Apparently unseen since its initial theatrical sweep in the early 70s(presuming it actually received distribution at all), this long-forgotten little coprolite was excavated from some lost-film boneyard during the late 90s, and has since laid claim to its rightful spot on the roll-call of the weirdest movies ever made.
GODMONSTER weaves an ambling configuration concerning a sheep fetus being exposed to a strange chemical vapor. Taken to a lab by scientists, it matures into a bald-headed, lopsided hirsute beast with a parched lolling tongue and a gimp arm. Naturally, the upright-walking miscreation escapes and hobbles over the arid desert terrain, scaring a few kids and wreaking general minor havoc. This course of events gives rise to a climactic stage so heteroclite...SO IMPOSSIBLY RANDOM...that it literally defies description.
All the elemental constituents of this film are surprisingly solid, and performances from the key players are moreless on-the-beam. It even has sharply defined characters and a developed, articulate subplot touching on sensitive sociopolitical issues. In taking note of these niceties, the burning question arises...how in hell could the folks involved with GODMONSTER have justified applying their erudite capacities to such a fly-ball project? Could a concept as utterly 'non-compos-mentis' as this have possibly seemed like a felicitous undertaking at the drawing-board stage? The mind boggles.
We can't lose this film again, or future generations will dismiss the lore as either a collective hallucination or an elaborate hoax. 10/10? 1/10? ...how does one possibly rate something like this?
GODMONSTER weaves an ambling configuration concerning a sheep fetus being exposed to a strange chemical vapor. Taken to a lab by scientists, it matures into a bald-headed, lopsided hirsute beast with a parched lolling tongue and a gimp arm. Naturally, the upright-walking miscreation escapes and hobbles over the arid desert terrain, scaring a few kids and wreaking general minor havoc. This course of events gives rise to a climactic stage so heteroclite...SO IMPOSSIBLY RANDOM...that it literally defies description.
All the elemental constituents of this film are surprisingly solid, and performances from the key players are moreless on-the-beam. It even has sharply defined characters and a developed, articulate subplot touching on sensitive sociopolitical issues. In taking note of these niceties, the burning question arises...how in hell could the folks involved with GODMONSTER have justified applying their erudite capacities to such a fly-ball project? Could a concept as utterly 'non-compos-mentis' as this have possibly seemed like a felicitous undertaking at the drawing-board stage? The mind boggles.
We can't lose this film again, or future generations will dismiss the lore as either a collective hallucination or an elaborate hoax. 10/10? 1/10? ...how does one possibly rate something like this?