XX

2017

Horror

36
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 72%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled 20%
IMDb Rating 4.6 10 6316

Synopsis


Uploaded By: FREEMAN
Downloaded 116,352 times
May 07, 2017 at 03:29 AM

Director

Cast

Natalie Brown as Susan Jacobs
Sheila Vand as Carla
720p 1080p
599.01 MB
1280*720
English
R
23.976 fps
1hr 20 min
P/S 12 / 72
1.23 GB
1920*1080
English
R
23.976 fps
1hr 20 min
P/S 10 / 109

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Jacob Feirclough 3 / 10

Female directors fail at making female characters interesting

When the very poster draws heavy focus to the fact that the shorts are directed by women, one assumes that you will finally be able to see film through a female lens. Those in the film industry are frequently excited by the prospect of having the stories and viewpoints of women shown as it opens up stories that previously have been masked. Female characters frequently are left underdeveloped and masked in the backgrounds of features. You can imagine my disappointment to read that tag line on the poster, just to find that 3 of the 4 shorts are as generic and soulless as the dregs of the horror industry.

The first 3 shorts are as uninspired, uninteresting and cliché as imaginable. 3 of the 4 stories feature white, middle-aged stay-at-home mothers, of which are the manifestation of what most people complain about when a female character is given minimal attention and effort from a male director.

The 1st and 3rd short offer absolutely nothing we haven't seen before, and the 2nd short isn't even remotely within the horror genre. The director of the 2nd short has somehow managed to convince herself that adding loud, eerie music to a regular scene creates a horror short.

The 2nd of the 4 shorts is vastly the worst, followed by the 3rd and then the 1st. The 4th short however is an interesting, if not still un-creative piece of horror. Whilst the 4th short feels reminiscent of films like The Babadook, it still manages to differentiate itself enough to warrant at least a 7/10.

Ultimately generic, uninspired and frustrating. The intermission, stop motion segments are the pinnacle of this feature. 3/10

Reviewed by EscapeFromtheVille 1 / 10

The Worst "Movie" I've Seen in Years

Is this some sort of community college art project? The last two stories could have been absolute masterpieces but I'll never know. The Box and the Birthday Party were such horrible pieces of trash that I stopped watching to come do this review. The idea that it matters what gender the creator is is insulting and horribly sexist. This must be a joke.

Reviewed by vasiln 4 / 10

Not quite good enough

Four short horror films, no linking narrative, although there is some decent Svankmajeresque stop-motion animation serving as transition:

A boy loses his appetite after getting a glimpse of something mysterious; a woman discovers her husband's corpse on the day of her daughter's birthday; four attractive young people discover an Ancient Evil (TM) in the wilderness; and a mother deals with the discovery that her nearly adult son is disturbingly violent and yet everybody worships the ground he walks on.

Production values tend to adequate-high, and effects are acceptable, but there are small issues with each section that leave the overall film feeling amateurish. They're generally small issues, and I expect the filmmakers to work them out for their next projects.

Narratives are disappointing, generally from the lack of resolution-- although inconsistent characterization and unimaginable motives plague the second, making it the weakest. I can enjoy unresolved horror shorts in general, but it doesn't work here, not with the way these films are implemented; there's too much dragging along at each end, suggesting a reveal that never materializes.

The first was my favorite, and I found it generally creepy, although, again, the resolution was handled poorly; there were also some instances of poor acting, and too much voice-over exposition.

The "theme" of XX is apparently that all four films were directed by women, but there's not really any significance to that. If the title wasn't so eager to let me know, I wouldn't have realized it, and it kind of feels like painting a handgun pink for marketing purposes, a little dubious. Still, it's not a big deal to me, just a title. But after knowing, a few things stand out: the inversion of stereotypes for the parents in the first film; the unwillingness to commit to any crazy-lady characterization in the second, even though that's the only thing that would give the story even a lick of sense; the self-important and overly long soliloquy in the final film. (The only thing that maybe stands out in the third is that none of the attractive young people decide to disrobe, as they do so often in similar films.)

I'd say that the first film is probably worth watching, but I wouldn't bother watching past that. Not worth paying money for. Still, there's no reason not to expect good things from the filmmakers in the future, as they find some better scripts and improve their techniques.

Read more IMDb reviews

14 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment