This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

It is a performances centric movie

The first must-see film of the year.

There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

SLASHER HOUSE is a micro budget British horror film with a surrealistic edge. It was made by MJ Dixon, a force to be reckoned with in regards to British independent horror cinema, and it stars the distinctive Eleanor James who wakes up naked in a prison house and soon discovers she's in the middle of a never-ending nightmare.You see, this building just so happens to be home to a number of serial killers, all of whom quickly set their sights on here. What plays out is regularly gruesome but altogether low budget, with a lack of realism in the action bits which hurts it quite a bit. A lot of pressure is heaped on to James' shoulders but she acquits herself well with her role here. It's a very arty film and the green look of the building makes it quite distinctive on a visual level, although it doesn't really add up to all that much.

A naked chick, Red (Eleanor James), wakes up in a locked cell with no recollection of how she got there or who she is. When her cell door is electronically unlocked, she finds post-it notes instructing her what to do. She is not at all perturbed by the fact that everything is green with just an occasional splash of red. She puts on a dress, finds a weapon inside a fridge, and wanders around a bit until she discovers someone else locked in a cell: a young man called Nathan (Adam Dillon). Everything is still green and red.While Red is trying to free Nathan, a homicidal clown called Cleaver (Andrew M. Greenwood) makes an appearance and the pair are forced to defend themselves. Cleaver is just the first of several psychos to be released over a period of time. Why are they there, who is controlling the 'game', and who will make it out alive? These questions and more will be answered by the end of the film, although why everything is green and red remains a mystery.With such a generic title, I wasn't expecting much from Slasher House other than a whole lot of gore; sadly, it didn't even deliver much of that. What we do get is a badly written, poorly acted mess that only displays a modicum of innovation in it's closing moments, when it builds a mythos around the central character that proves rather intriguing. The remainder of the film is dull and derivative, the film's opening being little bit Cube and a little bit Saw, but with none of either film's scares or tension, while the stark colour scheme is straight out of an Argento film, but rather than being used sparingly and with consideration, the effect is clumsily splashed over virtually every scene and soon becomes extremely irritating (while ruining what gore there is).And call me pedantic, but I also have a problem with the scene where one of the killers is pushed into an electric chair and fried with the throw of a switch: in a real electrocution, the whole chair isn't carrying the current—the process requires the application of moist electrodes to the head (via a metal skullcap) and the leg.

This is a pretty wild ride of a scare flick.For one thing,Why isn't Eleanor James in more or bigger flicks…Look up the titles : Backslasher,Bordello Death Tales,Was that her in CAM GIRL? ! Four serial killers and a babe: Well-We have CLEAVER the clown,CORBEN(Richard?),NATHAN(goblin) and THORN-The doom bringer ? CLEAVER,Like the others has a back story and it reeks in crimson and CORBEN reminds me of THE LACKEY,But bloodier and NATHAN has a GOBLIN/TROLL 2 alter ego that is amazing to watch take him over for the kills and THORN ….we found out is a franchise character who has a prequel in his future or something similar.The set is wonderful and obviously was Used at one time,make-up and effects RAWKED and the sound bothered me—Kept adjusting and then a kill will scare us and sound went down,Back and forth with the remote.

Where to begin? The film is called "Slasher House", which has to be the laziest, most uninspired film title I've ever come across. To add to that, the film isn't set in a house. That sounds facetious, but when the TITLE is both clunky and inaccurate, how good can the film actually be? As it is, the film, title included, is more or less what would happen if you had a five-year-old describe what he thinks horror films are like, wrote it down and shot that. The film is a dull, incoherent assemblage of lacklustre horror clichés, stilted dialogue, laughable acting, messy action and a painfully feeble plot, all cobbled together by a bunch of incompetents.Highlights include the character with a hat pulled over his eyes, who was obviously intended as a Hannibal Lecter type but instead comes across like Brian from Spaced. There's also the embarrassing killer clown (complete with an origins flashback that doesn't say anything about its origins), the extremely awkward kiss between the two leads who until that point have barely even looked at each other, the plastic budget fright mask which for no clear reason turns a snotty emo kid into a tubby metalhead with two big fake swords, and to round it all off a scene captioned "Russia" which immediately includes clear shots of roadsigns written in English.I won't even start to list the constant continuity problems, the patchy editing, the painful sound mix - it's enough to say that the film looks and sounds in the worst possible way like an amateur production. Obviously it's a film with a tiny budget, but the budget really isn't the problem here. The problem is that the people who made the film set themselves seriously unambitious goals and were then too lazy to make sure they achieved them. The script is obviously a first draft - Hell, the story seems like it hadn't been revised since it was first scribbled on the back of a fag packet by Uwe Boll's less talented brother. The majority of the cuts are first take, technical errors and all. I'm not sure if the garish green tint they've slapped all over everything is just a misguided attempt to be arty or a last-ditch effort to give the film a coherent look, but either way it's your first clue that the director isn't on speaking terms with subtlety, taste or style. Things he's also unfamiliar with include subtext, themes, tone, pacing, composition and lighting. Which, I'm sure you'll agree, is a lot for someone to not have learned and still decide they should make films.Anyway, you get the idea. Make a pile of the worst, most badly-made horror films you can think of and every last one of them will still on most levels be far better than this. So watch one of them instead. You're welcome.P.S. I have just remembered that the production company's logo is a Jeson-style hockey mask. I challenge you to think of a clearer way of telling the world that you have no ideas of your own than branding your own product with someone else's concept.