Woodyanders How's this for a promising premise: A motley bunch of extremely annoying and unlikable college frat boys are sent into a dangerous blighted urban area as part of an initiation rite. The grossly unappealing dolts run afoul of vicious malformed psycho Splatter (well played with fierce intensity by Edwin Neal of "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" fame), who naturally stalks the frat boys through the back alleys of these mean city streets. Sound good? Well, it just ain't, man. Director/co-writer Ronald W. Moore lets the story unfold at a painfully sluggish rate (the opening third in particular is way too draggy and drawn-out), crucially fails to build much in the way of either tension and momentum, stages the infrequent action scenes with a crippling dearth of skill and panache, and makes clumsy sporadic use of slow motion. Moreover, the frat boy characters are a truly hateful, idiotic, and extremely unsympathetic bunch; one quite simply doesn't care whether these irritating jerks live or die. Worse yet, the acting for the most part is very poor, with Wade Reese rating as the biggest offender with his profoundly grating turn as obnoxious meathead Steve. Only Alice Villarreal manages to rise above the muck with her enjoyably spiky portrayal of feisty streetwise punkette chick Julie. Neal's fellow "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" star Marilyn Burns is sadly wasted in a nothing minor role as Splatter's bitter old flame Dorothy Grim. Things briefly perk up with a cool appearance by the funky band Max and the Makeups at a rowdy punk club, but not even a decent smattering of tasty gratuitous female nudity and a handy helping of nasty gore can redeem the general tedium of this lackluster clunker. Jon H. Lewis' fairly slick cinematography and Robert Renfrow's snazzy synthesizer score are both a good deal better than this dreck deserves. A real stinker.

Backlash007 I picked up Future Kill because of the Giger artwork on the box and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre alumni in hopes that it would be good crappy film (you know, like Ghoulies 3). What I got was a hybrid of genres, and something that I had already seen when I was younger. Look at the storyline: A group of teens running from a gang in the city because they have been framed for murder. It wanted to be a futuristic version of the Warriors so bad (it even starred someone who was featured in The Warriors). It's certainly no Warriors or anything to write home about, but it's not as bad as you'd think. With no budget whatsoever the filmmakers actually made a credible feature. It never once gets boring and the characters are fun to laugh at. What was up with the beginning though? It's like they were trying to make the next Porky's and then realized that the movie was titled "Future Kill." It doesn't really fit with the rest of the flick. I couldn't really decide whether the movie was sci-fi, horror, or comedy, but it does star Edwin Neal and Marilyn Burns from the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre and features Bill Johnson who played Leatherface in TCM 2. With that cast, how could it not be a horror movie? But the real question is, why is one of the alternate title Night of the Alien?

Aphex97 This movie has the distinction of being the worst movie I have ever seen, and the only film I have ever given a 1 out of 10 on imdb as of yet. I was fooled into renting it because of the cool H.R. Giger cover art on the box. This cover art is the only thing the least bit good about this steaming pile of...It was about frat boys fighting "freaks" in a strange but not the least bit interesting post apocalyptic world where the cities are in ruins/chaos, but apparently the suburbs are still a safe and wonderful place for young men to haze other men into braindead frat organizations. The most uninspiring performances by boring characters, not so special effects, dreary, un-original scenery and just generally extremely poor quality in all production aspects make this lemon the all time loser on my list.FINAL RATING: 1/10 I wish I could give it a zero.Noob Aalox

ad2020 Simply put, the only saving grace this movie has is settings, costumes and an OK punk concert. How H.R.Giger must feel about his cyborg picture on the cover of this movie, I wouldn't like to know. Right away, all I could do was make sardonic comments about the films protagonists, I was hoping that the "freaks" in this movie would execute them in gory fashion. I sense SPOILERS a comin'! I was wondering if this film in the spirit of the first 20 min. was intended to be as humorously half-baked as the rest of it? Examining all the obvious political outcries (Police trying to rape a "freak", the discussion of superficialities between the "freak" and the frat boy and the punk concert w/ the female vocalist) and the use of slow-motion in the fighting sequences (which screams "martial-arts coordinator") I just don't know. The character named "Steve" irked me since he tries to pick fights w/ people off the street (he shoulda been mugged and raped) and looks bad when he broke that guy's neck towards the end (want me to show you how to do it?) I must say this though, if they would've developed other characters better than they did "Splatter", this might have gone somewhere. If there was a 0 to give this movie, it would've got it, but alas it's a 1.