Woodyanders 1909. Philosophical middle-aged dandy assassin Print (a terrific performance by Aaron Stielstra) gets assigned by his boss Mr. Paul (Brett Halsey in fine form) to kill wicked, yet scrupulous brothel owner Heinrich Kley (superbly played with chilling calm by Dan van Husen), who regularly performs abortions on his whores whenever they get impregnated. Moreover, Print has to show crude novice Lee (well played with scruffy conviction by Derek Hertig) the ropes. As the unusual premise alone suggests, this is anything but your standard shoot 'em up oater. Those expecting a clear-cut delineation between the good boys and the bad guys will be sorely disappointed; instead we get several fascinatingly complex and flawed individuals who aren't exactly endearing (Lee in particular at first is pretty odious and unlikable while Kley isn't entirely hateful because of his strongly felt religious beliefs and stance that his brothel serves a useful purpose for the community at large), but manage to be interesting just the same. In addition, the turn of the century old west shown here is an extremely harsh and grimy place. Director Michael Fredianell's brings a dazzling cinematic style and a fiercely uncompromising gritty sensibility to the dark material while David Lambert's bold and edgy script offers an intelligent and idiosyncratic meditation on style, manners, and morality. Granted, the expected shoot outs are bloody as all hell and staged with real rip-roaring brio, plus there's a handy helping of inevitable nudity from the prostitutes at the bordello, but it's the way this picture subverts basic genre conventions and squeezes a maximum amount of surprisingly polished production value from its modest budget that in turn gives it extra substance and resonance. Further enhanced by Stielstra's moody eclectic score and Michael A. Martinez's striking cinematography, this film overall rates as one powerful and provocative pip.

sgroyle Nowadays I reckon we're lucky if we get a great western every decade or so. This doesn't qualify for great, but it is good. If you're expecting "Hollywood" - raise your expectations... this is better.The action in the movie plays well. With influences of Peckinpah mixed with ("early not quite there yet") John Woo; credit where it's due, it didn't get unreal.The dialog could have been tweaked better, I reckon, there was ample opportunity through the settings which were done well. The scene in front of the barber shop is an example of where the script could have gone deeper, and pushed this movie into great. Overall I liked the pacing, the arc and the various spread of characters. It didn't get overly deep into the characters, but neither were they shallow - there's an edge to all of them. I thought Montgomery Ford did a fine job.One thing I really liked about this western? It treats the audience with a bit of respect - allowing me to draw my own conclusions; meeting with my expectations in terms of credibility, there were no "cop outs" in plot. What happened was a logical, if whacky series of events.If you really like westerns, I don't think you'll be disappointed. I am very surprised by the low rating the movie seems to have - strange; maybe good, hard-boiled westerns are just out of style...

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.

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.•