Rabid (2019) User Reviews

A brave attempt but falls short of a good remake

[mungflesh · 4/10 · 1 September 2019]

Remaking a movie by a guy who was talented enough to create one of the great all-time remakes is ballsy and almost bound to fail. Rabid is close to being a good remake but has too many issues for my liking.

The story: a beautiful fashion designer has a life-changing accident and is doomed to a future of ugliness, unless she undergoes an experimental operation which has unforseen side-effects for her and the city around her ...

It's a cool premise, as was with the original but the pacing is way off. It takes too long to get off the ground and then when it does, lacks focus and seems to be telling two distinct stories rather than one, whereas Cronenberg's movie has a much sharper narrative.

There are a few grisly scenes but not immensly eye-opening for something that really should have people squirming.

The lead actress is good and, on the whole, the acting is solid but let down in a few places by some support roles. The editing could be a lot slicker; some scenes just felt dragged out and irrelevant.

I think it's worth checking out if you like the original but I'd be surprised if many people hail this as a big success.

blame the directors

[surfisfun · 4/10 · 2 December 2019]

Not close to the original atmosphere and tempo, very disappointed of the works of directors since American maRY I SUGGEST to check the 70s version first.

Medicore

[bastos · 5/10 · 19 September 2020]

I'm not a huge fan of the Soska sisters. Their most acclaimed movie, American Mary, doesn't do anything for me other than show some potential, and I usually don't like remakes, so as you can see, I'm not the target viewer for this film. I must say that it started horribly, terrible directon, terrible make up, the rhythm was completely off, and the performances were at soap opera level (which I blame on the directors). But after a while the movie started getting some momentum and things started getting better, with some genuinely good shocks and some nice make up effects (I especially like the face after the accident), but that was not enough to salvage the movie and it ended on a sour note with a pretty bad ending. Overall, the low budget and bad direction don't allow this to be more than a mediocre experience of a totally unnecessary remake.

It's the pits.

[BA_Harrison · 2/10 · 25 October 2019]

They might be rabid horror fans, but the Soska sisters were a poor choice for directors of the first-ever remake of a David Cronenberg movie. Cronenberg is a true innovator of horror, having directed more than a few genuine classics; the Soska Sisters, (or 'Twisted Twins', as they like to market themselves) have one decent film to their name(s) - American Mary - the bulk of their output ranging from the mediocre (slasher sequel See No Evil 2) to the downright awful (Tarantino inspired exploitation trash Dead Hooker In A Trunk). Rabid is possibly their worst film yet.

Set in the world of high fashion, Rabid 2019's central character is Rose (Laura Vandervoort), an aspiring designer hoping to get her work noticed by her boss, Günter (Mackenzie Gray). One night, while leaving an event, Rose is involved in an accident that leaves her face horribly disfigured; however, after volunteering for revolutionary stem cell treatment, Rose's natural beauty is restored, and better still, Günter chooses her designs for his latest show. Life would be perfect if it wasn't for Rose's strange hallucinations, her newfound hunger for blood, and the vicious tentacle that lives in her armpit.

Clumsy direction, gimmicky editing, an overlong running time, obnoxious characters, a ham-fisted tribute to Cronenberg's Dead Ringers, and weak make-up effects all contribute to a hellish viewing experience, but what made this film really unbearable for me were the fashionistas and the models, all of whom could have come straight out of cult comedy Zoolander (or worse still, Zoolander 2). If I thought for a minute that the Soskas were going for giggles, then I would probably think better of the film, but I don't think this is the case: any laughs seem to be purely unintentional. Günter is an embarrassingly bad caricature -- Will Ferrell's Mugatu is positively normal by comparison -- and the scene where Rose slashes at a dress with scissors to realise her boss's vision would be genius if this were a satire. But it's not.

I honestly think that the Soska's believe their own hype, but as the film descends into asinine zombie territory, it becomes clearer and clearer that the twins have bitten off way more than they can chew. The final scene, in which Rose discovers the true horror of her condition, is let down by more terrible make-up effects and the directors' misguided belief that they have crafted a truly shocking movie. The only thing that is shocking about this film is that it got made in the first place.

It could've been so much better.

[ronnievanrijswijk · 6/10 · 25 October 2019]

I'm not the biggest fan of remakes or reimaginings but i wanted to watch a movie in the evening and i thought let's give Rabid a chance, since it's based on the work of Cronenberg. I thought it was really well made for the first 45 minutes, i thought it was going to be an arthouse movie since they focused so much on the main character (and her struggle) who suffers from facial deformity which was caused by an accident. And then came the moment where they came up with a great scene which definitely pays tribute to Cronenberg's Dead Ringers, which is one of my favorite scenes from Rabid. After that the movie slowly turns into mediocrity, i love horror but i didn't expected that they would ruin the second half of the movie by turning it into a zombie movie. A real turn off if you ask me, any work of Cronenberg doesn't deserve to be treated like this. There were a few interesting points towards the end but it doesn't save the movie as a whole, what a shame.

Another remake BOMB.

[mhorg2018 · 1/10 · 18 November 2019]

I don't know where the Soska sisters get their rep. Are people afraid, in this day and age to be honest in criticism of them because they're women? Their first movie American Mary was overrated, but way better than this trash pile of a movie. Overlong, boring and with some horrible acting - where did they get that doctor? If it were the real world, I'd say Nazis are us, he's so obviously a tool. The movie meanders about at a leisurely pace as if the editor or the directors were taking the day off. If one has the guts to remake a DAVID CRONENBURG, the master of body horror, film they have to go way better than this. Perhaps one day, studios and backers will say no to remakes, which are basically lazy films, hopefully that day is soon.

Good spin-off of the source material

[influxtwo · 7/10 · 8 October 2019]

This reimagining of the Cronenberg-Marilyn Chambers classic is actually quite a guilty treat on it's own and a surprise. It wraps all the themes and elements together of the source material and does it with flair. The lead actress was great in the role and paralleled the emotions of what you felt like while watching Marilyn Chambers in her original peril. The music and cinematography was better than expected. Though there were some moments of cheese I felt they fit with the theme well enough even going in to B-Movie SciFi realm a bit. Overall this film impressed me for the expectations I had and I find it may very well be the Soska sister's finest work to date.

A Rabid Misfire!

[single-123 · 1/10 · 26 August 2019]

Jen and Sylvia Soska decided that for their fifth feature film, they would attempt to be the first filmmakers to remake a David Cronenberg film. In this particular case, his 1977 film, Rabid.

I sat through the world premiere of the film at the 2019 FrightFest Film Festival, and the result was witnessing one of the worst genre films of the year to hit the big screen, and more proof that often, remakes suck. Rabid was way worse than I expected it to be. I wanted to like it. I was hoping it would be good. But what a perplexing mess of a film! From the odd opening scene, to the smash-cut title card, to the out-of-place drone shot of a city, the red flags were already waving mere minutes in.

Rabid is way too long (one has to sit through about 35 minutes of eye-rolling before it sort of gets going), horribly shot and poorly lit . The tone is all over the map. The confusing narrative shines as the film doesn't know what it wants to be. I doubt Rabid's supposed to come off "funny" either - maybe unintentionally funny? If so, I'm not laughing. But, it does. From silly hospital scenes, to cringe-worthy performances (if only the surgeon had a mustache to twirl on or the laughable bad fashion designer, Gunter) to the cat-walk shoot-out to a pointless third act which feels like there were plans for a substantial/ambitious sequence but it wound up scaled back for various reasons, and winds up feeling like it's tacked on.

I laughed out loud at a couple parts (especially the "hey let's give homage to Dead Ringers" because why not, don't we have to? Pointless). The Soskas are trying so hard to get validation from Cronenberg, that they forgot to focus on the film. Are we supposed to laugh at this? Was there someone responsible for continuity? Details? Editing? Yikes. The Soska sisters should be embarrassed.

If the Soska sisters spent the time on their craft as "filmmakers" as they do with their rabid (excuse the pun) fanbase, they might have had something coherent to write and produce about/with. But with each subsequent film since 2012's American Mary, the Soska sisters are proving they are really are a fluke. A one-hit wonder. Perhaps they should stick to game show hosting because they do have the personalities and a knack for that. All showmanship, no substance.

In the end, RABID winds up a five-million dollar dumpster fire (seriously, where did the money go??) and the first Cronenberg film to be infected with crappy remake labeling. The Soskas certainly achieved that with the film. Perhaps one day, someone else will come along and remake Cronenberg properly, because he's not off to a good start.

Just ok

[scoxey · 6/10 · 3 January 2022]

Typical. Fairly well done but sort of all over the place. Super funny unintended scene towards the end. Worth a watch. More sci-fi than terror with a bit of a soap opera feel.

A-W-F-U-L

[kopower · 1/10 · 24 November 2019]

Had a glimmer of promise and they rode that glimmer straight into the toilet. Don't waste tour time

Didn't see the original - fresh eyes

[RanDizzle1198 · 8/10 · 25 January 2020]

Because I never saw the original I kind of have a fresh look at this film. While some of it was silly, for the most part I really liked this little gem. I'm so sorry that so many of you hated it because the original was 'better', but going in with fresh eyes and a fresh perspective allowed me to enjoy this grizzly tale.

Be well and I hope you enjoy the next film you watch much more!!!

Re-Imagening

[kosmasp · 6/10 · 11 November 2019]

I thought it was important to watch the original. I couldn't do that beforehand, but only after I watched the Soska sisters remake. But it is different in many aspects so it wasn't too bad doing it this way (I usually like to watch an original first and then the remake if I can). The effects here obviously up the ante, but the original had some great ones too.

One of the main differences here is that we get to learn our main actress first, before the inciting incident. This may feel like time wasted or as a nice little touch. Let's go for the latter. The Soskas do have an affinity for Cronenberg and you can tell. They also assembled a nice cast overall, even though someone like CM Punk (can't recall his real name) is quite a cardboard cutout and very cliche for example. But you can tell he has fun with his litle role as is anyone else involved.

The Soskas did change enough for it to make sense to watch both movies. So if you are into horror movies, and don't mind a bit of social commentary thrown in for good measure, you could do worse

Inexcusable

[Charliexnev · 2/10 · 4 November 2019]

This literally looks like a Lifetime or Hallmark movie... The editing, cinematography, directing choices, and half the acting are exactly what you would expect if hallmark tried to make a horror rather than a christmas film this year. Some of the scenes are full on something you would expect to see in a student film!

and dear lord... If the Soska's keep insisting to act in their own movies they should really take some acting lessons.

many of the scenes that are supposed to be scary come off as funny for how silly and poorly executed they are.. The way they handled the crash and the first time the tentacle emerges were so bad I burst out laughing, the face prosthetic was clearly a rushed job that again takes the viewer away with how un convincing it was, the acting is so consistently cheesy that it must have been a directing choice rather than the will of the actors(who I have seen kick ass in other movies), and the sheer amount of blatant stock footage shots again made it feel more like a lifetime movie.

I was excited for this film when I heard that Paula Fairfield was doing sound design (did sound for the dragons and creatures in Game of Thrones) But it's clear she only worked on a few creature scenes amounting to probably no more than 8 minutes of screen time, because all the other sound was, again, just as generic and boring as a lifetime movie.

it's clear that American Mary was a fluke for being such a great movie, because every other project they've done got worse and worse.

The only thing that genuinely impressed me was some of the practical effects, prosthetics , and set pieces in the final 10 mins of the film. but even then, those effects were still surrounded by more poor cine and editing.

Basically the Soska's achieved with $5 million what some film school graduates achieve for free during their end of year projects.

Deliberately bad?

[Delrvich · 1/10 · 29 November 2019]

Add: Far too many continuity errors to be coincidental. This is schlock. Jun 01. 2021.

See review for Dead Hooker In A Trunk.

--- Probably one of those movies that seems to be deliberately bad, like The Room (2003), to possibly appeal to a niche audience (the "its so bad I enjoyed it" crowd).

It had "continuity errors" from beginning to end. And, IMO they didn't add to the appeal of the characters, satire, or plot. So, either they intentionally inserted them or a few people noticed but chose to keep quiet.

The movie did have a great pro-vegan message in the final quarter. -

Some of the continuity errors:

After Rose awakes in hospital meeting her doctor, she requests to see her wounds. She reels in horror and Doctor calmly says "I would strongly suggest staying away from mirrors right now".

Rose wears the same bloodied bandages throughout her stay in the hospital.

Much later, Brad and Rose go on lunch date which is awkward, then are suddenly attacked by rabid zombie who is hammered bloody by Brad.

A few scenes later, Brad sees Rose and asks what was troubling her at their lunch date but not about the zombie that came at her through the diner window.

Even later, Rose goes into an alley for a break and collapses. Two curious males come up her and she takes one of them out with her "appendage" which is seen by Brad. Rose is taken back indoors where she resuscitates. Brad asks her what she is doing up, not mentioning the 5ft snake writhing from her armpit.

Only for soska fans

[ahmedrockinblues · 6/10 · 12 November 2019]

I am one. Soska sisters have their own colors and angles to capture visuals and i love their vision, like the red kinda religious attire at the surgery table.Quirky , i would say..otherwise mundane

Gruelling and superficial

[Leofwine_draca · 3/10 · 8 February 2020]

RABID is my favourite early Cronenberg film - it captures a coldly clinical and gritty kind of '70s horror in a perfect way, similar to the works of Romero from the era. So when I heard that the directors of AMERICAN MARY were making a new version, I wasn't particularly interested. How would it improve? The answer is it doesn't, not by a long shot, and instead it turns out to be typically cheap and digital-looking and entirely routine. The film shares superficial similarities with the likes of THE NEON DEMON, another overrated yawner, but turns out to be nothing more than an exercise in bloodshed and mayhem. It might be gruelling but it's also largely depressing, with superficial writing and nobody to root for throughout. A waste of time, then.

A rabid changing fashion.

[morrison-dylan-fan · 7/10 · 9 November 2019]

Checking to see if any special Horror screenings were taking place over Halloween, I was thrilled to find that The Electric in Birmingham (oldest working cinema in the UK) were holding a special "Cine-Excess" event in November, which would feature a double bill of attending directors Jen and Sylvia Soska, and Norman J. Warren.

After a memorable awards ceremony where the film makers got glass trophies,one of which broke in two after it slipped out of one of the Soska's hands (!) I got set for a rabid remake.

View on the film:

Mentioning in the pre-screening intro that before this project had landed on their desk they had actually started looking for none-movie related jobs, due to the "gross" factor of American Mary (2012-also reviewed) putting studios (such as The CW) off from hiring them, co-writers/(with John Serge) co-directors Jen and Sylvia Soska make a welcomed return to the big screen with a blend of gory Body Horror,and the clinical body modification art of American Mary. Closely working with cinematographer Kim Derko, the Soska's brush Rose's altered face with close-ups on the excellent practical effects.

Changing the setting to the fashion industry, the Soska's & Derko stylishly use glass to reflect the pristine appearance of the fashion industry being torn to ribbons by gashes of pulpy gore seeping across the screen.

Touching on American Mary's theme of people trying to be comfortable in their own skin, the screenplay by the Soska's and Serge twirl the rapid hunger of Cronenberg's Body Horror with a wonderfully rich cynical line of the fashion industry, where Rose (a terrific, breezy Laura Vandervoort) finds herself forced to having to dress to impress, even when a excellent sound design by Paula Fairfield crunches on the consuming infection rapidly changing Rose.

Deflated

[fireblade-13487 · 2/10 · 26 November 2019]

This film has more questions than answers.. a majority of the cast were plucked from a b movie extras list. It needed to be more in your face. At best it was more in your farce. A poor remake..

Pretty good remake that is going to go unotice

[kaefab · 7/10 · 8 October 2019]

I saw the first movie made in 1977 with Mary line Chambers , as any Cronnenberg movie it was quit provocative and original.

Of course this remake does not live up to the original but its pretty entertaining in itself, the effects are really good gore and all, and its got a good finish.

Was quit funny to see CM Punk acting in is real persona, like a douch that he is hahha, and a few known faces from the horror gender b movie.

Wow BAD with TONS of FAKE Good Reviews

[arfdawg-1 · 1/10 · 14 November 2019]

This is perhaps the WORST movie of 2019.

Thinly veiled re working of Cronenberg's GOOD Rabid. Surprised he didnt sue their ashes off if just because this is an abomination of film making.

Don't waste your time or believe the fake reviews here.

Gory Horror/Satire

[Pairic · 8/10 · 22 September 2019]

Rabid: A remake of the Cronenberg horror film. If anything this one is even more gruesome. When Rose (Laura Vandervoort) is horribly disfigured in a road accident we see every detail when the bandages come off. Rose goes for experimental stem cell treatment at an Institute run by Dr Burroughs (Ted Atherton) which has unexpected results. Rose develops a craving for blood and has strange nightmares about attacking and biting people. Burroughs is more of a Dr Moreau than a Dr Frankenstein and has a sinister agenda.

While Rose is vampiric her victims act like zombies, devouring the victims they don't just infect. Soon the city is being overrun by a plague of rabid biters. Funny scenes of a rabid Santa on the loose in a hospital and an arrogant womaniser encountering Rose. There is also a pretty good satire on the fashion industry and the facile nature of beauty and celebrity. Gory Horror/Comedy/Satire directed and written by Jen and Sylvia Soska. 8/10.

Decent Remake

[MsGoreXale3723 · 7/10 · 24 April 2020]

I love the Soska Sisters. I love their movies and I liked this movie. They definitely have their own style. Probably recommended for fans of the sisters. If not, you probably won't like it. Don't compare this movie with American Mary. That's the problem with a lot of these reviews. Just watch it as it's own movie. It's not the original which is hard to beat. But I don't think it deserves to be ripped apart. Watch both movies and don't compare it to American Mary. There's blood and violence. It's horror. What does everyone expect? I was entertained and there were some cool scenes, so I got what I wanted in this movie.

Slow, Bad Directing And Story, and a Stupid Ending

[J-Kidin · 1/10 · 22 May 2020]

Ugh! What's to like? The film quality is good. Other than that...poop.

The directors are touted as amazing but this is the second film I've seen with their style and they Still stink. One shot is filmed with a dirty glass taking up half the screen. Really? That's their "awesome" style- something a 3rd grader might do... by accident! The directors also steal heavily from Silent Hill, but do a poorer version. Sad, it's been done many times before and even their version is extremely dull and bad.

The story is slow, dull and stupid. They never really explain what was done to the lead actress that would give everyone she bites rabies. If they crossbred her with something that gave her rabies, it's not going to be anything resembling what we see in the end. It's not fun even fully shown, and seems to change concept throughout the movie, like they couldn't make up their mind what it was. Do sea creatures even get rabies? Hahahaha

And typical of a crap horror movie, the writers/directors (same people) couldn't come up with a creative or somewhat logical ending.

Overall, this movie stinks and felt like a waste of time to sit through such crap writing and directing of a crap story.

Judge for yourself.

[metalbeard · 5/10 · 18 February 2020]

I'm a big David Cronenberg fan but I've always felt that Rabid was one of his weakest efforts. That the Soska twins chose this one to remake cannot be faulted. Since Cronenberg himself did a remake, let's not be overly judgmental. The twins do an okay job but don't really add anything to the original concept. I liked this Rabid slightly more than the original but neither of them are going to set the world on fire. All these low reviewers are hateful asshats. Watch and judge for yourself.

Don't compare to the original!

[singhlall · 7/10 · 13 September 2020]

A decent standalone horror. If you don't compare to the original you will find a well made body horror with some good performances and special effects. Horror is not an Oscar category so switch off and enjoy the ride. Well done Soska Sisters!