dami_k_po_ja Ok, first of all, since is an amateur approach, a low budget movie and all around it I can say that it has it good points, the plot could use more deep installments and the acting may not be the best but the fursuits were very well done and the music was amazing.The fact they choose a place neutral and without people was key since its not ease find fursuiters or employ too many, the camera work also has its flaws but its forgivable, I am more concerned at the majority of the indoors scenarios were they look just like a modern house rather than an old place.

AlbinoAlbedo This movie was hyped up big time in the fandom. On its premiere it received almost universal praise. Was it because of the acting? The plot? The cinematography? No of course not, the only reason this slop gets any credit is because it is the first "feature length" movie made by furries for furries. Oh God why. I do have to give the crew behind this credit for going to the lengths they went to to make this. They obviously put a lot of effort into it, and it's not as bad as Anus Magilicutty or anything like that... but it's still terrible. The first problem is the story. Short of it is it's boring. Even for a measly 40 minutes. The intro teases you with the idea of a civil war before giving you a big middle finger in the form of peace talks (which are fine in a well-written politically/philosophically driven film- which this is not). In fact, the entire plot boils down to "hurr durr I was only pretending to be retarded". There is also no explanation as to what and why the characters are foxes/wolves/magic dragon things. Furries need to learn that if they want to make a serious work of fiction, they have to explain WHY there's a talking dragon woman. If the characters were human it would make no difference to the story. None of the animals traits show through (not even a howl or anything!), no symbolism, nothing! They are just animals for some reason. If anyone who wasn't a furry was watching this (pity them) then they wouldn't be able to get past this! I'm a furry and I can't! Pathetic!There are almost no sound effects, no weight to actor's movements and poor lighting. I could see lighting stands in several night scenes, and a certain air conditioner is painfully obvious in several scenes. The aforementioned night scenes look... bizarre to say the least. The lighting seems to be from poorly placed halogen work lamps. There are several stab scenes, and the attacker does not really stab but instead gently tickles the backs of the other actors. The climatic sword fight was so stupid I laughed my ass off. Everyone dies and the story cliffhangs, which feels like a threat (I don't want to review a Bitter Lake 2: Electric Boogaloo).The actors try to add emotion to rather static (but well constructed, this is Qarrezel) fursuits that only have jaw movement by flailing their limbs around dramatically. The voice acting is HORRENDOUS (especially the black wolf thing, it sounded plain stupid and kept making dumb lines like "HELL'S B­I­TCHES"). No character development either. Just zero value across the board. The music score is acceptable, Fox Amoore is a talented pianist but his scores are somewhat cliché and unoriginal.I could go on listing all the flaws this movie has for a lot longer, but it's not necessary. Bottom line: watch this movie, it's good for cheap laughs now that it's on Youtube for free. It was never, ever worth paying $20 for. I have picked up better movies for $2 at the dollar shop. And remember, just because it's made by furries, and you're a furry, does not make it good.

nelandquinten Having just finished "Bitter Lake", the first confirmed furry film ever produced on a budget, I think it would be right to give credit where credit is due, being a furry myself.The biggest plus to this film was simply that it was pulled off. It's labeled as a fantasy adventure with people in fur costumes, so you may be thinking "How the hell are they going to pull that off?" Oh but they did, and the production itself is a marvel. The costumes were outstanding and the puppetering was spot-on. The musical score was lovely as well. It's amazing that a real composer worked on wholly original music, and used it to carry the film to emotions it could not achieve on its own. Lighting, cinematography, and direction were also executed smoothly. So in terms of production, its a pretty solid attempt at the first furry film. An excellent short flick by a very talented crew. But that's where my acclaims ends. The short film opens up with a fascinating mythical tale about four provinces that wage war against one another after a crumbling peace. The heir to the throne of one kingdom has been killed, and the discussion for a resolve to the conflict must be made. However, we never get to see ANY of the backstory, and the "discussions" of what to do next are the focal point of the story, not the war itself. For fifteen minutes, we see the main characters talking in the room of a hut in a village. The voice acting is disastrous and the dialogue could have been much better. They use a few curse words and raise their voices to make what they are saying seem more important to the viewer. The characters are incredibly bland and generic, and don't help the grogginess of the film's pace. Most of the scenes are of the furs walking, running, or glancing across the scenery awkwardly. There's a painfully choreographed sword fight (but still pretty damn good for people in fur suits) at the climax between one of the main characters, Colonel Dreer, and another guy who seemed like an extra but turned out to be a villain. And just like that......its over. It's only 30 minutes long, and that's why I'm calling it a "short film" in this review instead of a "feature" that its being made out to be amongst those who got a taste of it at last year's AnthroCon premiere. No happy ending here, but an ending that cliff-hangs more then Sylvester Stallone. By the way, the website praises its use of 35 mm cameras for filming, when in fact it was filmed with DSLR cameras."Bitter Lake" is a film that uses furry fandom as leverage to display its uniqueness, yet it feels like an award winning film crew directing a direct-to-DVD flick. It's a shame, really. You could tell that the crew obviously did the best they could, and the filmmakers probably had a blast making it. The production value is mind-blowing for a small crew, but the performance and final execution are mediocre. I tip my hat off the the filmmakers anyways; they've earned all my respect.So, is it a good attempt at the first serious furry film in terms of production value, and is it a movie that furries would probably enjoy? Yes! Is it worth seeing? If you've got 30 minutes to cut through. Is it worth buying for $10 on the film's website? NO. Oh Jesus, no.

debruin1975 Here it is, the very first full-length furry movie ever produced. Although it is kinda short for 45 minutes, I really enjoyed every second of it. It may look amateuristic but I can tell you, it is certainly not. Even the soundtrack is well done.Few things nag me though: in the entire movie only the main characters are visible, but where were the extras, like the people in the villages. It now looked like the main chars were walking thru abandoned villages. Where were the rest? (I think due to the raging war all other peoples had fled to the mountains.) But overall: this movie is very watchable, certainly for furs and non-furs alike.EZ... TOP NOTCH WORK!