646f9e108c Hunger is a dark exploration into the breakdown of humanity. How far would you go to survive in the most extreme of circumstances? Five strangers awaken to find themselves trapped in an underground dungeon. They soon realize they are the subjects of one man's sadistic experiment to test the depths of a human being's will to survive. As the days go by with no means of escape, their hunger increases as their humanity fades away. Basically, there are two kinds of cannibals featured in hundreds of human-eating-themed movies during the past century. Best broken down into the categories of "cannibals by choice" and "cannibals by necessity," many top films fall into one of these categories (as well as even more really poor ones). Note that for purposes of this discussion, one must forget all about the thousands of zombie movies (since zombies are no more human than vampires, werewolves, ALIEN-type extraterrestrials, mega-sharks, or any of a hundred other threats to mankind that lack objective, scientific proof for their existence). SILENCE OF THE LAMBS and EATING RAOUL are a couple of my favorite examples of cannibal-by-choice movies. On the other side, FRIED GREEN TOMATOES and A BOY AND HIS DOG are two of my best-loved cannibal-by-necessity films. HUNGER falls into the class of cannibal-by-necessity flicks, though the characters put into a totally implausible circumstance disagree among themselves as to whether the necessity justifies cannibal-by-murder (since there's also the option of waiting until someone dies of "natural" if unusual causes BEFORE starting to eat them). Unfortunately, what could have been a riveting movie in the hands of the directors of the four films referred to above comes off more like something directed by Ulli Lommel or Uwe Boll under Steven Hentges' control. Especially off-putting are all of the scenes featuring the mis-named character ("The Scientist") who is responsible for the rest of the cast's SAW-like predicament. The repetitious shots of this creep at his control board bring to mind Lommel at his worse, while the flashbacks to the pre-teen "scientist" eating his dead mom after an isolated car crash smacks of Boll at his most tawdry depths of exploitation. "Hunger" has the big disadvantage of being called another "Saw" clone but it is a completely different movie. Sure, the story lets you believe that at first. Five strangers wake up in an isolated dungeon and are being monitored by the mysterious kidnapper. It screams "Cube" and "Saw" but this is not a standard torture slasher. <br/><br/>It is an insight study into man's dark passenger. What will we ultimately do to survive ? "Hunger" is surprisingly well made with great acting, an eerie, claustrophobic feeling and intense and gruesome moments. As a viewer, you're really into the story and you know that this will not end well and that blood will flow. "Hunger" is an entertaining movie which will certainly be appreciated by the genre fans. But it's not just for the horror freaks. <br/><br/>The motives for the kidnapper, who will kill to protect his project, are interesting and at the same time it's gruesome reality. The same goes for the choices the people have to make in order to survive. And it will raise the question: What will you do ??
Rabulcouve Admin replied
295 weeks ago