The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part
The Walking Dead
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We want to hear what you have to say but need to verify your account. Just leave us a message here and we will work on getting you verified.
Please reference “Error Code 2121” when contacting customer service.
Shocking and bloody. Maniac is smarter than your average psychological slasher, but it's often undermined by its excessive gore.
All Critics (73)
| Top Critics (18)
| Fresh (38)
| Rotten (35)
A creepy experiment that stays with you.
Frodo Baggins as a psycho-killer? Why not?
The sadistic proceedings here are pointless, and not very scary.
It's not clear what exactly merited an updating of William Lustig's 1980 "Maniac" - a cheapo urban grimeball about a serial killer - but like a rash's unwelcome return, we got it anyway.
It's a bit like watching an amputee play hopscotch: there's no way that it's polite to stare for this long, but you just have to see if this guy's gonna make it to the end.
"Maniac" only takes what had merely been a disturbing film and makes it into a truly disturbed one.
I appreciated just how bloody and uncomfortably slow each scalping was. Even for someone like me, it was pretty vomit-inducing, and really impressive.
I went out for a walk after watching this movie, and I still felt like I was looking through the eyes of a psychopath.
One for hard-core gore-hounds.
Maniac is gripping from beginning to end and more intellectual than your average slasher flick.
Does a fine job of balancing some legitimately smart ideas with its requisite moments of pain, suffering, and horror.
Leave it to the French to conclude that a remake of a quintessentially American (and steadfastly '70s New York) fleapit horror flick is not only possible but necessary.
This brilliant film is certainly not for everyone's stomach, since it is a brutal, tense and intensely disturbing experience that forces us to adopt the perspective of a maniac psycho killer, using an ingenious subjective camera to put us right there inside his deranged state of mind.
A depraved, disturbing, and uncompromising slasher that boasts amazing technical craftsmanship, forcing you to follow the kind of character you fear your sister or daughter would meet. Strictly for fans of extreme horror.
More of a gory art experiment than a coherent movie, "Maniac" is watchable (when you're not squirming away from the gore) but ultimately uninteresting and unstimulating. Instead of an interesting take on serial murder and the mental illness that causes it, "Maniac" is just a filmmaker's attempt to showboat gory art.
Elijah Wood is an interesting casting choice that is ultimately fumbled. By shooting the film in 1st person perspective, Wood isn't allowed to show how he's matching the character's torment. The victims could have been running away from anybody with a knife, his presence isn't used to effectively convey his menace other than his penchant for angry mutilation.
"Maniac" is a remake of the 1981 cult classic slasher flick. That version used its low guerilla-style filming to add to the subject matter's depravity. 2013 moves the action from New York to Los Angeles and that move seems to hurt the film as well. NY's 1981 grittiness really helps to add to the believability of the menace, LA 2013, on the other hand, seems a bit fictional and forced.
"Maniac" is undeniably gory, but ultimately it's undeniably pointless.
Frank: Please don't scream. You're beautiful.
"I warned you not to go out tonight"
Maniac is undoubtedly a very interesting and well made psychological horror/slasher. I haven't had the pleasure of seeing the original, so I can't talk about this as it compares to the original. All I can really say is that despite the fact that this was shot well and had very interesting psychological sequences(especially the ending); I just didn't like it that much. The movie was disturbing and gross, which works with some movies and doesn't work with others. For me, it didn't work here. I could always see Elijah Wood playing a creepy guy like this, but his performance was a little too much. It's just too weird for me I guess.
Frank is the title maniac, and he no doubt embodies the essence of that word. He's a voyeur, a lunatic, and a killer. He stalks and kills young, beautiful women because of sick childhood memories of his mother. He also scalps all the bodies and uses them for his mannequins. When a beautiful, French artist asks for his help with her new exhibit, his maniac-ness goes to another level.
This movie has that authentic feel of Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. It just feels so real life and the camera views from Frank's point of view make it feel like the viewer is the maniac. It's all very unsettling and disturbing, which should have left me feeling satisfied. In the end, though, something was just missing. I don't know if it was with Wood's performance or with the lack of true believability that came from the supporting cast, but something just didn't sit right with me.
Maniac is worth a look and it definitely makes me want to give the original a look, as the story and character is very interesting. I may not have liked the movie very much, but I can't say it's bad. In fact, it's one of the more technically well made horror films I've seen in recent years. It's just too bad it couldn't win me over in the end.
View All Quotes