Watch it at Amazon
31 out of 52 people found the following review useful: It's Alive!! It's Alive!!! ... x50!, 14 March 2006 Author: Coventry from the Draconian Swamp of Unholy Souls
Two young men, isolated up in the mountains, performing bizarre and questionable experiments on each other… No, it isn't an early sequel to "Brokeback Mountain" but a new & clever independent horror film that I hope will be regarded as a minor cult gem within a couple of years! The screenplay of "Subject Two" is based on Mary Shelley's almighty "Frankenstein"-tale in which an intelligent but overly obsessed scientist brings back an unwilling victim from the dead. Only, times have severely changed by now and, instead of lightening storms or voodoo rituals, science now uses Nano-technologies, cloning techniques and loads of other hi-tech stuff I totally didn't understand! Dr. Franklin Vick (got it? Victor Frankenstein? Yeah OK, you get it…) lures the anti-social medical student Adam to his remote mountain cabin where he kills him repeatedly…but successfully brings him back to life every single time. These intense experiments have a severe impact on Adam, of course, and pretty soon he turns into an emotional and physical wreck. This film contains multiple praiseworthy elements that I haven't spotted in other, high-budgeted horror productions in a very long time already. First and foremost, there's the hugely original Aspen, Colorado filming location! The total lack of civilization and the false hope for rescue is perfectly illustrated by the snowy mountains and unbearably cold winds. The limited number of cast members contributes a lot to the power of "Subject Two" as well, also because the male leads give away great performances. Dean Stapleton (who tremendously resemblances Jack Nicholson when he was younger) is genuinely sinister as the doc and Christian Oliver is very convincing as the mentally unstable guinea pig. This isn't exactly a full-blooded horror film, but there's quite a bit of gore and raw violence on display. The dialogs are witty and – entirely unexpected – the plot takes an ingenious turn near the end! Just for that, "Subject Two" receives one well-deserved extra point. If you have the opportunity to see this smart film by Philip Chidel, don't hesitate!
24 out of 41 people found the following review useful: Worth seeing, 12 February 2006 Author: jonathan-446 from United States
I saw a screening of this indie film at the San Francisco Independent Film Festival and enjoyed it a great deal. Nicely done, especially on the low budget they had for this. I'm not generally a fan of "horror" (although this may be more suspense/thriller than horror), but found this film keeping me interested with both the plot and the editing that kept things moving. I hope "Subject Two" can find distribution so this filmmaker can bring us more. The choice of Aspen is beautiful to look at and well captured. The isolation the winter scenes promoted helped keep the story taught, and the visuals lovely. The acting is natural and well captured, and even the director has a fascinating part in this film.
23 out of 41 people found the following review useful: Modern "Frankenstein" story in an isolated cabin in the mountains., 19 February 2006 Author: me_methos from United States
This was a great movie. Modern Frankenstein story with a twist. The story centers around Dr. Vic and his new assistant (an unhappy medical student named Adam). Separated from the world, hours from any town, Dr. Vic's experiments take a twisted turn. It was filmed entirely around Aspen, CO. The actors literally had to snowmobile hours on end to get to the film site. I really loved this movie. The horror aspect was less apparent, but I didn't mind at all. It speaks a great deal towards the nature of man, and towards our arrogance. The story was great and the acting was awesome!! The special effects were believable and not at all cheesy. Dean Stapleton is incredible. I am curious as to why he has not had other roles. Christian Oliver plays an amazing Adam. The emotion he brings to the part makes the movie. I recommend this to everyone!!!!!
7 out of 11 people found the following review useful: Playing God, 7 September 2008 Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
When the antisocial and lonely medical student Adam Schmidt (Christian Oliver) receives a mysterious e-mail inviting him to participate of a unique medical research, he accepts the job opportunity and travels to an isolated snowing area to a cabin in the middle of nowhere. He meets Dr. Franklin Vick (Dean Stapleton) that kills him cutting his throat with a hunting knife. When Adam resurrects, Franklin calls him Subject Two and explains that he is engaged in an unethical medical research, bringing dead to life. Along the days, Adam is killed and resurrected over and over again, with Franklin improving his research, until the day Adam decides to leave the isolated spot.The weird "Subject Two" has a promising and intriguing beginning, with a youngster being killed and resurrected as part of an experiment. However, the pointless story becomes repetitive and boring, with the repetition of the same situation (Adam killed and brought back to life by a guy playing God), having a terrible ending. The best this movie can offer is the wonderful landscapes in Aspen and the blue eyes of Courtney Mace. My vote is four.Title (Brazil): "Cobaia" ("Subject")
11 out of 19 people found the following review useful: I don't understand the positive commentary...you guys were paid, right?, 7 September 2006 Author: Gorgon Zola from Belgium
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The reason I went ahead to see this flick was because of the near 6 vote it had and much of the commentary which was rather positive. It is usually a good way of checking out a movie beforehand but in this case I felt cheated.Because even with the best intentions, its impossible to find this movie anything other than it being a complete disaster in every aspect.Story: The story is no more, no less just as the tagline on the cover. Nothing else happens but a guy being killed, brought back to life, killed, brought back to life etc. There is no sub direction, no subplot or any other elaborate magnification on the whys or the hows. Some have tried in their comments to led u to believe that it has, but there are none. The conversations go like this:Guy1: "How about that weather ey?" Guy2: "What about it?" Guy1: "Bit moist don't u think?" Guy2: "now that u mention it.." Guy1: "I hate walking in the rain, don't u?" Guy2: "yeah I did that once, I got all wet!" Etc.Plot: There is no plot, the stuff is just happening without any redeeming explanation as to why or what. They just mention some words as Nanotechnology (which isn't used) and cryogenics (not used either) and this is supposed to interest the viewer to go ahead and see it through. They could just as well have mentioned Kamasutra techniques which would have had no baring on the plot either.<---here is that spoiler but since u should really skip this film u might as well just read it--->Plot twist/ending: They tried to have one, but hopelessly failed and again I can not believe someone actually wrote that it had an unexpected twist at the end. Anyone who has ever seen a horror flick before in his life must have secretly been praying at the beginning of the movie that the corpse in the snow was not going to be alive again at the end. But OMG!!! that's exactly what happens. My wife and I couldn't stop laughing when it did. And the living corpse turned out to be the real doctor. "So what?" I ask u. It's not like the real doctor would have done anything different opposed to the guy impersonating him (the assistant, subject nr. 1). that's not a twist, it's lamer than lame and just about the worst thing they could have come up with.Performance: The performance of the actors was overall good. Some did claim that dr. Vic bore a too striking resemblance to Jack Nicholson, to me a young Michael Ironside came to mind.Special effects: Someone wrote about special effects, like if they were even in this movie. Or maybe this person was talking about those pathetic looking contact lenses the main character had on his eyes which made it hard to keep a straight face watching the guy from that point on.Location: The location of the set is praised by many in the comments, but lets be honest people; a horror/thriller set in an overly sunny and bright snowy environment could not ever work. It made it look like a holiday brochure for crying out loud. Overall only the acting could have been a lot worse but please, regarding the rest, who in their right minds would seriously find this an enjoyable pastime?I rate this stinker 2/10. The extra point given for those beautiful blue eyes of Kate (Courtney Mace).
20 out of 37 people found the following review useful: Well-worth seeing, 24 July 2006 Author: davitalvitch from United States
What a surprise this film is! It's a quiet, get-absorbed-in-it sort of horror film, and properly light on gore. The story is similar to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, whereas life is created from death in the name of science. The acting is solid and moving; there is no mugging, no sly popular culture wink-winks. The focus is on the story, not special effects, not body count, and there's a steady sense of sadness and madness that made me not want to watch the bonus features afterward; I got so drawn into the characters that I did not want their effect on me altered by watching the actors goof around or discuss the film.The actor who played Adam, the loner medical student, was wonderful -- and very handsome, to boot. He conveyed very well the pain and isolation that Adam felt, and it made sense why Adam would take part in Dr. Vick's experiment for, in part, he'd finally have a connection with another person, regardless of any personal consequences.Any faults I found with the film were too minor for me to give them much consideration. It's too nice to finally see a low-budget film that obviously was a work of love and is dedicated to its story, not to getting its talent noticed by making yet another indistinguishable gorefest that is a checklist of a dozen other horror films.And not once does a screeching cat leap out from a closed cupboard door. Mad props for that, guys.
4 out of 6 people found the following review useful: Death Becomes Him, 18 October 2008 Author: wesconnorsehny from Earth
Unsuccessful student Christian Oliver (as Adam Schmidt) is smart enough; but, he is failing to make the medical school grade. Possibly, this is due to his frequent headaches, and an anti-social disposition. Mr. Oliver explains, "I think I'm allergic to people." After receiving a "F" on his ethics essay, Oliver decides to "drop out"; and, quickly, he responds to an invitation from mysterious doctor Dean Stapleton (as Ethan, aka "Dr. Vick"). So, Oliver goes to live with Mr. Stapleton, in an isolated, snowbound cabin. You should know Stapleton has gruesome plans for Oliver. Stapleton wants to murder his house-guest, and bring him back to life."Subject Two" is quite an intriguing take on the old life-creating "Frankenstein" plot. The film is very bright, and well-photographed. The lonely cabin, set in the vast and sparsely populated mountains, is a worthy setting. Rich Confalone's photography is beautiful. Writer/director Philip Chidel, who also appears as "Subject One", and the two lead actors are also excellent. The story could have been a little clearer. For example… well, you'll see… Still, it's an interesting slice of intellectual gore, and a definite career peak for those involved.Its very weirdness is most welcome.******* Subject Two (2006) Philip Chidel ~ Christian Oliver, Dean Stapleton, Philip Chidel, Courtney Mace
11 out of 21 people found the following review useful: Worth a watch? oh pls!, 6 September 2006 Author: CineCritic2517 from Netherlands
No kind words come to mind looking back on whatever it was I just fast-forwarded. And I just can't believe anyone would write kindly about it which was the reason I gave this flick a shot. Silly me ey?And just to counter the obvious statements in the "worth a watch" section; it being low budget doesn't give it merit by default. Sewage is sewage and a 100$ turd reeks just as much as one in the lower pricerange.But...something that is worth a watch is also worth a telling, right? so allow me to just sum up this movie for u then: (spoiler, but please be spoiled)-Guy goes to a mountain shed in the snow to undergo an experiment with a doctor, guy gets killed, guy gets revived but now his eyes look exactly like those of master Poo in Kung Fu, guy gets killed another 9 times, gets revived 9 more times and then he walks back down the mountain. Oh..and the dead guy in the snow turned out to be the real doctor.-Honestly folks:..thazzall...Now if this brilliance of a story would have had some cunning dialog or sublime wit in it, it might have been passable. But to top the cake; it had none of it. U will find the dialog between two amoeba more entertaining.Anyone rating this more than a 3 or even having the nerve to find this worth watching, has either been paid to say so or has been paid to say so.This's not even a stinker! 0/10
13 out of 25 people found the following review useful: Just A Bad Twilight Zone Episode, 18 September 2006 Author: youfunnytoo from United States
Anybody who hasn't guessed the surprise ending of this one by five minutes in deserves what he gets.Which is not much.Some goofy and abortive mooning over the meaning of life, a couple of boring chases on a snowmobile, some special effects that woudn't cut it on Halloween.And Vick's repetitive killing of Adam actually gets funny after a while. Like a Roadrunner cartoon without the Acme products.And can anybody explain why almost the only time Vick wears a hat is when he's indoors?
6 out of 12 people found the following review useful: Interesting Take, Boring Execution, 23 August 2006 Author: KillerCadugen from Waterbury, Connecticut
I have to admit I was intrigued by this new look at the Frankenstein ideal, but despite the number of times Adam (Christian Oliver) died and was resurrected and Vick (Dean Stapleton) battled with the complexities of his formula and its side effects, the story never seemed to go anywhere. How about a insight into death and what may lie on the other side? How about some moral or ethical message? I will say this, the acting was quite good and I liked all the performances even though Stapleton bore an uncanny resemblance to Jack Nicholson (probably intended) but this was one of those movies I was waiting to end so I could put something else in.
Add another review
