twolanebl The Scarlet Worm: Finally! Wild Dogs in mass-release! Longtime fans had a lot to get salivating over: Fredianelli free from starring and cinematography and able to focus on directing, Lambert writing (after his wildly successful two previous outings with Fredianelli), Stielstra starring, special guest stars, and a solid, sordid grindhouse set-up. Everything was in the right place, but with all of these elements, the final product ends up feeling a bit too restrained, a bit too tame to live up to its premise and the promise of all involved. If the earlier Fredianelli efforts sometimes felt a bit slapped-together or a bit rough around the edges, this effort feels a bit too pretty and concerned with professionalism (a gambit that seems to have paid off in some ways). A perfect point of comparison is A Habitation of Devils, Lambert's previous collaboration with Fredianelli. That movie is super rough around the edges, with a script that barely manages to bounce between generic stereotypes and digital video cinematography sometimes so underlit to the point of indiscernibility. However, it manages these hiccups due to a sense of what, for lack of better terms, I'll call "going for it." This same "going for it" mentality is all over other WD pics like The Minstrel Killer and even the recent Apocrypha. Why then does even Stielstra, normally a maniac when facing the camera, play it so cool? Why can't the genre kings (Fredianelli and Lambert) deliver on some of their promises? Why does Print have a reputation for being such a dirty bastard and such a merciless killer but never show us why? Why can't we see what makes his work such poetry to him (as he says over and over and over again)? Even the flick's abortion subtext feels pretty inoffensive and tame (unexpected, consider the distributor Unearthed Films, generally known for stuff like the Guinea Pig and Slaughtered Vomit Dolls). Money was well-placed to grab Dan van Husen, who provides most of the flick's best scenes, but even his work and the (as- expected) excellent shoot-outs feel bogged down by a laborious execution of the basic genre steps. There is a nice father-son dynamic between van Husen and Stielstra, but even that seems to too frequently be displaced in favor of other beats and concerns. I wanted to love this one so much, but in the end, I just can't find as much to love about it as in the cast and crew's other various projects.

HughBennie-777 Director Michael Fredianelli's western shows a lot of guts to present characters this unlikable, yet still insists you empathize with their ickiness. Of course, none of this would be achieved with B-movie actors, and, luckily, the principle cast here is exceptional. One look at the plot, involving an unstable gunfighter who trains a young killer to rid a town of its delusional brothel-owner, dismisses any idea that the subject matter is going to be modest, and the actors evoke the kind of natural weariness and cold-blooded fury often "corrected" in more conventionally moral westerns. Most of the graphic, stylized content here comes in the form of gargantuan, spurting gunshot wounds and a lot of buck-naked prostitutes. Screenwriter David Lambert allows his often sociopathic characters to speak in dialogue both realistic and humorous, and with leads like Aaron Stielstra (as the shootist Print) spaghetti western veteran Dan van Husen, and the commanding presence of Montgomery Ford on screen, there's more than enough brooding on screen to sustain both sarcasm and menace for the film's 90 minutes. The vivid cinematography gives a blighted look to the many seedy locales, this despite a low budget. $25,000? A western made for that today in Hollywood could barely improve on an interiors-only moral fable like Randall Heller's "Tolerance". Again, the film-makers overcome most production obstacles, though in a few places the pacing is draggy. But considering the plot deals with a talkative villain (van Husen) who co-stars alongside so many other talkative villains (Print even has his own deranged voice-over), the action-packed gunfights and ass-kickings make up for it. Solid soundtrack by Stielstra features traditional folk music as well as demented instrumentation, both creating the proper ambiguity and dread which support the movie's ending. Film also features great cameos by a jellyfish and a giant sow.

jkelp90 A low film budget, especially one attached to a period film as demanding as a western, doesn't have to reflect what can be brought to a movie when gritty acting and a hard-nosed storyline are both unafraid of controversy, or breaking archetypes.Here, the film-makers make that their saving grace. WORM may lack sweep and grandeur, but it compensates for its meager funding by creating a world of believable, albeit strange, characters, who are caught in writer David Lambert's bleak narrative and poetic dialogue. Both make their mark in a tale of a cynical killer hired by a cattle-baron to sterilize a town of its brothel owner. The killer Print (played excellently here by Aaron Stielstra) can see the brothel-owner (a chilling Dan van Husen) carries an unhealthy amount of Biblical fury about sin, but Print comes to learn the man is far more dangerous for his own philosophies and this soon leads to Print encountering (and unleashing) an enormous bloodbath.All divided into cinematic chapters and told in a bold and muscular style by director Michael Fredianelli, cinematographer Michael Martinez also create a claustrophobic wilderness out of the luckless town and its inhabitants. Complementing this is the cast, which one doesn't see in a big budget western. More reflective of 60s and 70s westerns, the characters show damage and hard-lifestyle, this further reinforced by the shocking circumstances and violence that erupt in a moments's notice to often punish the innocent. The movie additionally benefits from Aaron Stielstra's somber score, complete with strangled electric guitars, ominous Morricone outbursts of noise, and a memorable finale.Though thought-provoking, WORM is troubling movie and one without pandering resolutions to its good guy/bad guy scenario. Like equally morally conflicted westerns like Peckinpah's "PAT GARRETT AND BILLY THE KID", "RIDE IN THE WHIRLWIND" or the savage "THE HUNTING PARTY", here men are compromised throughout by their own codes of conduct and the brutal instinct to survive. Without the film's superb acting and direction, here both strong enough to make one forget the large scale adventuring to appear in something as banal as "COWBOYS AND ALIENS", the movie might have never surpassed its economic limitations and played out like an exploitation flick. Instead, WORM is a harrowing and unforgettable alternative to shoot-'em-ups or the kind of popular western entertainment that asks no questions of its audience. Prepare to be be impressed.•

Pycal Kind of surprised this film (despite being well regarded by critics) holds only a 4.1 rating on this site (as of today). Even though it is so far the only film of Michael Fredianelli's to receive a really wide DVD and Blu-ray release, such is a bit odd given this film is easily Fredianelli's most accomplished and (all around) best film to date. This is a movie that despite being made on a meager budget stands as perhaps one of the best Westerns of the last 12 years or so. It is gritty, violent, and hearkens back to (and was clearly influenced by) some of the genre's best entries in the 1960s and 70s.One critic described this film as a cross between Terence Malick and Sam Peckinpah and they are largely right. Nevertheless the film is quite unique and is perhaps the first Western to deal with abortion. That said, this subject matter is not all that central (the movie just happens to represent it as a reality) and the film doesn't play politics at all or resort to being a message film because this subject is explored. Aside from examining this topic, the film manages to feel fresh and unique all around (even if it's just because films, particularly Westerns, just aren't made like this anymore).David Lambert penned the script for this film and shows great skill paying particular attention to the period in which the film takes place. His characters are interesting and well fleshed out and Print (the lead character) in particular is an extremely memorable protagonist. Actor Aaron Stielstra shines in his portrayal of Print who is a middle-aged gunman; a dandy who has a knack for poetry and a penchant for religion. It's really difficult to compare Print to any other Western protagonist, but Stielstra's character lands right up there with being as interesting and and as memorable as some of the icons of the genre. The rest of the cast is for the most part also spot-on in their performances with veteran actors like Dan van Husen and Brett Halsey making nice additions to the cast. While a Spaghetti Western influence isn't quite apparent, fans of the sub-genre will no doubt recognize these two along with cameos from actors/dubbers Michael Forest and Ted Rusoff.Director Fredianelli and cinematographer Michael A. Martinez craft a great looking film with some truly well crafted scenes and shots. Fredianelli proves to be a highly skilled director especially with the larger budget he has here (although still pretty meager by most standards) and really shines through this work. Set-pieces are abound and many of the shootouts that take place are thrilling and tense. If Fredianelli continues to make films on this level (which I hope he does), he will no doubt be a force to be reckoned with in the film world.THE SCARLET WORM stands as a fine film that fans of Westerns or tough-guy genre and action films in general should find thoroughly enjoyable. Highly Recommended.