taguanutivory The story is a bit cold-blooded, but the dialog between Millard the mediocre writer and Lucky the demonic dog is some of the wittiest ever you'll hear in American film. And the sparkling cast does the dialog justice. A minor morbid gem along the lines of "Eating Raul" and "The Honeymoon Killers." The writer, Stephen Sustarsic, have a long and extensive background in television sitcoms, but here he seems to have let his unbridled id indulge in the sort of Rabelasian humor that the networks would NEVER allow. As it is, this movie's take on every writer's nightmare when facing creative paralysis cuts a lot deeper than anything Stephen King has managed.

planometric-rotoscope This film has nothing to do with the 'horror' tag it is being sold on it is more of a sit-com about a screen writer's delusions (in more ways than one). The film's central character provides a cliché ridden narration from start to end - on word count alone it would probably be enough for 4 films however the schoolboy shallows that are being scraped make it wearisome after the first five-ten minutes. Maybe this is intended but it makes any genuinely interesting (visual) details, and there are at least enough to count on one hand, seem forced.I think the only reason this film has been noticed in any way is though some cabal amongst screenwriters determined to see their profession on the silver screen, which judging by this effort must be resisted.The next bit contains SPOILERS.Into our hero's world comes Lucky as soon- to-be undead dog whose magical 'knowledge' helps our hero to hitherto unknown success (which isn't enough for a rags-to-riches story). The dog is as clichéd as the hero (I think velvety, pimp voices as signifying 'knowledge' outdated themselves in the early 70s) but his acting is marginally better. A major turn for the worse is seeing the sexual fantasies of our middle-aging hero in their full suburban banality, and for these segments the narration intensifies to full-on teenage angst. It would have been a far, far better movie if we actually saw the dog killing the women that provided the energy for his scripts rather than hearing the hero sitting at his computer.

mikehurst33 I bought the DVD of Lucky after reading about it on a horror film site I stumbled across. I just watched it and was very, very impressed. Other comments accusing the film of misogyny are, in my view, misguided. Every abuse and sadistic scene is set up in such a way that, well, I'll abide by the SPOILER warning and not spell it out here, but if you watch the film (and I strongly recommend you do) then you'll see what I mean. All in all I felt this was excellent story telling, really communicating the inherently terrifying concept of what it would FEEL like to lose your mind. That (in answer to some of the previous comments) is what makes it a horror film, and a damn effective one at that. Congratulations to the guys who made it and I'll be sure to check out anything else that the writer and director make in the future.

haydenflicks To be humorous on a low budget feature is often a very difficult task. To blend humor and horror is an even more arduous task. But director Steve Cuden does so with such imagination and creativity. With a feature that can best be described as daring, Cuden has created a jet black comedy that will chill you. With great performances and a distinct visual style, this hybrid film will thoroughly entertain and sit up and beg for repeat viewings. Definitely, check this film out!