A Chronicle of Corpses

2001
A Chronicle of Corpses
4| 1h23m| en| More Info
Released: 24 October 2001 Released
Producted By:
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

The Elliot estate was once a thriving plantation, but by the 19th century, the family has crumbled under the weight of its own excesses. If sordid sexuality and insanity don't claim their lives, a malevolent force lurking on the land certainly will. Is it a supernatural entity, or simply the poverty-stricken locals seeking revenge? Marj Dusay and Ryan Foley star in this award-winning chiller from auteur Andrew Repasky McElhinney.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Trailers & Images

Reviews

ofumalow People who hate this seem to be disappointed that it fails as a graphic horror film, despite its serial-slaying storyline. People who like it take it for what it is: An art film in the most slow, minimalist, rigorously formal, non-naturalistic mode, closer to "Last Year at Marienbad," "Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant," et al. than any regular genre flick. I'm not saying films of this nature, which apply a very abstract technique to narrative cinema, can't be dull as dishwater or inexcusably pretentious when they fail. But for me, "Corpses" really does cast a hypnotic spell, its disconnections from period accuracy and melodramatic norm enigmatic rather than just arbitrary and annoying. Though I can understand why some folk would think it has exactly those last qualities. This movie is like an Andy Milligan bloodbath directed by Terence Davies--which is a wonderful combination by my taste, but naturally would be off-putting or simply incomprehensible to others. Regardless: Amidst several very stiff (yet nonetheless effective) amateur performances, soap opera veteran Marj Dusay is amazing in her long, stock-still late monologue about the family's sinful past. I can't believe this was made by a 22-year-old director; it's got the astringency of 70-year-old Dreyer or Bresson. Not to say it's an achievement equal with theirs--but I am very fond of it.
sol (Some Spoilers) Long, even though it's under 90 minutes, and torturous film about a deadly curse that was cast on the Eillot family. For the evil deeds committed by the Matriach of that family Grandmother Eillot, Marj Dusay,in the distant past. The movie Begins with two persons connected to the Eillot's being murdered. A bagger, David Scott, who hangs out on the Eillot estate and the daughter of the Eillot's gardener Anne Swales, Amanda Scheiner. As the film preceded one by one the Eillot family members are murdered by someone, or something, with a grudge against them until there's no one left, of the Eillot's, to continue the family bloodline.Were given the lurid background of the Eillot family with stories told to us, as well as actual scenes, in the movie like infidelity murder and madness. The movie introduces us to the Eillot's as their having communion at the church at their estate conducted by father Jerome, Jerry Perna. Father Jerome at first seemed to be the only normal person in the film but even that turned out to be just an illusion. An illusion in the minds of those of us watching and trying to make some sense out of "A Chronicle of Corpses". The movie has a number of long and drawn out sequences, that last as long as five minutes, that only seemed to be nothing more then extra padding to make the film longer and thus somehow impressive to those of us watching it. The actors in the film read their lines with monotone deliveries and blank stares as if they were on sedatives or suffering from lack of sleep. It's as if they were in the process of being brainwashed by some weird religious cult. There were also a number of scenes of people in the film giving long boring and meaningless speeches about world and local conditions, this in early 19th century America, about slavery religion war integration and the environment that had nothing at all to do with what was going on in the movie that almost ended up putting you,if you were still awake by then, to sleep. We finally get the truth of what's happening to the Eillot's, and why, from non other then Gradma Eillot herself. This coming from what looked like the comatose Grandma who up until then never said a single word in the film. With that, by letting the cat out of the bag, about her past indiscretions that lead to the deaths and carnage that's happening Grandma Eillot now sits back and relaxes by taking poison and doing herself in. Mind-numbing and boring movie that you just can't wait for it to finally end. Since everyone in it seems to be in some semi-conscious state of mind and that you, by watching the film, feel that you'll end up just as comatose and brain-dead as those actors and actresses in the movie.
tutt-roberts A brilliant effort by a young director and writer. The cinematography is superb, with each transitional scene reminiscent of a major painter, such as Vermeer, Caravaggio, Da Vinci, or Goya. While the story itself is relatively simple, the telling probes the psyches of its characters with a masterful insight into their collective anxieties about their pending fates, and a thematic breadth superb in its brevity. Even if one were to take issue with the writing, the visuals alone are worth the viewing. It was also refreshing to hear a well-selected choice of master composers accompanying each major scene. It is to be hoped that Mr. McElhinney will develop his style and become a major force in new cinema.
John POSSIBLE SPOILER ****** Being a very low budget piece, I was really impressed by many aspects of this film such as top notch cinematography (very impressive Euro style), capable cast, good use of backgrounds and a well chosen classical musical score, all aspects usually missing from low budget indies. The problem with the film is it's pacing which is deadly slow, and it's lack of any suspense or emotion. Even with this criticism, the film is still a haunting work even after it's over. I still find myself thinking back on it's disturbing plot. POSSIBLE SPOILER. If anybody else has seen this can you explain the ending in the chapel? Not really sure what it meant, was the victim at the alter, the true villain of the piece (which would explain an earlier scene with the brutal murder in the kitchen) or was the the ending to show the futility of life on the part of the last surviving character. All in all gave it a 7/10. This director has promise, hope he continues his career in his art.