Broken (III) (2006) User Reviews

Could Have Been Amazing...

[FilmFatale · 4/10 · 23 September 2008]

Broken is a simple story of a good mother who wakes up in a nightmare. Trapped with a serial killer, she must take herself to the brink of pain and strength to survive and discover the fate of her daughter.

What's good about "Broken" is the gore (I've only seen the unrated version), the performances, and the location. The brutal, unflinching gore scenes serve to unnerve the viewer - this ain't no Lifetime movie, and you're instantly on edge and expecting the worst. And the lead characters, Hope and the Man, do a good job of portraying their situations without much dialogue. There's a LOT of screaming and grunting here - I wondered what the neighbors must be thinking. Which leads me to what I found bad about "Broken" - I just never got to know or care about the characters. Is the bad man making some sort of social commentary on the sheltered lives of women? Does he want to create an equal to live out his days in the wilderness with? Does he just think it's a kick to torture women? Who knows? And Hope is pretty thinly drawn, so I'm just not into her journey of being broken or rebuilt or whatever.

Still, the downbeat ending and the fact that it tried to be something more than it was are commendable.

Broken is what you get if you don't join the family!

[jpgonc · 6/10 · 19 March 2007]

I am gonna skip the synopsis and run to the review itself.

This low budgeted B-Movie is a good surprise. This British independent film has a small cast (3 actors only), very little dialog and set almost entirely in the woods. It hardly sounds like this thing can pull us up for anything good but Simon Boyes and Adam Mason have created a gory, shocking, intelligent and modern thriller.

Broken is somehow paced, I mean, could be a little bit slow for some people out there already hypnotized on clichéd/biased Hollywood horror crap, but let me tell you, this thing will throw suspense and confusion every time you think you know what's going to happen next...

Nadja Brand (Oh! What a gorgeous and sexy woman!), is absolutely fantastic while making her character very realistic and credible.

Eric Colvin is magnificent according to his character on script.

Abbey Stirling is a young actress and did a mediocre job for her first appearance. Who's to blame?

Summing all and concluding, the cinematography makes the film look a lot more expensive for a 9000 Euro cost. The editing is professional, the script good and the directing is quite an accomplishment comparing to other British indie movies of such grandness like Dog Soldiers, Cradle of Fear, Dead Meat and even Boy Eats Girl.

So, we or you will think: If it's so damn good why it's not being distributed in international theaters? Well... because it's too grim and too violent for the regular viewers... but not for me.

I bet on Broken... do you?

You'd have to be sick to like this

[lurpak · 5/10 · 14 December 2006]

I thought this was a very well made film, which drew obvious parallels to Saw in the opening scene...but thats where it ends, its far from a Saw rip off as previously mentioned, it does challenge your sense of morals, the "baddie" is extremely well acted as is our heroine and the characters are a lot more than one dimensional killer/victim types. The atmosphere is realistic, and this film delivers a lot of award winning aspects.

As for the films contents, I really hated this sick guy, and wanted to see him punished, which brought out more emotion than your typical slasher flick, which most I term comedies due to their predictable outlandish villains.

There's none of the annoying stereotypical bad guy gets hit by car, shot by arrows, hit by axe and still comes a chasing scene that you find in the usual run of the mill films of this ilk.

I do recommend this film for everything that you can recommend a film for, except one thing... it should never have been made, you would have to be real sick to appreciate any entertainment value in this film, its gritty and a little too close to the bone for my liking...and I assure you I'm no prude.

Well done film makers excellent execution, but make something a little more pleasant next time, whats wrong with you !!

broken

[zweick · 28 August 2006]

Broken is a grim low-budget horror film in the old-school tradition. I won't go into details about the story, as most comments already cover that. What I will say is this: Made for next to nothing, and with a simple and strong premise, it's an impressive piece of work. Firstly, it looks great. Atmospheric and intense, the photography suits the theme of the film. There are some shots near the end that simply look superb, and they've really captured that moist, raw "waking up in the woods in the morning"-feeling.

The story is simple and raw. The screenplay is well structured and exploits the premise without ever repeating itself. That's an accomplishment in itself! And it's scary and intense. The gore is well done without being over the top, and the acting is good.

I'm happy to see that people notice low-budget films like this, and give them the attention they deserve. Check it out!

Painfully bad

[Leofwine_draca · 2/10 · 6 January 2013]

An abysmally poor entry into the 'torture porn' genre, a British movie shot out in the Cambridgeshire woods somewhere with the writer/director's own wife playing a central role. I have two questions after watching this: who told the writing/directing team they could direct, and who told the main actress she could act?

BROKEN is the worst kind of horror film, a repulsive exercise in sadism designed to cash in on the popularity of the SAW franchise, which it rips off throughout (and most notably at the beginning). The opening credits play out over a montage of a young woman trying to retrieve a razorblade sewn inside her stomach, and if that sounds like your idea of entertainment then you're welcome to it. The repetitive self-mutilation continues for another twenty minutes or so before the film settles down into a plot less affair which tries to depict a supposedly tense relationship between hostage and captor.

The truth is that BROKEN is entirely void of original idea and intent, so instead it ups the ante in terms of on-screen gore and general nastiness. Not that the special effects are good, because they aren't, but there's a general undercurrent of depravity and sadism which makes it an alternatively gruelling and boring watch. Despite the unpleasantness, there's never any suspense or tension in any of the hackneyed scenes, and the intensely irritating Nadja Brand fails to elicit one iota of sympathy for her character's plight. The villain is a nobody, there's no motivation or backstory for any of the characters, no attempts at characterisation or realism. Just endless repetition and padding until the final, merciful moments.

Just torture garbage..

[RMS1949 · 1/10 · 27 June 2008]

Oh joy,, another foreign torture/bloody movie that sadistic gore hounds try to convince themselves and other people that it has value or merit. To anyone with an IQ higher than a rock this is NOT a good horror movie, it's just another mindless, silly gore fest.

While the movie "Inside" at least had suspense in the first half of the film, in the end , the movie Broken is just another excuse to show how much the human body can take getting ripped apart and how much an audience can stomach it.

Storyline takes another back seat to "special blood effects".. (yawn) It's not scary people, it just fossil fuel for the sick. I really think those men that get excited over movies like this should have a" I love tortured women" printed on their forehead, so that we know to keep our daughters and sisters away from your twisted selves.. :) LOL

The only reason this gets a one is cause there is nothing lower...

[aaronpynn32-1 · 1/10 · 10 January 2008]

This isn't even a remotely well put together film. It has no real plot. The film is disjointed and shows pieces and never puts them even remotely together. This film has a guy that tortures his victims and the director and writer torture anyone stupid enough to fall for this. It amazes me that people continually begin to make apologizes and put indie films on a pedestal just for being indie. I don't care of this film was made for 3 dollars or 3 million it would suck either way and trust me this movie sucks. The only thing you will get from this is the gnawing urge of wanting the time back you wasted on this crap. Want to know how the guy kidnapped his victim? What happens afterwards? Where the hell this true story is going? You won't none of these questions are answered. It's bad film making all around. I kept wanting to like this film... Sadly it was impossible too. Broken makes little sense. Broken is just like this review is starting to get. Repetitive.

Intense, disturbing and brilliantly executed low-budget film.

[john-2755 · 7/10 · 27 August 2006]

There's not a lot more to add to the already overwhelmingly positive reviews. First and foremost, this is a low budget, independent film that actually works to it's advantage. Without constraints of Hollywood pampering or any of that nonsense, what we get here is a film made by horror fans, FOR horror fans. These people have a clear understanding of what people want to see; none of this teen-orientated rubbish, this is a seriously disturbing and believable film.

With the main character being an ordinary person going through a horrific ordeal in the woods, this really could happen to anyone. From the outset, I felt my stomach churning, and to someone who has seen as many films as I have, this is indeed an achievement. Needless to say, I recommend this film to anyone who can appreciate a good, shocking and unpleasant film.

Keep your eyes on this director.... 5 years from now he will be a much bigger name!

Sick, Unpleasant and Disturbing

[claudio_carvalho · 3/10 · 8 July 2007]

After dating a wonderful man, Hope (Nadja Brand) comes back home, sees her daughter Jennifer and goes to sleep. She wakes-up in the woods with a psychopath (Eric Colvin), fighting to survive for more than forty days and asking information about her daughter to the stranger.

"Broken" is a sick, unpleasant and disturbing low budget movie. In spite of having a reference in the beginning of the movie that it is based on a true event, the pointless story is completely flawed, the character of Hope is a total idiot and the schoolgirl is very stupid and annoying. There is no explanation about where they are and how the women have been kidnapped and transported to the middle of nowhere; Hope is an imbecile, and I do not understand how her character does not kill the sadistic maniac when she has the chance and after being tortured the way she had been; the schoolgirl screaming all the time is really irritating, provoking the nasty situation with her tongue. I did not like this gross movie. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "Jogos Sangrentos" ("Bloody Games")

Entertaining

[aliens1986 · 7/10 · 8 March 2007]

The thing with Broken is, despite being a horror movie, I think it only appeals to a select audience. I saw it under the impression that it was a lot like Saw and, although this is true at first, it ends up having more in common with Misery, with a character lead plot. It is very gruesome and also fairly amateur, yet still well made considering these two made the film on no budget. Another problem I had with the film was that they tried to create a complex villain, although he ended up coming across as all over the place. It also seemed at times that gore was just there to keep the audience interested. Overall, I really enjoyed this film, and made for uncomfortable viewing which is great as far as I'm concerned. If you watch this film bear in mind that is not a lot like Saw, it was made on next to budget, and is a valiant attempt at a character-lead horror.

stupid s h i t

[Satan02 · 1/10 · 30 June 2007]

a woman sits at her daughters bed and the next thing we see is that she is somewhere in the woods in a coffin-like box. WTF? there is no connection to ANYTHING in the next part of the movie, except that she has a daughter. then she's bound to a tree with a razor-blade in her stomach which she can pull out and save herself. (i don't think anybody would survive that) i don't need to talk about the other girl having no problems at all after her tongue has been cut out.

this film gets increasingly boring every time the mountain-top-view is shown and we see how many days have passed since the beginning.

i don't know which is worse: this or http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0189456/...

Cruel and Unusual

[SoLove · 9/10 · 3 August 2006]

I saw this film at this year's Dead by Dawn festival in Edinburgh.

You know the way you can watch a trailer, get excited by what you've seen and then be ultimately disappointed when you realise that the best bits were in that trailer? Well every so often a film comes along that bucks that trend and you realise what you have already seen was just a taste.

'Broken' is such a film.

The pace from the start is admirable, we know that a mother loves her daughter, so we're spared interminable scenes showing this. The main character is put in her predicament and we know just as much as she does (nothing). We have to found out information as she does. The film descends into mental one-upsmanship as cat and mouse struggle to get the upper hand.

For those weak stomached viewers... beware. This is a film that doesn't shy away from violence and its effects.. or showing them. People will do desperate and uncharacteristic things in the name of survival and when confronted by a cruel enemy, especially when a child is at stake. The escalating violence mirrors this desperation.

Not a film for everyone but an excellent one for those who enjoy quality genre cinema. Which let's face it, is becoming more and more rare.

9/10 James

Well crafted and very disturbing story of survival

[Indyrod · 7/10 · 6 October 2008]

Here's the simple plot summary...

"After dating a wonderful man, Hope comes back home, sees her daughter Jennifer and goes to sleep. She wakes-up in the woods in a box in a hole, and a psychopath, fighting to survive for more than forty days and asking information about her daughter to the stranger."

It says its based on a true story, and wow, what an ordeal that must have been, because the movie is extremely nasty and disturbing. The short back story of Hope was an add on according to the filmmakers, they were going to start the movie with Hope waking up in a box in a grave, and you don't know who anybody is, which I actually think would have even been better. But moreorless, you still don't know who anybody is, nor do you really care, because this movie is about survival against extremely long odds. The psychopath woodsman, apparently is kidnapping women and putting them through extreme tests to hopefully for him, find one that can be his companion. After waking up, the women are placed hanging on their tiptoes tied by the neck to a tree, and a razor blade has been implanted in their stomachs. The object is, they have to dig out the razor blade through the stitches, cut the rope, and then they are free to pass his other tests. For Hope, the tests don't go much further than that, because the woodsman is impressed with her, and she learns how to cope with the madman, until she figures out a way to escape. The whole beginning credits get the movie off to a very excruciating start, as a previous woman is scene attempting to dig out the razor blade to free herself, with her guts falling out of her belly, and then pleading for the woodsman to kill her. She grabs the trigger of the shotgun in her face, and pulls the trigger, and wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, we are off to the races. It seems the woodsman doesn't actually think he is killing anybody, because he gives them a chance to survive, and if they don't, well, it's their fault for being so weak and stupid. While Hope is being held captive, the woodsman brings in another woman who does not stop crying and begging, which irritates even Hope. Simple enough, he takes a nice long hunting knife and cuts out her tongue and vocal cords. Yea boy, that will fix that problem every time. Wonder if that would have saved one of my marriages?? I'm talking about the wife of course. This movie has been compared to SAW, which is totally misleading. Nothing about the two are similar, except for maybe the tree and razor blade thing, which Jigsaw should have thought of. This movie is very good, very depressing, and even the ending which looks promising, delivers a gut punch that is totally unexpected all the way around. You see, all through this, Hope is concerned more for her daughter than herself, because her daughter disappeared with her, and the woodsman only says her daughter was too weak. The movie is never boring, and very interesting as this strange bizarre woodsman, seems to be only looking for a mate. It does not fall into that idiot genre name torture porn, which I hate, because after the initial scenes, it comes down to a cat and mouse game, with the mouse slowly figuring out how to trap the cat. This is the one with everybody saying how terrible the commentary is, and for only the few minutes I listened to it so far, it does seem to be very annoying.

What a piece of Junk

[mike_panikhouse · 2/10 · 17 September 2007]

First, I love horror films including slasher flicks but there is nothing here. They seemed to have had a decent director of photography and the acting isn't bad but sadly the problem is the film as a whole is pointless, senseless garbage. The point (if in-fact there is one) of the film seems clearly just to shock you with over the top gore and mindless violence, a theme I'm entirely sick of and in my opinion a total waste of film-making dollars. Maybe if they spent at least 5 minutes working out a story and characters it would be a decent film. But they sure as heck did no such thing here. Could have been good but this film will not be remembered.

Broken/ Grim and twisted

[michaeldukey2000 · 23 October 2007]

I just can't agree with the nay sayers on this title. I watch an average of 40 horror films a month so for my taste I can instantly spot something that rises above the crap. True, there are many mysteries and perhaps because of that holes in the movie. The how's and Why's of the situation are never explained but then again a real life victim that is kidnapped,tortured and condition seldom gets a pat answer. The acting is convincing as is the gore and while the story is simple it's never boring.I think some people might have a problem with it's raw non Hollywood feel.SOme may link this to the current trend of "Torture Porn" but this is a far cry from the slick and premeditated madness of Saw or Hostel. THis is actually closer to the seventies horror survival films like Alive,Man In THe WIlderness,I spit on Your Grave and The Town That Dreaded Sundown. With such awful films like the remake of The Invasion Of The Bodysnatchers,The Boogey Man,Hide And Seek and Hostel 2 I am continually perplexed to hear people trash a film like this so indiscriminately. What is your cup of tea,Final Destination 3?

A truly tedious waste of viewing time

[siggy-16 · 1/10 · 11 December 2006]

This film has all the ingredients for a truly tedious experience.Poor acting,senseless violence that has no purpose,even less of a plot(unless the surreal elements are so carefully hidden no one but the director is aware of them)and minimal dialogue. Nothing develops other than a resentment at having paid to see it. Of all the really good horror films made, which did not rely on close exemplars of gratuitous violence, I cannot understand why modern film makers cannot learn from their masters and create high quality films that extend the craft of those who preceded them. Why does everything popular have to be as banal as you can make it. There are still large numbers of film goers who have brains that work and enjoy being intellectually and emotionally challenged. Why are they being overlooked in favour of the mediocre masquerading as some type of new art form. If you want to waste valuable time living on this planet this film might appeal to you, but if your brain still works, give it a wide berth !

Just Annoying

[wilddalidaisy · 2/10 · 7 August 2012]

This movie was so horribly bad I could barely finish it (but I forced myself to finish because I can't leave something unfinished). I had to watch it on mute sometimes just to avoid listening to the terrible lead actress screaming & crying & whining all the time (it made me hope the killer would finish her off quickly). The characters are all unattractive & hard to watch for their poor acting, which I can excuse, I guess, since the movie had a small budget. But, this film also made no sense at all. With little dialogue, a ridiculous plot with no explanations & what looks like hand-cam footage, this film, for me, was a total flop. I'll give a little props to the realistic gore, but that's about all I can do...

How they got funding...I just don't know!!

[chasum · 2/10 · 19 October 2007]

Let me start by saying that this movie was so bad that it inspired me to register as a user on this website and write a review.

This movie is only entertaining for the sick and twisted. I've seen movies like Hostel and Saw before. I would agree those movies are far more gruesome, however they do offer a plot line, which offers the audience some intrigue and interest.

Unfortunately, this movie is just disgusting. It offers absolutely no plot line, not even a piece of a story. The script was horrendous at best. There is also no resolution. On top of which, the killer is also a total incompetent pussy, which is contradictory to movies of its genre.

The only good side to this movie was the acting, which was pretty good for this genre of movie. If nothing else, this is why I give it 2 stars instead of 1.

How they got funding... I just don't know!

A somber story of survival.

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 7 February 2012]

Reasonably riveting tale, ostensibly based on "true events", of young mother Hope (Nadja Brand) who awakes one morning to find that she's been abducted by a creepy, mysterious stranger (Eric Colvin). After he puts her through a gruesome test of sorts, he continues to hold her captive, forcing her to do such errands as tending his garden and washing his pots. Her penalty for not performing such errands to his satisfaction will be severe... It becomes clear how quickly the writers / directors, Adam Mason and Simon Boyes, want to get to the meat and potatoes of this thing, not bothering to reveal just how this abduction went down or what led this stranger to select this woman. The movie isn't really strong on story, however, as it very much turns into a persistently grim battle of wills between these two people. We never see that much of the wilderness, and there is a true bare minimum of main characters; therefore, this is something that could work just as well on stage. Due to these elements, there is a true sense of intimacy to these proceedings. These characters truly are isolated in this little corner of the world (the movie was filmed on location in Cambridgeshire, England). It's a fairly good movie for gore lovers to watch as there are some powerful scenes of violence certain to catch their attention, not that they will be spoiled here. But this is most often a movie of psychological torture; the movie is drab looking but this does suit the tone of the material. The two main actors do a fine job. Colvin is rather spooky, while the appealing and sexy Brand makes Hope a person worth rooting for, especially as she starts to wise up to the realities of her situation, her fear dissipates, and her resolve strengthens. One thing that's intriguing here is the resolution, which achieves the combination of being happy and downbeat at the same time, as a hoped- for outcome actually comes at a price. "Broken" doesn't, when all is said and done, really rise above average, but is still reasonably entertaining for this sort of thing. It's worth a look, anyway. Seven out of 10.

Another over ambitious wannabe

[pyrofanatic · 1/10 · 7 December 2006]

This movie is yet another that has been poorly made by a fan of films, who cannot execute one properly. A film student maybe? OK, the camera work is good and the overall quality of the picture is good, but this film has no real point. The acting is terrible and this film is full of moments that will have you shouting at the screen in annoyance. Moments where the actress has ample opportunity to escape her captor but just cries and wails constantly. The worst unrealistic part of the film is where the girl gets her tongue cut out. She covers her mouth and collapses, only to be fine and eating food the next day! Surely someone with their tongue cut out in some woods and chained to a tree, would bleed to death rapidly? The movie is full of these inconsistencies and is very unrealistic and pretty pointless, solely relying on lots of fake blood and a few gory bits to carry it. I got the feeling that maybe the director has tried to make this film very arty, with funny camera angles and out of focus parts. It doesn't work. I wouldn't recommend this film unless you enjoy watching pointless unrealistic gore. Surely in 2006 we are past the need to be entertained by lots of fake blood and people having their legs broken etc? It takes more to make a great movie than cheap gore. A coherent storyline and an overall ending point perhaps?

Fun for psychology majors!

[exploremn · 7/10 · 20 October 2007]

DON'T READ IF YOU DON'T LIKE SPOILERS This movie was interesting from several viewpoints. First, it shows how social conditioning or conforming to the social norms can be detrimental to your survival. The main character, Hope, had a chance to get away and because of her inability to kill her captor she ends up getting recaptured and tortured some more. The school girl or whatever she was is a complete idiot that screams for several days straight. A feat that is probably impossible to do without losing your voice. There were several things that just didn't make sense. Like if you are in the middle of the woods and you are leaving in a direction, keeping in mind a circle is 360 degrees, what are the chances you would walk straight into a little shack containing your kid? Why would both girl's, given their chance to escape only attempt to injure the captor considering he tortured them in very inhuman ways, why wouldn't they kill him? Why didn't the daughter warn the mother? How did the wounds NOT get infected considering all the dirt, grit, and germs that would have easily gotten into the system? Meh...it was at least entertaining.

Wow.

[bigbadduude · 1/10 · 3 October 2007]

Alright. So...had they done this film for 500 dollars, i would have given them props for trying and said it was pretty friggin' excellent. But it says they spent 500 000 British pounds on it. What the hell did they spend it on??? That's almost a million US dollars. That fog machine and the spotlight behind the trees must have been pretty damn expensive. Not to mention the consumer camcorder they filmed this dog crap on. A soap opera looks better than that. Anyways, to the story...I guess the man in the hat was supposed to the villain? I sure as hell was cheering whenever he beat the crap out of that ugly ass blonde big-nosed whiny twit. All she did was scream whenever she was lucky enough to be getting away. Total moron, and a crappy actress as well. She totally deserved to die, and in a perfect world, she would have died in the first 3 minutes into the film. Also the brunette he brought over that kept on screaming for 3 days, I was really hoping he'd slit her throat and not just cut her tongue out. Man was she annoying. The end was also fantastic, I'm not even going to get into it. Please avoid this film like a plague, this garbage isn't even bad-good.

Will you go on?

[Hereismandypandy · 8/10 · 5 July 2006]

Broken shows us a man who is systematically putting a stream of young women through graphically horrific trials in isolated woods in order to test their strength. It seems as if he's searching for a woman strong enough live at his side as his partner. And it seems he's aware you need to break someone down before you can rebuild them into something you desire. Clearly, the qualities 'physically and mentally strong' and 'subservant' are at odds with each other. This is something 'the man' has taken in to account, figuring ritual abuse, humiliation and demonstrations that if you try to fight back, you'll pay the price will be enough to mix this oil and water. He's wrong. But then, just perhaps, he always had a back up plan anyway... isn't it always best to change behaviour before it's set in stone?

Grim viewing (possibly difficult if you're not acquainted with fairly extreme horror imagery) and leaves you pondering. This is the best work by a long shot so far to come from the Brand-Mason stable, and perhaps will be the film to 'put them on the map'.

Solid horror flick

[curtbling · 7/10 · 15 May 2008]

Upside: I enjoyed this movie throughout. The box art always caught my eyes and I do say, break the stitches to see the sight for sore eyes. When I watched the movie, I made a comparison that this movie was a combination of 'Saw' and 'Wolf Creek'. If you have ever heard of 'Stockholm Syndrome', this movie's plot fits its very definition.

Downside: The camera angles are a little strange at times, I wanted to say something like a soap opera. I will also point out that sometimes the lead actor overacts her part, to the point where I laughed. Considering the circumstances at the time and the horror around her, I really should not have even chuckled.

Overall: I gave it a 7/10. I would say watch it, put it in the dusty DVD rack and break it out from occasion to make a few friends lose their lunch. If you cannot handle or understand a grizzly horror film, don't waste your time.

Don't waste your time watching this movie.

[springer1450 · 1/10 · 15 September 2007]

.

It seems the Directors were in way over their heads. Poorly Directed, Poorly Filmed, Poorly Written, and Poorly Acted. I understand it was low budget and all that, but come on... First year Film Students could have done better. Small wonder it went straight to DVD. And another thing... the "Special Features" part is one of the most Inane, Juvenile ramblings from a "Director?Writer" I have ever seen/heard. He even goes as far as threaten physical violence against critics that have posted negative reviews of his film on the web. They should stick to making Music Videos...

.