grrg63 I watched this old flick because Katrina Law (Spartacus, Arrow) was in it. It is the worst lit movie I have ever (sort of) seen. It is DARK. I don't mean psychologically, I mean they were too cheap, or too broke, to adequately light the scenes of the film. Or maybe they just didn't know what the hell they were doing. You can barely see what the hell is going on in the damn thing. The plot is convoluted to the point of senselessness and the dialog and actions of the characters are often crotch-grabbingly ridiculous. One egregious example is how Katrina, playing a beautiful young medical examiner, while performing autopsies on corpses displaying disturbing symptoms of weird, unknown, possibly communicable disease, doesn't bother to wear a surgical mask.I've watched a lot of bad movies/TV shows because they had good looking chicks in them and this does have that. Too bad its not better lit so you can see them more clearly.

tmbrunerj1 Choker, apparently renamed as Disturbance at some point for reasons undisclosed, found its way to my collection as a result of the untimely closure of a video store. It sat in my collection, unwatched, for several years.In a word, it is delightfully awful. The 8 rating is because we enjoy horrible movies and were devastated when MST 3000 ended its run. Choker/Disturbance would have been a classic MST3K excursion. Alas, it fell to my friend and me to play the part of Crow and Tom Servo asking all of the smart-ass questions and maintaining an inane running commentary ourselves. Though amateurs, it was extremely entertaining.From the monochrome film noir scenes,replete with Hitchcock-esque silhouettes, the cop with a fedora ripped out of 1947, to the hookers without meth mouth, it was a stirring jaunt through the land of cinematic art gone terribly wrong. Unfortunately, the story was fairly coherent and there were no major continuity errors.So if you too mourn the loss of MST3K, go ahead and get a copy or put it in your queue. Gather 'round the flat screen and have some fun with it just like in the old days.

Rich Wright You see the box. You check out the actors in it. You sniff the disc. You KNOW it's going to be sh*t, but you can't help yourself... You have to give it a taste...It's just as bad as you feared. You watch the fight sequences, that are beyond parody. You try to follow the story, but fail as you're not high on Class A drugs. The acting... What acting? As for the 'special' effects... They must have been done by 'special' needs people on a ZX Spectrum. No, too advanced. A pocket calculator perhaps? Who on Earth paid for this @:><{?!...Then it hits you. We NEED films like this to put into perspective how hard it is to make a good movie. It makes you cherish even the mediocre flicks, when you stack movies like this up next to it. So rather than feel I've wasted my time on this crap, next time I sit through an underwhelming 90 minute production I can say: It wasn't great but... At least it wasn't B.E.I.N.G. Or Choker. Or Disturbance. Or whatever the heck they're calling it these days.Cosmic logic at its finest.

slomocherry Choker is an interesting creature, much like the surprisingly sympathetic characters that are presented to us in the film itself.Seeing the film projected in vivid HD on a big screen probably helped the illusion of being dunked into this "sci-fi/noir" world and being told that the film was conceived and developed over a six week period prior to a twelve day shoot definitely got a raised eyebrow from me.The cast elevated this thing immensely. Even the director, who was at this screening, said that without his cast, the material could easily have been reduced to the mediocre. I must remark on this. Based on what I saw and knew of the film, I would have scored this film smack in the middle of a 1-10 scale. Having said that, and given the singular performance of actress Hayley DuMond (playing the lead villain), I must score this film at least one or two points higher - her performance does not deserve to be in a film ranked as a "5" and it elevates the film without question.Solid performances from all, including leads Paul Sloan and Colleen Porch aside, I felt quite disappointed, not because I wasn't engaged...the story demands you keep paying attention - but because with minuscule budgets and no time, a project's true potential can be undermined. Some sequences were gorgeous, well acted and moving - others were muddy and looked rushed or dragged out. To be expected yes, but still a mark against.I expected more horror, but got more of a thriller. Expected more gore; got more creepiness and social commentary. Kind of a cool surprise - I left with the feeling that I had still gotten a little bit of entertainment from a film that seemed to have been made on sheer determination on the part of a gung-ho cast and crew.The film itself is not what I would technically ever call a great film, but the energy behind it seemed to want so badly to contradict that.