shakes and sways which was done on purpose for unnecessary effects. This is aggravated by scenes switching back & forth. Luckily we have the main character's beard to help out. (The main actor with full beard means the scene is from the past, If it shows the man just with mustache then it is at the present!). Otherwise this is not a bad movie. The acting is quite good and full of fast moving action. The movie is all about killing and showed how it can be done horribly. It should be classified as adults only. It can also be classified as a horror movie.

A very mature, organic, moody, restrained, dark, character driven drama/thriller that took its time going down a tense, sometimes terrifying path. The movie was filmed in a very artistic, independent, simplistic way that connects the viewer with the characters in a personal way that makes the ordeal effective and all too real which makes the sinister acts very disturbing and chilling. The film has a very familiar theme that we've seen before as a serial killer escapes from prison and begins to kill again but to me it hasn't quite been done like this before and makes the thriller different from the norm and ends on a surprising and powerful note. The movie did have suspense in it and some bloody scenes but it's done in a less is more way making it have a classic feel but this movie is smarter than that and relied more on character depth, performances and story than anything else which it mostly succeeded on. Overall if you like your serial killer movies to have a more deeper meaning and not over the top like it was back in the day you might find something to appreciate about A Horrible Way To Die but don't expect a lot of gore, scares and action but more on mood, atmosphere and suspense and even at that it a pretty slow burn of a movie but a decent one at that. 6 out of 10

A serial killer does his usually stchick on unsuspecting characters after he escapes from jail. His ex-girl friend is in hiding and under witness protection because she testified against him.

But, the cinematography was so bad, it was hard to follow the story.

I think the director got a string of Christmas lights and decided to use them in an out of focus foreground for a 'anxiety' effect. Really? A very poorly conceived decision. 'Shaky cam' was used on Blair Witch and a few others. You might try a tight story line, good actors, and scenes and presto a movie and a tripod.

Rather than move you into the story, such techniques take you out of the story since you are very aware of the effects and fail to follow the story. But maybe the cinematographer had the d'ts'

Pulp Fiction had very little 'artsy out of focus lights' as an effect to get the audience in a tipsy mood.

Story line wasn't bad, but ruined by the constant use of out of focus lights and jumpy camera work. Did you not have access to a pair of sticks?

Plot at the end was good though and should have been extended instead of endless AA meetings.