It isn't scary, but...it's sick. Like, I'm not normally the squeamish type, but there are scenes that I just had the urge to close my eyes for because they're so sick.

Maybe I just have a weak stomach now.

***

It was awesome, as I kind of expected given the hype Was anyone else reminded of Cabin Fever at times even though the movie is much better acted and directed than that was?

Grade: A-

Also:

Zing, we need a crowd report on The Ruins. Interested in how crowded it was.

I'm planning on seeing it Sunday. Can't wait. I hope I'm not disappointed.

Ruins

I found the movie to be decent, bordering on good but just missing it . I actually enjoyed the film overall and thought it had some pretty good moments in the film that were squeamish worthy. I thought the actors did a decent job and the dialogue was sufficient. J. Tucker is a very fit individual and J. Malone was alright. She was a little over the top at times. Somewhat. I don't think it's a horror picture but more of a thriller psychological type film. It was less about gore and more about thoughtful action and reaction. I don't regret viewing the film but probably wouldn't watch it again for another 12-24 months.

Grade - B

Crowd size was 75-80% full I'd say in a 175 seat theatre during a 1920 showtime.

This movie is a billion times more watchable than Cabin Fever imo.

Oklahoma has finally hit the 21st century as we now have a theatre that shows all their movies in digital format.

Well, it ain't no Simple Plan...

My hopes had been raised by the screenplay by Scott Smith, and the egging on of Lectro el Doctoré, but they were unfortunately not met.

That being said, it was certainly well above the average horror flick that I end up seeing. I place this amongst the "it could happen to you" genre that includes such recent classics as Open Water and Hostel - - movies that even though far-fetched in their premise, are stories that one can imagine happening to them in TRW. Unfortunately, unlike A Simple Plan where a viewer can well imagine the baser choices of the characters - - here we are left with guessing at what them damn vines are thinking...

The cast of "unknowns" certainly helped the believability (though I sincerely doubt that Jena Malone can remain unknown for much longer - - she's going far!), by the end, I'd had it.

3 out of 5.

After seeing that this recieved an R rating and not watered down to get the oh-so coveted PG-13 I was expecting somewhat good things from this film. Instead I found the film to be utterly pointless. The whole film felt like it had been cribbed together from lesser horror films with nary an idea of what it wanted to be or were it wanted to go. I felt it had no suspense or any shock value what-so-ever and the gore factor was probably a 2 on a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the highest. The acting wasn't bad but it wasn't anything to write home about either.

Grade F

Is there any movie you do like?? It seems to me that what few reviews I've seen from you, that you just don't like anything..

So my head stays where it is?

quite mediocre for a horror flick. everyone on here seemed so excited about it, yet it wasn't any better than a so-so horror film. some of the scenes were really sick, but they were the result of these people making the most retarded decisions ever, so it was hard to take it seriously.

C-

A fantastic horror film! I could have done with a bit more development when it came to certain aspects of the plot, but for the most part this was incredibly chilling, scary and intense. Not to mention that this is certainly not a film for the squeamish - it's incredibly graphic and sometimes hard to watch. I think the reason it worked so well was because I felt for all of the characters. All of them were flawed, but interesting and compelling to watch. I hated Amy and Jeff at first but both of them eventually grew on me. But the best character by far was Stacy, who should have been the lead in this film. She's one of the best characters in any horror film in recent memory, IMO. Her final few scenes were equally devastating and horrifying. Laura Ramsey's performance is excellent and the standout from the rest of the cast. Jena Malone also does a good job, successfully showing her character's transition throughout the film. Jonathan Tucker and Shawn Ashmore turn in respectable performances as well. I didn't like Joe Anderson or his character though. The direction in this film was great, and it was visually stunning throughout. Anyways, I definitely want to see this one again - and I highly recommend it.

There's been more than a few movies released this year that I've enjoyed.

For example this year I've enjoyed :
The Bands Visit
In Bruges
The Bank Job
4 months, 3 weeks, 2 Days
Redbelt
There Will Be Blood
Diving Bell and the Butterfly
Persepolis
Under the Same Moon
Run, Fatboy, Run
Funny Games
Definitely Maybe
Charlie Bartlett
The Savages
Doomsday
Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day

I can't help the fact that Hollywood continues to release mostly below average films each week. I have but one critieria for judging films and that is does it entertain me. If a film fails to do its job and entertain me then I take the gloves off.

THE RUINS - 8/10 (A-)

Loved it! The best horror movie to come out in quite some time. It's better than The Descent, Turistas, and especially Cabin Fever. The characters are flawed and yet I still cared about them. I loved the location.

It's such a shame that this disappoints at the Box Office and crap horror movies are all successful.

I was most surprised by Laura Ramsey's performance. She was pretty good when nothing I've seen of her in past films hinted at any real talent. Then again, films like The Covenant aren't exactly projects in which acting talent shines through, heh.

Yeah, she was good. I really liked her in it.

i would've liked her and her friends more if they didn't make the most idiotic decisions in a movie this year.

yes, Cloverfield came out this year (but it managed to be extremely good despite the characters' decision-making).

The only time I was annoyed by a character's actions was when Amy was snapping the pictures of the Mayans. Otherwise I found the decisions realistic. I can't think of any overly idiotic decisions. And I was so thankful the movie wasn't filled with obnoxious characters like in Hostel who just go around being pigs and saying "fag" and calling everything gay all of the time (How that movie, and even Cabin Fever, got good reviews and this didn't is beyond me). Them I wanted dead, but I disagree with a lot of reviews saying you just wish the characters in this one would die already because they're so annoying. I myself really liked them.

And I'm sick of people saying that the gore is just there for shock value. I really had no problem with it and while certainly gory enough I was kind of expecting worse from what some said. I briefly turned during the amputation scene but for the most part I didn't get squeamish at all. I found the gore that was there to be necessary.

This movie is already underrated. For the most part, if you don't like it, then you most likely just don't like horror movies, IMO.

The camera turned as well - - that scene took place out of camera range. Beyond some of the plant extraction incisions, very little was actually shown.

The best American horror film since, what... Scream? I'm having a hard time recalling one...

Carter Smith elevates the slasher aesthetic to nightmarish, beautiful heights. He frames the young and sexy actors in natural lighting with a mostly hand held camera - very fashion photographer-esque, which makes sense given Smith's experience as just that. People will scoff at the nudity in the opening minutes, but I felt relieved and intrigued. Relieved that we were in the hands of someone who can appreciate the aesthetic quality of a nude body (and later the quality of it being destroyed), and intrigued by the fact that this showcase was very naturalistic (opposed to the theatrical, often over-the-top nudity found in some horror movies).

It's simultaneously revolting and exciting to see these exquisite bodies destroyed in varying, always graphics ways, and Smith seems to understand this. It's the key to the art of a horror film, and Smith revels in it and doesn't shy away from the inherent allure of it all. The editing is subdued and controlled, and his camera is precise, sometimes floating around the carnage and sometimes centering it in frame. Smith always seems to know exactly how much to subject us to. It's always refreshing to see a filmmaker who truly gets this type of film at work inside the genre. The imagery is alternatingly (and often times concurrently) gorgeous and disgusting, case in point the perfectly composed shot of Stacy carving herself up to reach the vines' living in her muscles. The foreground is a geometrically centered, blood-soaked and organ exposed beautiful girl, and the background is a glorious blue sky dotted by the South American skyline.

This movie isn't stupid enough to be another Ugly Americans Go Home parable, and instead reaches for more heady, metaphorical themes that it may not always hit but always prove interesting and dynamic. Mother Earth's revenge on the flesh is eerily similar to the havoc wreaked on her - prolonged, invasive, and destructive.

The only issue I had with the movie was its overly abrupt finish, but I appreciated the fact that no explanation was offered up, and no real satisfactory conclusion is reached on Amy. She is obviously infected with whatever it is that has decimated her friends (the red blemishes that develop on her skin throughout the movie a tell-tale sign), but will she make it far enough to contaminate a large swath of society?

The Ruins is a chilling, sickening experience that feels wholly different. And thank God for that given the current state of the American horror film.

I'm really disappointed by the number of folks here that saw this movie. Talk about an overlooked gem!

I think you shoulkd definitely read the novel, makeshift. I read the the book and then the entire plot of the adaptation and I've gotta say that as good as the film sounds, the book is even more sickening, depressing and dark.

Yeah, I'm curious to know what you think about the movie Lec since you're such a big fan of the book. When are you going to be able to see it? I really feel like it's a bit of a triumph. It's fully realized and perfectly crafted.

It won't be out here till June 12th :-/

See, I didn't think she was infected like them. To me it didn't seem like you were until you got a wound that they could get into and not that just because you touched them you were infected. Maybe I'm wrong and it just took longer if you didn't have a wound.