User Reviews

I work in a video store and this is by far the worst movie I have ever come across, and that is saying something! The horrible dialog wasn't helped by the acting, which was god awful, the story line was boring and seemed thrown together, the graphics were cheesy and the fight scenes MUST have been made up on the spot.

We follow the story of Frankie Falzone who, for some reason, is a lesbian. Its only brought up once and I think it was just an excuse to film in a strip club. She and her "gang" are on the run from a couple of the most inept U.S. Marshals in the history of the United States. Why you need five people to rob a liquor store I'll never know but...what ever. After hanging out in the woods for a while, and by woods I mean what looks like somebody's back yard, they carjack somebody and proceed with a home invasion, which they instantly screw up, never mind the fact that these people want to harvest their organs. After a stupid and gratuitous bath scene, everyone in the "gang" but Frankie is killed. Then there is some running down some paths in the woods. Then a lot of running down some paths in the woods. Frankie gets some of her things and tries to do some Rambo style traps which "of course" works. All of this leads up to a final horrible fight scene in which Frankie wins. She then hears some one crying and she finds a, as yet unseen, little girl who proceeds to stab her in the throat. The end.

I am willing to bet most of the equipment was borrowed for this film and the actors did it "for the experience". If I had to venture a guess I would say they had a budget of about $20 and spent it on beer.

Bottom line? See it if for no other reason than to say you saw the worst movie ever made.

Finally, a horror movie without "good guys" that are nearly superhuman. There are two marshals, but they are merely human. No spoilers, but this is really a very good movie considering their entire budget was probably $13.85. For that little money, the acting is really rather good. Certainly far better than the acting on most TV series shows. The main thing to watch for, though, is Jaime Kalman. She is a classic beauty in the old Hollywood sense, and also possesses by far the best figure in the movie. She is not a bad actress, either, and her cat fight with the biker chick is classic. The rest of the actors and actresses are at least competent. Again, I would much rather watch this than 90210 or Charmed. The writing is also at least competent. Again, though, if you are male (or a female lover of feminine beauty), you will be astonished by Jaime Kalman. Why is she not much much more well known?

(Spoilers) A criminal gang led by a tough Gulf War Vet lesbian (!) kidnaps a young woman hoping to use the home of her parents as a hideout not realizing that her family makes a living murdering people and harvesting their organs for transplants. The film was directed by Joe Ripple, but produced, written and photographed by cult film maker Don Dohler, the Ed Wood of Perry Hall, Maryland. (I don't necessarily mean that as an insult.) Dohler is most famous for 1977's "The Alien Factor," a film about a spaceship carrying an alien "zoo" which crashes on Earth. The film is bad alright, but it has a certain goofy charm as Dohler attempts to realize his expansive vision with the limited tools at hand.

"Harvesters" represents a comeback after sixteen years of cinematic inactivity. The premise is somewhat promising, but fails because it reaches only as high as the lowest common denominator. Although Dohler has learned much since 1977, the entire enterprise has dull, low- budget perfunctory feel to it. Everything is text, there is no subtext whatsoever. All of the dialogue exists only to forward the story, we are given nothing sly, witty or surprising. None of characters possess any inner light. This, sadly, is a wasted opportunity. Had the film makers told us the truth about the family prior to the arrival of the criminals, rather than just hinting at some vague something, we could have enjoyed the wait; anticipating the moment when the supposedly innocent middle class family would turn the tables on their captors. Imagine what Hitchcock could do with such a scenario. Dohler is no Hitchcock. Neither is Ripple.

On the plus side, the film, errr, video, does move along at a brisk pace. There is an occasional effective moment, like the totally gratuitous "bloodbath" scene, and the gruesome death of the U.S Marshal played by Joe Ripple. The script had problems, and some of the performances were substandard, but a little more care and professionalism in other areas might have compensated the weaknesses. (Think "Night of the Living Dead." That film suffered from some bad lines and a bad performance or two but it remains a true classic nonetheless.) The constant reliance on close-ups and mid-shots gives the cinematography a cramped, unappealing claustrophobic feel. The sets and clothing are also a problem. The house where the main action takes place is adequate, but it looks like the offices of the U.S. Marshals were filmed there too! Also, do U.S. Marshals go around on duty in jeans? Do they they split up when exploring a house which might contain criminals? I could go, but why bother.

Keep it up, Don. One of these days....