Ghoul (gool) n. 1: a legendary evil being that robs graves and feeds on corpses 2: one suggestive of a ghoul-ghoul-ish Stash and Hub, two redneck ghouls, take a journey through an ancient graveyard to do what ghouls have done for centuries: grave defiling, necrophilia and cannibalism. On their midnight walk, they rant about their idiosyncrasies. But this morbid journey to feast on the dead does not unfold as it has the numerous nights before. Stash and Hub have raided the resting place of the deceased one too many times and the dead do not take lightly being fed on for centuries. Enter a world that has no prepositions of time or space in this character driven short film that stands outside of any genre. It verges on comedy with its cynical dark wit. It dabbles in horror with its exhumed graves, corpses and Lovecraftian monsters.
Linda B (jp) wrote: A powerful, well done film, bringing attention to the sex trade before it was what everyone was talking about. This movie helped start the conversation about this tragedy.
Umang V (de) wrote: A fascinating movie, got a good twist towards the end.
Frank S (nl) wrote: Starts off really well with a clever idea and nice cinematography. Things start to fall apart after the 30 or 40 minute mark or so. The movie just stops making sense and the nifty and even at times, scary slasher man/woman is not utilized to its full potential. The beginning promises something different and great, and sadly that promise isn't kept. Not terrible but not great.
Marty H (fr) wrote: if it's at all historically accurate, i'll watch it with my kid one day. why not.
Shawn S (ag) wrote: This film is not as clever as its predecessors but it's still very funny.
Jon W (ca) wrote: Who wouldn't want to see a movie called "Wizards of the Demon Sword"? I mean there's a pretty good chance that it is better than "Deathstalker III".****EDIT**** I actually watched it and can safely say that it is indeed better than "Deathstalker III". This movie sucks in a fun sort of way. It's retarded, but as I said earlier, It is called "Wizards of the Demon Sword" and that's gotta mean something. Though truth be told, there isn't actually a demon sword, it's more of a dagger.
Scott C (ca) wrote: This is one of those movies with great performances, but aside from that I found it too dry. It's relatively watchable though.
David M (es) wrote: Marlon Brando says this is his best work, and favorite film. I thought he was very good in it, but I felt the film was a train wreck in the editing department. I could nary follow the events or narrative of the film, it was clunky at best, and almost incoherent at worse. It basically amounts to a series of scenes that make some astute observations about colonialism, slavery, and revolutions. They are relevant, but dated, as they seem common sense now.Brando creates a distinct character, and he is Brando, so it is obviously going to be a superb depiction on his part, but the character is rarely given anything of real interest to do or say. HIs upper-class Englishmen is appropriately regal, and Brando brings his trademark effeminate touch to the character, and a good accent (in his mumbling way.) This was when he was being ostracized from Hollywood for his on set behavior, politics, and altogether attitude. An interesting failure.
Eric S (es) wrote: Absolutely hilarious!!!
aaron s (br) wrote: Really fun comic-book sci fi adaptation, good casting and performances and effects.
Eric P (ca) wrote: I know all these artsy types love this but without drugs I have no idea what is going on. all this work on animation so weirdo Charley Kaufman can tell a story only a crazy person likes.why are the females have a male voice. stupid,#