Mulberry Street Reviews

Page 2 of 23
April 13, 2015
I loved Jim Mickle's most recent 2 movies, and stake land was still damn good, so i was interested in checking out his first film, and despite the low budget its by no means bad, he still maintains the somber serious tone thats present in the rest of his films, all the tenants of the apt building are sad lonely cases just trying to get by, and then rats start biting people turning them into mutants, he does a good job making it seem the whole city is shut down, despite obviously not having the budget to do so, there are some suspenseful scenes, it did get a bit weak at the end, like they ran out of money and then just had to end it suddenly, still for a first movie made for 60 grand apparently it's well done
½ February 16, 2015
I think a lot of people are, unfortunately, likely to pass on this film based on its appearance. I'm not gonna sit here and suggest that this was a great film, or even a good one, but it's definitely better than I think the audience reaction would imply here. Or at least the score, because people can score a film without reviewing it. I'd like to think the reviews are a little more thoughtful. Jim Mickle has gone on to directed several films I've enjoyed. Those being Stake Land and We Are What We Are, the latter being the better of the two. I, unfortunately, have not had the pleasure of watching Cold in July just yet, but I definitely want to. I thought this was honestly gonna be something along the lines of CHUD. Like a cheap low-budget, B-fest, with ridiculously over-the-top moments. But this was honestly, and bear with me when I say this, closer to 28 Days Later than it was to CHUD. 28 Days Later is one of my favorite horror movies from the 2000s, so this isn't a comparison I make lightly. Even with the concept of rat-people who act like zombies, this is treated as something that is serious. Not too pretentiously serious or anything like that, since this is STILL a movie with rat-people that act like zombies, but it's certainly a refreshing way to tell this story. The characterization is also supremely well-done. These characters aren't cliched or stereotypical. They may not be the most intricately written characters, but there's a certain reality in how they interact with each other. They're a small tight-knit community of tenants all sharing the same building, that they're being evicted from. They all have distinct personalities and you come to like them in their own way. So Jim Mickle and Nick Damici, who acted and co-wrote the film, already had a handle on how to properly frame their characters to make the horror of what happens to them be truly effective. With that said, I do think that the characters themselves, while likable, needed a little bit more depth. The movie is quite short, but they really do the best they can with what they're given and I cannot hold that against them in the least. The movie is well-paced, it doesn't feel longer than it should've been, and it climaxes perfectly. The ending itself is very poignant, particularly for this type of film. I think the horror itself, while decent enough, wasn't as effective as it could've been. This is, again, budgetary problems. I'm not holding it against them, but in a way I am given the score I'm giving it. It's just not what I would call a good movie to be honest. This was just a way to get Jim Mickle's foot in the door into a bigger independent spotlight and this early film proved him to already be adept at characterization and atmosphere. Something that was very useful in a film like We Are What We Are. I wouldn't exactly recommend this to just anyone, but it's pretty decent all things considered. It's not pretty, but it's got more than enough under the hood to keep one intrigued.
Super Reviewer
½ December 10, 2013
Part of Horrorfest 8 Films to Die For. They are independent films, and you can't usually expect very high quality. This one is no exception. I half enjoyed it, though. It is filmed rather darkly, so you can't really see everything 100%. Plus, they do that shaky camera thing during some graphic, or action scenes. BUT, I love creatures, and monsters, so I sort of got a kick out of it. The ending, however, wasn't very creative...
½ April 17, 2014
This horror film definitely has a solid concept, nevertheless the execution has problems that limit the well realized characters and themes.
½ February 21, 2014
As a low-budget indie horror flick this film has admittedly creepy makeup designs, yet delivers exactly what's expected of an infection gone haywire thriller, nothing more, nothing less.
½ October 7, 2013
This was quite good.. and Wilf was fascinated by the Rats.
July 24, 2009
Nice original take on the zombie genre- especially the main character being an ex-boxer! A definite nod to 28 days later, but that happens to be one of my favorites so I enjoyed it for the most part.
March 7, 2013
A compelling indie horror from the pairing of Jim Mickle and Nick Damici who would make the landmark horror Stakeland in 2010. Mulberry Street is a low budget delight, with interesting, if a little shaky and frenetic at times, direction, excellent music and natural performances from the cast. The rat infected zombie creatures are quite effective if a little silly as they begin to look more rat like. You may see this packaged with an unrelated lurid cover and under the terrible title Zombie virus on Mulberry Street - don't let this put you off, this film is most definetly worth a look.
½ December 12, 2012
The movie was so creepy but I couldn't look away.
½ December 11, 2012
I really didn't care for this at all. For a bunch of unknowns, the acting was a surprise - better than in many low budget horror movies. The effects were terrible, though the story was straightforward, there were subplots that went nowhere cutting into its effectiveness. Rats don't bother me much, so this wasn't scary or even creepy; it was a bit dull and the handheld camera was nauseating.
December 1, 2012
If 28 Days Later and Quarantine had a pretty decent baby. With rabies.
½ November 5, 2012
First time I saw this film I thought it was ok. Upon second viewing, I'm finding myself liking it much more. The film takes it's time building and establishing the threat that will later turn this film into a frantic shaky cam gore fest but by doing so truly allows the audience to connect with the residents of the Mulberry St building.
This is low budget horror done right. When you don't have a lot of money, concentrate on characters, limit your locations (which the filmmakers expanded upon by filming random pickup shots around NY), and focus the money on the... well... money shots.
And besides... who doesn't like a good zombie rat movie anyways?
November 5, 2012
de efectos donde el fuego es digital y hay ratas zombies, no me suena nada al supuesto miedo paranoico post terrorismo del que se jactaba tener, aún así resulta algo entretenido.
½ October 2, 2012
This is a solid little horror picture and probably the best of the entire After Dark Horrorfest series. The characters are well developed even with the divided up screen time and pretty much all of the performances are serviceable. Obviously this doesn't have the budget of a lot of other zombie type films, but this does have one of the more horrifyingly plausible causes for the outbreak (minus the whole were-rat aspect). The film is simple but solid and fun, it looks great for the size of the movie and lets you get to know likable enough characters before the shit really hits the fan.
September 26, 2012
Cool "infected" cheapie that makes the most of it's claustrophobic setting and admittedly cheesy premise.
September 18, 2011
I thought the first 40 minutes of the movie was very slow. At the heart of the movie this was a zombie movie. What we got was 40 minutes of character development that in my opinion was not needed.

After the first 40 minutes the movie took off and it felt like a horror/zombie movie. The first couple of zombies were infected by rats, after that if you were bit by a zombie you also became a zombie. The difference between the zombies in this movie and other zombie movies is that the zombies showed physical characterizations of rats, and their actions was that of rats.

The second half of the show was action packed and was enjoyable to watch, until the ending, once we got to the last 10-15 minutes of the movie we once again got into the slow character building of the movie.

This movie to me was watchable but sub-par.
September 2, 2012
Nothing more that a Night of the Living Dead clone in rat's clothing.
The director shows potential though.
August 5, 2008
Not a bad little horror flick, set in NY amidst a strange outbreak of rat bites that begin to mutate the infected humans into rat-like creatures. The verite style shooting is very well-done, claustrophobic and disorienting at times.

Having recently given it a second look off the To-Watch Pile I can happily report that it holds up well on the re-watch as well.

Worth a rental.
½ May 1, 2012
Rat zombie people and the hero who didn't have a gun, bow and arrows.noooo he had his fist and headbutts. WTF! they tried to be different. it had the dark look of 28 days later but they failed miserably.
April 20, 2012
This was about the dullest zombie-style movie I have seen in a long time, despite the effort made to make everything gritty and dark. I just didn't find the monsters to be all that scary or believable, nor were any of the characters terribly interesting. Even the gore was minimal, and most of the terror consisted of people being pulled off screen. Yawn.
Page 2 of 23