Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Matrixiole Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

andyrose_tx Greg Arce wrote this story in 2000 and released this film on to the world in 2001. SAW came about 4 years later. Did the writers of Saw, who lived in Melbourne in 2001 lift the Saw storyline from Den? I don't know. But, to say SAW is DEN is a bit of a stretch because, as much as I liked SAW, DEN is far too intelligent and dark of a film to be compared to SAW. If the writers stole the premise from DEN they dumbed it down with traps and heads being ripped in half.Greg Arce plays a character named DEN and he abducts 4 people, each related to the other in some common skeleton in the closet. He engages them in debate and conversation, all along with the premise that they control their fate and the fate of the others. This film is intense, intelligent, and dark. Each of the 4 are forced to consider their faith, their value on human life, and their religious views.Warning: If you Google this film for reviews, there are several out there that give away the ending. The end was shocking as Den reveals the reason for this little game, so if you don't want it ruined for you -- don't read too many reviews or articles The acting is solid and incredibly believable. The film is an emotional ride that you'll never forget. There really is not a lot of blood or gore. Greg relies on the script and the actors to hold the audience not a bunch of fancy traps and heads being ripped in half.This is a must see film. But, therein lies the problem, it's only available in Australia as a region 5, PAL disc. I bought mine on eBay and watched it on a region free universal DVD player.It is worth the hassle. This film is a masterpiece and should get US distribution even if its 7 years late coming.

Scaleb_47 I found this on the shelf of my local DVD retailer and was attracted to the DVD by the dark colouring of the box and in particular, the disturbing picture of a half naked man with "BOY TOY" written on his chest. Don't get me wrong, I'm not into S&M or anything but the box of the DVD made this look like a dark,gritty horror film that was truly disturbing. Trust me, I was wrong. The whole film takes place in a well lit room, and the antagonist of the story is an overweight charismatic guy with a beard and sunglasses.I would hardly call this a horror film, although it seems as if the producer tried to dress it up like one. There are no cringe causing or nail biting moments, you'll only look away from the screen out of boredom... or perhaps confusion.The story is centered around four captives, consisting of two Jewish doctors, one Catholic Hispanic who changes drips in hospitals, and an atheist prostitute. Then there is their captor, who calls himself Den (Presumably short for Dennis?) who forces them all to play out his little debates, with subjects that are sensitive topics for followers of Christianity, for example capitol punishment. As the story plays out, he somehow reveals all of their personal secrets and the viewer is shown that all four captives know each other, for example the man doctor is related to the woman doctor who is having an affair with the Catholic Latino woman... while the man doctor is having sex with the atheist prostitute. How would Den know all of this? While Saw at least tries to show the audience some plausible reasons as to how Jigsaw carries out his games, its almost implied that Den got all his knowledge from God. The movie is full of ridiculous, unrealistic moments such as these.The acting is poor as well. While Greg Arce, who plays as Den, puts on a pretty good performance, the others don't seem to have any acting talent whatsoever. To make matters worse, the characters are terribly created, with the result being a cast of crappy actors playing unbelievable roles. How many AETHIEST prostitutes can quote directly from the bible, and completely outwit a religious fanatic? Then there's Den himself, who just doesn't seem like a believable member of society. I mean he calls himself a Christian, yet that doesn't stop him from accepting a lap dance from the prostitute hes holding hostage. Thats like two sins at once! Also, what kind of religious fanatic (Who would have to be pretty clever to kidnap two doctors from a hospital reception, a lady from a bus and another woman in broad daylight) gets religiously beaten down by a common street strutter? Then there's the ending, where it is half heartedly explained that Den kidnapped four people but he was only interested in the atheist prostitute, and it was all for the purposes of converting her. Somehow it gets to Den stabbing the prostitute through the chest, then telling her that if she takes the knife out of her chest she'll die, but if she doesn't kill him with it he'll go out and "Kill some kiddies". I mean, one thing I was beginning to be intrigued by was the storyline, but then the sudden, poorly thought out ending killed any interest in it.I recommend that you go out and watch this film, just for the sake of seeing it. I have heard things from people in the US that it may be hard to get it on DVD there, but if you can its worth seeing once. I personally didn't like this film, but maybe its just because I don't really like cheesy looking budget films. I certainly wouldn't waste my time watching this again though, but I'm interested to hear what other people think of it. Enjoy.

lincoln-maurice To get it out of the way: "Saw" has its similarities. A psychologically scarred protagonist who kidnaps a bunch of people. There is some reason for the people he selected. Could it be that Saw plagiarised this film in that respect? Possibly. The general synopsis is rather similar between the two. Despite this, the similarities end rather soon after that (though there are some semantic likenesses such as being chained to walls and such) when you have a poorly acted film and even more poorly written script (which Saw does not suffer the same fate). To add injury to this insult, the cinematography is as psychotic as the central character. In some cases, have frantic camera work can be a plot device or push the story, but in Den, it's simply another distracting feature prompting more glances to your watch than are generally considered acceptable in an hour and a half period.Where Saw uses clever writing and plot twists that are realistic, and yet elusive, Den fails on these points miserably. It's plot is overly contrived and once the film reaches its climax, it soon after meets an anticlimax too soon and after some biblical facts being splashed about the screen, which were poorly investigated, the film ends.The characters were the strength of the film. The characters were all unique enough to hoard in actors willing to play them, and earned actress Dana J. Ryan a best horror actress award in an independent vote. The problem with the characters is that the film in its tenure took its cast through a frightful experience that taught them nothing and ultimately almost everybody had blood on their hands. The other issue with the characters was that their depth wasn't explored. Facts were shown about the characters. The revelation to the Doctor that his wife's pet name was known to Milton was an unrealistic reaction. It wasn't one of surprise, though nor was it one of inquisition. It was almost spoken atonally and without any meaning.The greatest flaw of the film was the writing, however the actors surrounding the words given were not nearly strong enough to make a bad script good. They even failed at making a bad script bearable.If you're interested in seeing films that bear similarities to Saw, see its sequels first and foremost. They're the greatest films of their "new horror" genre. Second to these I'd suggest is House of 9 featuring Dennis Hopper. But do yourself a favour and avoid Den in favour of this.Even see a Uwe Boll film before this.

Circus-Szalewski I had the good fortune to catch a screening of this DV-shot feature at the 2002 Hollywood Underground Film Festival (at which it was named Best Feature Length Drama). Though I'm not certain I'd agree with the IMDb genre-listing of DEN as a horror film (guess it depends on what horrifies you), it most certainly lives up to the classification of a drama and a thriller. And it is creepy.The script is marvelously intriguing from the opening montage to the often snide tone of the intelligent dialogue, to the final frame. While that may seem hyperbolic, it is a fitting appraisal of a work which contemporarily explores the timeless impact of basic human nature upon personal and societal morality... and still manages to be engaging and entertaining. Equally important is that Greg Arce's cast is up to the challenge of the material from which there is no easy escape. Imagine Jean Paul Sartre's NO EXIT meets TAXI DRIVER and you might start to get the idea.The cinematography ranges from arty to voyeuristic to "no-nonsense-two- people-in-the-frame", yet weaves together well -- never making the viewer feel like they've left one film and entered another. Even some of the simplest shots of the opening montage can be interpreted to something much richer upon repeated screenings. Without giving any spoilers, I will say that the action of one or two shots (well into the feature) happened so quickly and/or in dim lighting that it left me a bit confused until I was discussing the scenes later with a friend. The shots may look fine when viewed on a monitor and the apparent lighting problem may just have been due to the projection system at the festival.Though the sound is not Hollywood-perfect (some of the sound edits are problematic as a main setting was inside an echo-y theatre and the echo sustain doesn't survive a cut here or there), in a work that is so dependent upon the dialogue, audio is certainly adequate. In fact, it's pretty darned good when compared to many hand-held DV features which plague the viewer with that "single-mic/reality-show-flat-sound".At a time when DV and the home computer have brought a tidal wave of do-it- yourself filmmaking with bold to boring stories realized in laudable to laughable production values, DEN is a fine example of what is achievable from a true auteur... far above the indie DV features which look/sound/feel like they were shot at a community theater gathering.I eagerly await the chance to see DEN at another festival in the future and hope that Mr. Arce's next works are as thoroughly engaging. 8/10