A bunch of scary glowing rats go out for some food and terrorise a nearby mental institution. Apparently, they're so bloodthirsty because they all want to suck up to their master, a gigantic superrat who makes them perform Satanic rituals and chant Barry Manilow songs. There isn't much to say about this movie, you've seen it all before. It's mostly boredom, but there are in fact two scary moments, namely the bathtub scene where suddenly a giant CGI rat comes out of a CGI nowhere and some other rat licking up blood, which is goddamn creepy. Don't do that, rat. Generally this thing just isn't entertaining. If you want a good killer rat movie, well I can be of no assistance.
27 Reviews
Ropey rat rubbish.
BA_Harrison14 October 2008
Rats starts out promisingly enough, with a suicidal woman being admitted to a secure institution for psychological treatment, only to discover that the staff are hiding the fact that patients are mysteriously going missing; given the title of the film, it comes as no surprise to find that killer rats are to blame for the bizarre disappearances. What does comes as a bit of a surprise, however, are quite how awful the special effects are in this film, and how much they ruin the whole experience.
Director Tibor Takacs' is best known for his 1987 teen-friendly horror The Gate, which delivered plenty of fun chills and thrills and some pretty good effects, proving that the man knew how to construct a decent film. On Rats, however, I suspect that he caught a glimpse of his digital effects mid-shoot, and, on seeing how excruciatingly poor they were, just gave up trying (either that, or The Gate was a fluke).
The barely-above-video-game quality CGI rats are so unconvincingly combined with Takacs' live footage, that I actually felt embarrassed for all those involved with the film (especially Ron Perlman)a shame, because, had the effects been much better, this could have been quite an enjoyable piece of schlock horror: the cast don't do too badly with the hokey material, the cinematography is good, and there is a bit of welcome gore in the form of some gnawed carcasses and severed heads.
Since Rats, Tibor Takacs' has directed several other creature features (Ice Spiders, Mega Snake, Kraken: Tentacles of the Deep) all of which I have yet to check out; for his sake (and mine) I hope that the monsters in those movies are a tad more believable than his dreadfully shonky rodents.
3.5 out of 10, rounded up to 4 for IMDb.
Director Tibor Takacs' is best known for his 1987 teen-friendly horror The Gate, which delivered plenty of fun chills and thrills and some pretty good effects, proving that the man knew how to construct a decent film. On Rats, however, I suspect that he caught a glimpse of his digital effects mid-shoot, and, on seeing how excruciatingly poor they were, just gave up trying (either that, or The Gate was a fluke).
The barely-above-video-game quality CGI rats are so unconvincingly combined with Takacs' live footage, that I actually felt embarrassed for all those involved with the film (especially Ron Perlman)a shame, because, had the effects been much better, this could have been quite an enjoyable piece of schlock horror: the cast don't do too badly with the hokey material, the cinematography is good, and there is a bit of welcome gore in the form of some gnawed carcasses and severed heads.
Since Rats, Tibor Takacs' has directed several other creature features (Ice Spiders, Mega Snake, Kraken: Tentacles of the Deep) all of which I have yet to check out; for his sake (and mine) I hope that the monsters in those movies are a tad more believable than his dreadfully shonky rodents.
3.5 out of 10, rounded up to 4 for IMDb.
There's a big phony rat in me kitchen...what am I gonna do?
Coventry10 February 2006
Another new-age creature feature flick with awful...better make that...REALLY awful computer-engineered effects, lousy acting performances and an ultra-thin storyline. Hungry and overly aggressive rats are once again revolting against the bastard doctor who performed scientific experiments on them and all this is taking place at Brookdale; institute for juvenile delinquents, drug addicts and suicidal teenagers. The funky red-eyed rodents are commanded by a ridiculously fake mega-rat and, for some reason, the institute's nerdy janitor can communicate with them. There aren't many aspects in the script that make much sense, like we're supposed to believe that two teenagers are capable to go undercover in the US' most heavily secured rehab facility. The film is also remarkably boring despite endless cargoes of silly-looking rats and irritating teenagers getting eaten. Of all the crappy, exaggeratedly computerized angry-animals movies that came out since the new millennium (and the list is really endless) "Rats" surely is one of THE crappiest. Director Tibor Takács scored a few hits in the late 1980's, like "The Gate" and a personal favorite of mine called "I, Madman" but he should consider a slight career change now. This was just irredeemably bad.
Creepy asylum where people are dying gruesomely and mysteriously by dreadful rodents
ma-cortes30 April 2008
The tale concerns about the Brookdale asylum is a strange hospital for the insane, mad and criminals. Jennifer(Sara Dowling) an intrepid reporter for Philadelpia Enquirer newspaper and guised as a patient investigates about possible health rules infraction. But Brookdale hospital is infested with astonishing and super-intelligent killer rats created long time ago by Doctor Winslow(Ron Perlman). Nowadays an ex-patient(Michael Zilkene) is developing a symbiotic friendship with the large bugs. The inmates are attacked by the amazing rodents who are mobilizing to do battle with the human intruders. This is a terror-thriller quite exciting where large creatures roam for facing off the patients fears and developing a bloodthirsty and eerie hunger.
The rats, themselves, of course , are the real stars , as deliver the goods with genuine chills, terror and tension. The film provides lots of screams, blood and gore and with creepy atmosphere which becomes pretty sinister when the rats appear. This movie with thin characters and contrived plot, packs grisly murders and the filmmaker retains a fascination with the decapitated members. The rats are mostly made by computer generator FX, as usual, they're frightening astounding and quite convincing . The motion picture is regularly directed by Tibor Takacs. Born Budapest, Takacs has directed TV movies(Sabrina, the teenage witch,Outer limits, Earth, final conflict), Mark Dacascos vehicles(Deathline,Sanctuary,Sabotage) and giant monsters and bugs movies(Rats,MegaSnake, Ice spider, Mansquito,). Another films about the Rats sub-genre are the following: Food of gods(76, Bert I Gordon); Food of the godsII(1988, Damian Lee),Willard(1973, Daniel Mann with Bruce Davison), Willard(2003, Glen Morgan with Crispin Glover), The Rats (2002, John Lafia with Vincent Spano), among others.
The rats, themselves, of course , are the real stars , as deliver the goods with genuine chills, terror and tension. The film provides lots of screams, blood and gore and with creepy atmosphere which becomes pretty sinister when the rats appear. This movie with thin characters and contrived plot, packs grisly murders and the filmmaker retains a fascination with the decapitated members. The rats are mostly made by computer generator FX, as usual, they're frightening astounding and quite convincing . The motion picture is regularly directed by Tibor Takacs. Born Budapest, Takacs has directed TV movies(Sabrina, the teenage witch,Outer limits, Earth, final conflict), Mark Dacascos vehicles(Deathline,Sanctuary,Sabotage) and giant monsters and bugs movies(Rats,MegaSnake, Ice spider, Mansquito,). Another films about the Rats sub-genre are the following: Food of gods(76, Bert I Gordon); Food of the godsII(1988, Damian Lee),Willard(1973, Daniel Mann with Bruce Davison), Willard(2003, Glen Morgan with Crispin Glover), The Rats (2002, John Lafia with Vincent Spano), among others.
Murderous mice threaten to devour hospital patients unless they're taken to their leader Mickey
just kidding.
ragana30 April 2005
At a mental health institution, the rats from a forgotten experiment (how anyone can forget an experiment I'll never understand, talk about a swiss cheese memory) have begun to mutate (of course) and eat the patients (guess the kitchen was out of head cheese) just as an undercover reporter checks in to do an inside story on the clinic (timing is everything, the proverbial hickory clock must not have struck one yet and the mouse is still running up it).
Okay, I have to be honest, this movie was lame. The special effects were horrible. The mother rat looked like some cheesy Halloween house decoration you'd leave out on your porch to wipe your feet on. The rat spawns had such fake glowing red eyes you'd think they'd be blind (but then again they all had their tails and there were way more than three of them). There was even a "Willard" type character who had a telepathic bond with the rodents (all he must have heard was "Brains! Brains! Must have fresh brains!" because the rats decapitated their victims). Although if you're actually into B- horror flicks you may love this movie and think it's the Mouse King of the genre.
Ron Perlman plays the head of the institution and the head of the forgotten experiment. It's a bad movie but he at least is, as always, good. Want to know more? Remember the remarks I made earlier about head cheese and decapitations?
Definitely a rental and definitely have a drink.
Okay, I have to be honest, this movie was lame. The special effects were horrible. The mother rat looked like some cheesy Halloween house decoration you'd leave out on your porch to wipe your feet on. The rat spawns had such fake glowing red eyes you'd think they'd be blind (but then again they all had their tails and there were way more than three of them). There was even a "Willard" type character who had a telepathic bond with the rodents (all he must have heard was "Brains! Brains! Must have fresh brains!" because the rats decapitated their victims). Although if you're actually into B- horror flicks you may love this movie and think it's the Mouse King of the genre.
Ron Perlman plays the head of the institution and the head of the forgotten experiment. It's a bad movie but he at least is, as always, good. Want to know more? Remember the remarks I made earlier about head cheese and decapitations?
Definitely a rental and definitely have a drink.
It's Not All That Bad....
huggy_bear27 January 2003
What do you expect? Sure, it's not "The Shining" for God's sake, but hey, it's decent entertainment, if you like cheap B-horror movies. If not, don't watch it, you sure won't like it. The acting is not all that bad, but the effects, like the huge rat, is really very comical. You have to realize that not a lot of money went in to making this one, and at times (most of the time) it shows. The plot of sneaking a reporter into a rehab hospital or whatever, to get a story is a little much, but the rats, hey they had a nice snack a couple of times in this one.
It's called Killer Rats - what do you expect?
vampyrecowboy20 October 2006
The tear jerking drama brought so much water to my eyes.
Mystery was so sharp, I could shave my beard with it.
Action was so intense. I had to watch this movie while being strapped by my arms, chest and feet to the seat.
Horror was so scary that I had to watch this with ten rolls of toilet paper.
The special effects were so believable that I couldn't tell if I was right there.
Music soundtrack brought so much emotion...once the film started, I was immediately hooked.
If any movie ever deserves an Oscar statue...Killer Rats would be it...for the title alone.
______
It was entertaining...anything more, you would have to be stupid...anything less you are expecting a movie script which I wrote.
Mystery was so sharp, I could shave my beard with it.
Action was so intense. I had to watch this movie while being strapped by my arms, chest and feet to the seat.
Horror was so scary that I had to watch this with ten rolls of toilet paper.
The special effects were so believable that I couldn't tell if I was right there.
Music soundtrack brought so much emotion...once the film started, I was immediately hooked.
If any movie ever deserves an Oscar statue...Killer Rats would be it...for the title alone.
______
It was entertaining...anything more, you would have to be stupid...anything less you are expecting a movie script which I wrote.
they don't eat, they don't sleep,they don't scurry with something bigger
kairingler11 November 2007
Let's start out with the cons of the movie,, the computer generated big rat,,, well it's so obvious that it's fake,, i mean it hops like a bunny rabbit,, i have a problem with the doors where the patients seem to go,, HM shouldn't those doors be locked.. other than those two points , i really don't have any problems with this movie. The acting wasn't that bad, the movie wasn't given a big budget; so it's going to show up somewhere. I think that the premise wasn't too bad either, at first i thought it was going to be like Clockwork Orange, then came the RAts so i'm thinking,, okay,, attack of the killer shrews,, the characters in this movie are pretty good, i liked the head of the hospital, Ron Pearlman's character, the female reporter was a hottie, the head nurse was funny,, this is a good movie if you're looking to have a few laughs,, not scared of rats, not expecting too much, and just want to enjoy yourself,, this is not a thinking man's movie, and if you go in to the movie with that frame of mind , trust me you will not be disappointed.
Moderately enjoyable killer rat flick.
b_kite16 November 2019
Despite some horrible CGI and a even worse looking giant rat puppet displayed mid film, this thing actually manages to come off quite enjoyable. It comes off like the earlier style Sci Fi original movies and I'm pretty sure the channel played this one several times back in the day. Plus they actually managed to get Ron Perlman to play in this thing.
This movie is insane!
gortyworty18 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Rats are awesome. How could they do this!? This is totally insane!Why not make a movie about evil cats that try to dominate the world?! The movie is bad just looking at it! Killer Rats.....yeah right. What about lions, or jaguars, or leopards, or tigers, or lynxes, or pumas, or cougars? They are killing machines!
Rats have actually sacrificed their lives to cure diseases that some people have. So what do you say to that?! Killer Rats.....insane......Cats are considered demons in disguise....thats why there was kind of a cat holocaust in Britain in the 1800's. Ever heard of a cat that will save your life? No, i don't think so. Ever heard a rat? No, because there too small. Rats actually have an excuse unlike cats....well maybe because they are lazy and fat.
Anyway, this movie stinks. Rats Rule! Dogs are Cool! Cats are mean and Cruel!
Rats have actually sacrificed their lives to cure diseases that some people have. So what do you say to that?! Killer Rats.....insane......Cats are considered demons in disguise....thats why there was kind of a cat holocaust in Britain in the 1800's. Ever heard of a cat that will save your life? No, i don't think so. Ever heard a rat? No, because there too small. Rats actually have an excuse unlike cats....well maybe because they are lazy and fat.
Anyway, this movie stinks. Rats Rule! Dogs are Cool! Cats are mean and Cruel!
Oscar material
Christopher71718 August 2006
This is so far one the better movies I've ever seen in my whole life. The leading role is gorgeous and the script is really awesome. I even think you have to watch the movie like 2 times before you understand it. And the special effects! Just one word: INCREDIBLE! I don't understand the people who don't like this movie, maybe it's because they don't understand the movie. Too bad that there isn't a sequel.This movie should have been nominated for an Oscar. And the ending was very unpredictable. I've seen this movie with my girlfriend and also she liked it a lot! In fact, it was this movie who brought us together! I will certainly buy this one on DVD.
so bad it's good
timbelgie10 January 2003
Well, a film with this title should make you think twice before you consider watching it. And this one certainly lives up to that prediction.
The acting is acceptable, the plot is absolutely awful and the special effects (the creatures) are .... well, funny is the word that jumps into my head right now, they are terribly fake, but then what did you expect from a low-budget monstermovie. Honestly, i should admit that this movie is so bad that you might actually like it if you're a fan of monstermovies.
The acting is acceptable, the plot is absolutely awful and the special effects (the creatures) are .... well, funny is the word that jumps into my head right now, they are terribly fake, but then what did you expect from a low-budget monstermovie. Honestly, i should admit that this movie is so bad that you might actually like it if you're a fan of monstermovies.
Just boring.
B_D25 December 2007
My friend and I picked up Killer Rats from the bargain bin in the hopes that it would be one of my favorite kind of movies: the so-bad-that-it's-good trash fest. Unfortunately, Killer Rats entirely fails to deliver. It's bad, but not bad enough to laugh at, and ends up coming off as just boring.
Let's start with what the movie does right. The acting, sets, and special effects in Killer Rats are surprisingly good for a movie of its caliber. Don't get me wrong, they're all pretty lame, but they're a few steps up from rock bottom. This is about the best compliment I could give the movie. Ironically, this makes the movie less entertaining; the production values never quite reach the "laughably bad" level - instead they hover somewhere between "mediocre" and "lame."
Killer Rats does a whole lot of things wrong. The biggest problem is that it's just really boring. Every time it looks like a plot is about to develop, it stalls out. The first 75 minutes of the movie are dull and plodding, and the movie never really manages to go anywhere. It's pretty much just a bunch of mundane incidents in a rehab facility with a few halfway-decent death scenes thrown in for good measure. There is never any interesting/funny/witty dialogue. The final 15 minutes get a little more interesting, but the final fight is still pretty boring.
For the life of me, I can't figure out what Ron Perlman is doing in Killer Rats. I bought this movie in large part because he's in it, but the script gives him NOTHING to work with. He plays an uninteresting, buttoned-down doctor, the sort that a movie with an even lower budget might have given to a random geriatric actor. I kept expecting him to relive some old war memories or become a badass, but he never did. At one point it looks like there is some tension developing in his character, but then it goes nowhere. If you see this movie hoping to get some cheesy-yet-satisfying Ron Perlman action, you WILL be disappointed.
The Bottom Line: Killer Rats is not anywhere near good enough to stand on its own merits, and never gets truly bad enough for the so-bad-that-it's-good vibe. Boring, not worth seeing.
Let's start with what the movie does right. The acting, sets, and special effects in Killer Rats are surprisingly good for a movie of its caliber. Don't get me wrong, they're all pretty lame, but they're a few steps up from rock bottom. This is about the best compliment I could give the movie. Ironically, this makes the movie less entertaining; the production values never quite reach the "laughably bad" level - instead they hover somewhere between "mediocre" and "lame."
Killer Rats does a whole lot of things wrong. The biggest problem is that it's just really boring. Every time it looks like a plot is about to develop, it stalls out. The first 75 minutes of the movie are dull and plodding, and the movie never really manages to go anywhere. It's pretty much just a bunch of mundane incidents in a rehab facility with a few halfway-decent death scenes thrown in for good measure. There is never any interesting/funny/witty dialogue. The final 15 minutes get a little more interesting, but the final fight is still pretty boring.
For the life of me, I can't figure out what Ron Perlman is doing in Killer Rats. I bought this movie in large part because he's in it, but the script gives him NOTHING to work with. He plays an uninteresting, buttoned-down doctor, the sort that a movie with an even lower budget might have given to a random geriatric actor. I kept expecting him to relive some old war memories or become a badass, but he never did. At one point it looks like there is some tension developing in his character, but then it goes nowhere. If you see this movie hoping to get some cheesy-yet-satisfying Ron Perlman action, you WILL be disappointed.
The Bottom Line: Killer Rats is not anywhere near good enough to stand on its own merits, and never gets truly bad enough for the so-bad-that-it's-good vibe. Boring, not worth seeing.
Lame with very fake effects, but not that bad
TheLittleSongbird28 August 2012
Not to say that is very much. Just that hearing about it I was expecting irredeemable horse-poop, but was surprised that it was at least watchable. The acting was better than average especially from Ron Perlman, who is good value, the music is appropriately eerie and the bathtub scene is very creepy. However, the rats do incredibly fake especially the giant rat and the "scary" eyes and they aren't all that menacing. The script reeks of cheese, while there are few characters that I found all that likable, the camera work and editing are very choppy and the story is predictable and dully paced. The ending is also very confusing and felt rushed as well.
Overall, not as bad as I thought it would be but mostly very lame with fake effects and a fair amount of dullness and cheese. Some decent acting, one creepy scene and eerie music aren't really enough to save it. 4/10 Bethany Cox
Overall, not as bad as I thought it would be but mostly very lame with fake effects and a fair amount of dullness and cheese. Some decent acting, one creepy scene and eerie music aren't really enough to save it. 4/10 Bethany Cox
Didn't last 5 minutes
shorland4711 July 2022
Those horribly animated CGI rats will haunt you for a long, long time...
paul_haakonsen27 October 2020
Well, even for a creature feature then this 2003 from director Tibor Takács, then "Rats" (aka "Killer Rats") was just a downright bad movie.
Fair should be fair, and I will say that some parts of the story, as written by Jace Anderson, Boaz Davidson, Adam Gierasch and Brian Irving actually were interesting enough. But the movie, as a whole, just didn't cut it. And the horrible CGI animated rats didn't help sell the movie one bit.
I sat down to watch "Rats" in 2020, not really sure what I was in for. Sure, I had seen the movie's cover before, but I never found the time to actually sit down to watch it. So I did now in 2020, as I was presented with the opportunity.
First of all, I will say that I was surprised to see the likes of Ron Perlman in a low budget movie of this caliber. However, I can't really claim to say that his appearance or performance in the movie were sprucing up the overall movie much. There just simply was too many bad things stacked against "Rats", which prevented it from being a movie you could take serious.
I managed to endure 50 minutes of the ordeal, then I was ready to claw my eyes out. Actually, I was was good and ready 24 minutes into it, but I decided to stick with it and give the movie a fair chance. Come 50 minutes, I just couldn't take any more of the abominable things that transpired on the screen. And those lousy CGI rats were just the final pinch that made me give up.
"Rats" is a movie that I can't recommend that you spend your time, money or effort on, as it is just simply not worth it. I am rating "Rats" a mere, but generous, two out of ten stars. And I can honestly say that I have no intention of returning to watch the rest of the movie.
Fair should be fair, and I will say that some parts of the story, as written by Jace Anderson, Boaz Davidson, Adam Gierasch and Brian Irving actually were interesting enough. But the movie, as a whole, just didn't cut it. And the horrible CGI animated rats didn't help sell the movie one bit.
I sat down to watch "Rats" in 2020, not really sure what I was in for. Sure, I had seen the movie's cover before, but I never found the time to actually sit down to watch it. So I did now in 2020, as I was presented with the opportunity.
First of all, I will say that I was surprised to see the likes of Ron Perlman in a low budget movie of this caliber. However, I can't really claim to say that his appearance or performance in the movie were sprucing up the overall movie much. There just simply was too many bad things stacked against "Rats", which prevented it from being a movie you could take serious.
I managed to endure 50 minutes of the ordeal, then I was ready to claw my eyes out. Actually, I was was good and ready 24 minutes into it, but I decided to stick with it and give the movie a fair chance. Come 50 minutes, I just couldn't take any more of the abominable things that transpired on the screen. And those lousy CGI rats were just the final pinch that made me give up.
"Rats" is a movie that I can't recommend that you spend your time, money or effort on, as it is just simply not worth it. I am rating "Rats" a mere, but generous, two out of ten stars. And I can honestly say that I have no intention of returning to watch the rest of the movie.
Stick with it.
Sergiodave27 October 2020
A Horror Rat movie set in an mental institute. Think of One flew over the cuckoo's nest crossed with Anaconda, although the acting here is far better than anything in Anaconda. The movie starts very slowly, but stay with it, it does improve, somewhat. If you like your movies with good special effects, then give this a wide birth. There isn't much to complain about, but then there are no big praises either. There is some fun gore for the Horror fans. Good to pass the time.
Drats
saint_brett14 March 2024
Warning: Spoilers
It was either this or Sondra Locke's 'Ratboy' tonight. I've opted for this unappealing feature.
What was that other Canadian movie about rats? 'Gnaw?' For an awesome movie cover, the movie failed to fire and was a huge disappointment. I heard so much about that swimming pool scene, but it wasn't really much to rave about.
Two plumbers explore underground tunnels, and the first flaw in this movie is the sound. It sounds like when you're at the cinema - if you even go anymore today, that is - and someone opens the heavy entrance doors and you hear that echoed surround sound.
We're in Philadelphia, so no doubt someone's flushing fentanyl down the water system, and the rats look forward to party time.
I think the movie attempts to explain later on that the head doctor experimented on the rats in a cruel fashion, and somehow they grew to resent most people and hold grudges.
Under court order, Avril Lavigne, or Alicia Silverstone, is admitted to a medical facility, and she's left in the care of teddy bears and a roommate, Rose, who's totally unlikeable, and you only wish that her death came earlier.
Lavigne's injected with more drugs to make her feel at home, and for the most part of the movie, it takes place inside this one building, which becomes claustrophobic, and it's refreshing to see a scene later in the movie where The Rat Whisperer drives the Ghostbusters vehicle out to the woods.
Apparently one inpatient has rat powers and can communicate and kill for them just because they injected him with a rat bite.
Hellboy, the mercenary who would rather stay on the ship with the things, plays the role of a lab coat wearing pen pusher. His role is miniscule, and somebody else probably should have been cast for his part.
Around the 17-minute mark, what appears to be Rebecca from Soft White Underbelly creates a scene over playing cards.
Another flaw is the giant, cheap CGI rat that moved like the digital enhancement that it is. It doesn't even look good. In fact, it resembles something from a Resident Evil video game.
Group therapy sees an odd bunch huddle in a 'Fight Club' sermon while toxic rats have already eaten one nicotine addict under the command of one megacomputer rodent that no doubt will grow and grow.
Lavigne isn't a real inpatient and has endangered her life by going undercover just to get the inside scoop on the facility's conditions and malpractice. As if you'd put yourself in harm's way and willingly be imprisoned with violent offenders just for a story.
Rebecca is eaten by the computer enemy boss, and it's not well filmed at all.
Some Ghostbusters are brought in with proton packs, and that echoed cinema sound kicked in again.
The director is under the impression that rats have infrared vision. I guess he got his same information from the nimrods, who told other nimrods for years that cats and dogs only see black and white or that snakes can't see and rely on their sense of smell. People in science are a bunch of moron know-it-alls.
Lavigne smuggles inside information to the outside world, which leaks the truth that one inpatient has Spider-Man abilities; in his case, he was bitten by a rat and inherited their power, and he is one part human, the other part rodent. This is stupid.
It told a story at the start and held my interest, but the threads are slowly disengaging, and it's becoming absurd.
The Rat Whisper dons a white gown and becomes the head of the facility temporarily, as Ron Pearlman was obviously off filming other movie projects. How many movies can an actor make at one time, and how do they juggle the balance?
This isn't exactly setting the world on fire, and it kind of stays at this slow pace for the majority of the movie.
They didn't have to write the Cyprus chick out of the movie in such gruesome fashion. At least she was interesting.
I've had my fill at the one-hour and 15-minute mark.
This movie has overextended its stay, and that echoed cinema door sound can be heard again.
The movie lacks direction, goes round in circles, confuses itself, and even tries its hand in having some of the characters turn almost zombie-like with supernatural elements. It's farfetched. Give it up.
The main giant rat keeps doing most of the killing, and I doubt that after eating almost 7 people in an hour, it'd still be hungry and looking for more nourishment.
Here we are in the future, yet all horror movies did was go backward. The 1970s and 1980s were the experimental phase to lay the platform for others to learn from, yet they didn't. You'd think beyond 2000 they'd get it right, but standards have only declined with such cheap, amateurish productions.
The worst thing that could have happened to film in general today is CGI.
What was that other Canadian movie about rats? 'Gnaw?' For an awesome movie cover, the movie failed to fire and was a huge disappointment. I heard so much about that swimming pool scene, but it wasn't really much to rave about.
Two plumbers explore underground tunnels, and the first flaw in this movie is the sound. It sounds like when you're at the cinema - if you even go anymore today, that is - and someone opens the heavy entrance doors and you hear that echoed surround sound.
We're in Philadelphia, so no doubt someone's flushing fentanyl down the water system, and the rats look forward to party time.
I think the movie attempts to explain later on that the head doctor experimented on the rats in a cruel fashion, and somehow they grew to resent most people and hold grudges.
Under court order, Avril Lavigne, or Alicia Silverstone, is admitted to a medical facility, and she's left in the care of teddy bears and a roommate, Rose, who's totally unlikeable, and you only wish that her death came earlier.
Lavigne's injected with more drugs to make her feel at home, and for the most part of the movie, it takes place inside this one building, which becomes claustrophobic, and it's refreshing to see a scene later in the movie where The Rat Whisperer drives the Ghostbusters vehicle out to the woods.
Apparently one inpatient has rat powers and can communicate and kill for them just because they injected him with a rat bite.
Hellboy, the mercenary who would rather stay on the ship with the things, plays the role of a lab coat wearing pen pusher. His role is miniscule, and somebody else probably should have been cast for his part.
Around the 17-minute mark, what appears to be Rebecca from Soft White Underbelly creates a scene over playing cards.
Another flaw is the giant, cheap CGI rat that moved like the digital enhancement that it is. It doesn't even look good. In fact, it resembles something from a Resident Evil video game.
Group therapy sees an odd bunch huddle in a 'Fight Club' sermon while toxic rats have already eaten one nicotine addict under the command of one megacomputer rodent that no doubt will grow and grow.
Lavigne isn't a real inpatient and has endangered her life by going undercover just to get the inside scoop on the facility's conditions and malpractice. As if you'd put yourself in harm's way and willingly be imprisoned with violent offenders just for a story.
Rebecca is eaten by the computer enemy boss, and it's not well filmed at all.
Some Ghostbusters are brought in with proton packs, and that echoed cinema sound kicked in again.
The director is under the impression that rats have infrared vision. I guess he got his same information from the nimrods, who told other nimrods for years that cats and dogs only see black and white or that snakes can't see and rely on their sense of smell. People in science are a bunch of moron know-it-alls.
Lavigne smuggles inside information to the outside world, which leaks the truth that one inpatient has Spider-Man abilities; in his case, he was bitten by a rat and inherited their power, and he is one part human, the other part rodent. This is stupid.
It told a story at the start and held my interest, but the threads are slowly disengaging, and it's becoming absurd.
The Rat Whisper dons a white gown and becomes the head of the facility temporarily, as Ron Pearlman was obviously off filming other movie projects. How many movies can an actor make at one time, and how do they juggle the balance?
This isn't exactly setting the world on fire, and it kind of stays at this slow pace for the majority of the movie.
They didn't have to write the Cyprus chick out of the movie in such gruesome fashion. At least she was interesting.
I've had my fill at the one-hour and 15-minute mark.
This movie has overextended its stay, and that echoed cinema door sound can be heard again.
The movie lacks direction, goes round in circles, confuses itself, and even tries its hand in having some of the characters turn almost zombie-like with supernatural elements. It's farfetched. Give it up.
The main giant rat keeps doing most of the killing, and I doubt that after eating almost 7 people in an hour, it'd still be hungry and looking for more nourishment.
Here we are in the future, yet all horror movies did was go backward. The 1970s and 1980s were the experimental phase to lay the platform for others to learn from, yet they didn't. You'd think beyond 2000 they'd get it right, but standards have only declined with such cheap, amateurish productions.
The worst thing that could have happened to film in general today is CGI.
Mickey's gone crazzzzzzy
KHayes6662 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The old saying "the nuts are running the asylum" was true in this movie...when you replace the nuts with killer rats. The storyline is a typical b-movie but it is kind of cool and you never know, this kind of thing might actually happen. Most horror movies can never happen in reality which is why you can sit back and go "its only a movie" but when you think about it, there could be a gang of mutated rats on the loose in an insane asylum because who would ever notice?
The plot is an undercover reporter is brought into the place to search for clues on the research done on rats from many years ago. Inside she meets the usual gang ofrejects, druggies and weirdos. One of whom named Cypress has the biggest nose I've ever seen. Anyway, as the reporter begins to get settled, mutant rats start devouring everyone in their sight and its up to the reporter to save the day.
The rats were computer generated but I didn't find the movie too bad. Its pretty dumb but if you need to kill time, not a bad way to do it.
The highlight of the film is when Jennifer tries to convince Michael that there are rats on the loose by holding up a picture Cypress drew. Michael says "This is your proof??? This is a finger-painting!"
4 out of 10
The plot is an undercover reporter is brought into the place to search for clues on the research done on rats from many years ago. Inside she meets the usual gang ofrejects, druggies and weirdos. One of whom named Cypress has the biggest nose I've ever seen. Anyway, as the reporter begins to get settled, mutant rats start devouring everyone in their sight and its up to the reporter to save the day.
The rats were computer generated but I didn't find the movie too bad. Its pretty dumb but if you need to kill time, not a bad way to do it.
The highlight of the film is when Jennifer tries to convince Michael that there are rats on the loose by holding up a picture Cypress drew. Michael says "This is your proof??? This is a finger-painting!"
4 out of 10
A Highly Unsatisfying B-Movie
Humdinger6910 October 2018
A reporter goes undercover in a mental hospital where locking the doors is a foreign concept, and finds the place overrun with... KILLER RATS! As well as a crazy janitor who speaks to them.
I would have preferred more real rats and models than the pathetic CGI that was on display for most of the movie, more gore would have been nice too. Ron Perlman is here, but sadly not very much.
Nothing to see here.
I would have preferred more real rats and models than the pathetic CGI that was on display for most of the movie, more gore would have been nice too. Ron Perlman is here, but sadly not very much.
Nothing to see here.
An enjoyable killer animal horror flick
Woodyanders6 January 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Gutsy reporter Jennifer (a winningly spunky performance by fetching blonde Sarah Downing) poses as the troubled Samantha so she can be admitted into the mysterious sanitarium Brookdale Institute in order to research a possible expose on the place. Jennifer uncovers more than she bargained for when she discovers that the joint is infested by lethal carnivorous mutant rats. Director Tibor Takacs, working from an engrossing script by Adam Gierasch and Jace Anderson, does a sound job of creating a suitably creepy'n'claustrophobic atmosphere, stages the rat attack sequences with a reasonable amount of flair, maintains a steady pace throughout, and further spices things up with a nice smattering of grisly splatter. The mental patients are a colorfully freaky bunch: Bailey Chase as the amiable Johnny Falls, Eileen Grubba as the scrappy, belligerent Rose, Patrick Dreikauss as the twitchy Morgan, Desislava Tenekedjieva as the fragile, suicidal Cypress, and Tarri Markell as spiky junkie Naomi. The rest of the cast are likewise fine in their roles, with especially praiseworthy work from Ron Perlman as humane psychiatrist Dr. William Winslow, Michael Zeliniker as oddball custodian Ernst, Denise Dowse as no-nonsense head nurse Matilda, Sean Cullen as Jennifer's concerned fellow reporter boyfriend Michael, and Michael Hagerty as likable orderly Lenny. Barry Gravelle's polished, shadowy cinematography does the trick. Guy Zerafa's shivery score hits the shuddery spot. While the rats with their glowing red eyes and insatiable flesh-eating appetites are pretty unnerving, the main giant rodent alas proves to be a total washout due to extremely poor and unconvincing CGI effects. That criticism aside, this movie overall sizes up as a nifty little fright feature.
Pretty good, could've been better
slayrrr66621 November 2004
Warning: Spoilers
'The Rats' is a pretty entertaining killer rodent movie.
**SPOILERS**
Teenager Samantha (Sara Downing) is admitted into Brookdale Institute, a psychiatric hospital. It has been plagued by strange disappearances nearby that the police haven't been able to solve. The head doctor at the institute, Dr. Winslow (Ron Perlman) takes an immediate interest in her, and assigns her to a controlling roommate (Eileen Grubba). At first, she really doesn't know what to expect, but she quickly makes a friend in the facility, Naomi (Tarri Markel). The next day, she is missing, and Dr. Winslow suggests a cover up among the staff. Samantha doesn't believe it, and launches a hidden investigation into Naomi's disappearance and finds that the place is infested with rats. After two more inmates are found dead, Samantha believes more than that a cover-up exists. She begins drilling the staff to do something about the rat problem, and they finally hire an exterminator, (John Paul Young) who also falls victim to the rats. After several freak-outs from the other residents, Samantha resolves herself to find out what the staff at the hospital is trying to hide. She discovers that the janitor (Michael Zelniker) of the hospital is controlling the rats telepathically as the result of an accident from an experiment Dr. Winslow had conducted before the hospital was used as a psychiatric hospital.
The Good News: For once, we finally get a horror film set inside a creepy location: an insane asylum. Granted, the idea has been done before, but nit with killer rats as the culprits. This was a great idea and should've been done a lot sooner. The location allows for the usual character stereotypes in these films: the caring doctor; the clue-less staff; the heroine; and the typical first victim who knows what's really going on. I've seen so many films where they try to step away from these stereotypes that, in a small way, it's refreshing to see those brought back into a film. That was a real nice surprise to see this old cliché brought back into a modern film. Even though the rats may be fake, I was glad that the blood and gore wasn't. The blood was realistic, and we even got to see some eaten-away carcasses. There were several of those, so it wasn't just one. The mother rat was very vicious and attacked everyone in sight, just the way a killer creature should be. The best quality is that something is always happening, so it doesn't move too fast for its own good and loose you in very confusing scenes. It did keep your interest, something all good movies know how to do and do well.
The Bad News: The rats are so obviously computer generated that it looses at the terror in the script. The film does have some really suspenseful moments, but the badly designed rats nearly ruin it. It damages a film when we see this really great scene where the rats overwhelm their victim, yet the person is seen to be covered in fake rats that don't match up to the on-screen mayhem. It was very frustrating to see those kinds of scenes. I was really getting into the movie and then they had to show the fake rats in a scene where they are clearly not in the same shot in the movie. That was a real killer to have to watch that kind of scene. The ending was also very confusing. It featured the same kind of ending that all these movies seem to have. If you've seen one of these kinds of movies, you'll know the ending. It wasn't a very creative ending compared to the rest of the film.
The Final Verdict: Keeping in mind that the rats are so obviously fake, this is still a pretty entertaining movie. The other 'Rats,' where they take over Manhattan, was only slightly better than this one, though both are recommended to killer rodent movie fans.
Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, and mild violence on the rats
**SPOILERS**
Teenager Samantha (Sara Downing) is admitted into Brookdale Institute, a psychiatric hospital. It has been plagued by strange disappearances nearby that the police haven't been able to solve. The head doctor at the institute, Dr. Winslow (Ron Perlman) takes an immediate interest in her, and assigns her to a controlling roommate (Eileen Grubba). At first, she really doesn't know what to expect, but she quickly makes a friend in the facility, Naomi (Tarri Markel). The next day, she is missing, and Dr. Winslow suggests a cover up among the staff. Samantha doesn't believe it, and launches a hidden investigation into Naomi's disappearance and finds that the place is infested with rats. After two more inmates are found dead, Samantha believes more than that a cover-up exists. She begins drilling the staff to do something about the rat problem, and they finally hire an exterminator, (John Paul Young) who also falls victim to the rats. After several freak-outs from the other residents, Samantha resolves herself to find out what the staff at the hospital is trying to hide. She discovers that the janitor (Michael Zelniker) of the hospital is controlling the rats telepathically as the result of an accident from an experiment Dr. Winslow had conducted before the hospital was used as a psychiatric hospital.
The Good News: For once, we finally get a horror film set inside a creepy location: an insane asylum. Granted, the idea has been done before, but nit with killer rats as the culprits. This was a great idea and should've been done a lot sooner. The location allows for the usual character stereotypes in these films: the caring doctor; the clue-less staff; the heroine; and the typical first victim who knows what's really going on. I've seen so many films where they try to step away from these stereotypes that, in a small way, it's refreshing to see those brought back into a film. That was a real nice surprise to see this old cliché brought back into a modern film. Even though the rats may be fake, I was glad that the blood and gore wasn't. The blood was realistic, and we even got to see some eaten-away carcasses. There were several of those, so it wasn't just one. The mother rat was very vicious and attacked everyone in sight, just the way a killer creature should be. The best quality is that something is always happening, so it doesn't move too fast for its own good and loose you in very confusing scenes. It did keep your interest, something all good movies know how to do and do well.
The Bad News: The rats are so obviously computer generated that it looses at the terror in the script. The film does have some really suspenseful moments, but the badly designed rats nearly ruin it. It damages a film when we see this really great scene where the rats overwhelm their victim, yet the person is seen to be covered in fake rats that don't match up to the on-screen mayhem. It was very frustrating to see those kinds of scenes. I was really getting into the movie and then they had to show the fake rats in a scene where they are clearly not in the same shot in the movie. That was a real killer to have to watch that kind of scene. The ending was also very confusing. It featured the same kind of ending that all these movies seem to have. If you've seen one of these kinds of movies, you'll know the ending. It wasn't a very creative ending compared to the rest of the film.
The Final Verdict: Keeping in mind that the rats are so obviously fake, this is still a pretty entertaining movie. The other 'Rats,' where they take over Manhattan, was only slightly better than this one, though both are recommended to killer rodent movie fans.
Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, and mild violence on the rats
Above average killer rodent movie for genre fans
Roddenhyzer21 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
A journalist admits herself to a mental health institute to investigate undercover the goings-on behind the curtains of the privately run facility. Things go relatively smoothly until patients start to disappear and an infestation of man-eating rats and a janitor, telepathically controlled by a humongous uber-rat, put a slight damper on her investigations.
Not really that much to say about "Rats" other than that, in a wide river of mostly sub-par monster and killer animal movies, it really sticks out as a relatively competent production. The story barely ever drags, with proper rat action taking place at an even pace, the cinematography is good, with some POV shots and unusual camera angles thrown in there to break up the monotony, and the cast, consisting of decent no-names and Ron Perlman as a bonus, never annoys. The special effects are somewhat of a mixed bag, though. While the practical gore effects and the scenes involving actual, live rats were pulled off surprisingly well, the additional computer animations are mostly just a laugh.
All in all, if you're looking for a cheap, little thrill involving killer rats, and you can get over some utterly abysmal CGI, then by all means, give this one a try. You could do *much* worse in this genre.
Not really that much to say about "Rats" other than that, in a wide river of mostly sub-par monster and killer animal movies, it really sticks out as a relatively competent production. The story barely ever drags, with proper rat action taking place at an even pace, the cinematography is good, with some POV shots and unusual camera angles thrown in there to break up the monotony, and the cast, consisting of decent no-names and Ron Perlman as a bonus, never annoys. The special effects are somewhat of a mixed bag, though. While the practical gore effects and the scenes involving actual, live rats were pulled off surprisingly well, the additional computer animations are mostly just a laugh.
All in all, if you're looking for a cheap, little thrill involving killer rats, and you can get over some utterly abysmal CGI, then by all means, give this one a try. You could do *much* worse in this genre.
Give me your $100, we'll film in my mom's basement and power up the laptop!
Dr. Gore7 May 2003
Warning: Spoilers
*SPOILER ALERT* *SPOILER ALERT*
Mighty cheap. Rats are crawling through the rehab center yet no one seems to notice. People start disappearing. No one cares. One of the patients is going to get to the bottom of this. Seems the rats and the janitor have a secret. Cheap rat carnage ensues.
Someone brought their Commodore 64 out of storage, dusted it off, saved up their allowance and made these rat effects. The rats looked pretty bad. They had lots of little rats and one big rat. The big guy moved like a komodo dragon. It wasn't convincing. Or good.
Another tactical error was to kill the girl with the largest breasts first. Come to think of it, there was no nudity at all. Another error. Why even set a giant rat movie in a rehab center anyway? I know the classic B-movie setup is to keep the action in one setting but surely they could have picked a more fun place to party with rodents.
There was a little blood near the end but it was too late. The movie had gone the way of so many cheap B-movie's before it. Dropkicked into the garbage.
Mighty cheap. Rats are crawling through the rehab center yet no one seems to notice. People start disappearing. No one cares. One of the patients is going to get to the bottom of this. Seems the rats and the janitor have a secret. Cheap rat carnage ensues.
Someone brought their Commodore 64 out of storage, dusted it off, saved up their allowance and made these rat effects. The rats looked pretty bad. They had lots of little rats and one big rat. The big guy moved like a komodo dragon. It wasn't convincing. Or good.
Another tactical error was to kill the girl with the largest breasts first. Come to think of it, there was no nudity at all. Another error. Why even set a giant rat movie in a rehab center anyway? I know the classic B-movie setup is to keep the action in one setting but surely they could have picked a more fun place to party with rodents.
There was a little blood near the end but it was too late. The movie had gone the way of so many cheap B-movie's before it. Dropkicked into the garbage.
A truly bad film
pleides10 November 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I'm trying to think of something good to say about Rats, but it's very difficult. Okay, Ron Perlman wasn't too bad but he was underused to a criminal extent and I wonder why he even appeared in this dreck.
The special effects wouldn't have looked convincing in the 80's so for a movie released in 2003 they're almost unbearable. The acting isn't good either, but it's mostly the abysmal story that drags this movie down to 2 stars.
------------spoiler ahead-------------------
It suffers from a barely comprehensible plot line that includes a man who has a telepathic link to rats due to being bitten by one as a child and the much-used 'secret scientific experiments' that resulted in the smart and oversize rats. The rats in Princess Bride were just as big but looked 100 times as real and were used for a comic effect; in Rats they are only funny unintentionally.
This isn't even worth watching for free on cable, although it is fairly gory so if that's something you enjoy then there's something for you at least.
The special effects wouldn't have looked convincing in the 80's so for a movie released in 2003 they're almost unbearable. The acting isn't good either, but it's mostly the abysmal story that drags this movie down to 2 stars.
------------spoiler ahead-------------------
It suffers from a barely comprehensible plot line that includes a man who has a telepathic link to rats due to being bitten by one as a child and the much-used 'secret scientific experiments' that resulted in the smart and oversize rats. The rats in Princess Bride were just as big but looked 100 times as real and were used for a comic effect; in Rats they are only funny unintentionally.
This isn't even worth watching for free on cable, although it is fairly gory so if that's something you enjoy then there's something for you at least.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
