Headless (I) (2015) User Reviews

Wasted Potential

[dcroman · 4/10 · 29 October 2018]

I write this review as a horror fan, seeking to inform other horror fans of what to expect with this film.

I'll be brief: like so many others here, I am drawn to extreme cinema, with visceral, shocking sequences of gore and violence. Honestly, I'm even down for cheesy, B-Movie style special effects. I love practical special effects, I love slashers, I love horror, and I love films that seek to push the limits. Naturally, Headless made its way onto my radar by seemingly checking all of these boxes. Like others, I had heard a lot of hype about this film, and was very excited to get my hands on it. (Minor spoilers ahead)

First the positive: The first 10ish minutes of this film are truly shocking and captivating moments of violent cinema. There are some unforgettable images in there, such as the killer sitting underneath the blood pouring from a body above him, the removal and eating of eyes, the infamous "head-hump", etc. The grain-y, 70s film visuals really work here, and the vibe is chilling and effective. A grim, fantastic start.

Now the bad: Not only does the film go absolutely nowhere here, but it's shown you most of its tricks and surprises right out of the gate. There's more eye-eating, more decapitation, more severed-head-copulation, but its nowhere near as effective as the first sequence. The directing gets really questionable here too, especially during kill scenes (disorienting is one thing...sloppy is another entirely). There's a backstory, but its pretty boring and predictable. There are other characters, but the cheesy acting and dialogue rarely comes off as funny/charming, and is almost always forgettable. It becomes clear almost immediately that this idea cannot sustain a full film. And yet here we are.

At the end of the day, this film's cardinal sin is simple: it's boring. Despite all of the gore and torture, this film will really struggle to capture your attention, and for a film like this, that's really not a good sign. It just goes to show that there needs to be SOMETHING more in order for a film to be truly shocking, sick and scary, and that "something" is not recycling the same 5 special effects tricks over and over.

The first 10 minutes are worth your time. After that, switch to something else. Truly wasted potential.

Not a movie for just anyone...

[paul_haakonsen · 4/10 · 11 February 2024]

I had never heard about this 2015 movie titled "Headless" prior to sitting down to watch it here in 2024. I figured that it was going to be a horror movie of sorts, given the movie's cover. But I have to admit that I was harboring zero expectations to the movie when I sat down to watch it.

Writers Nathan Erdel and Todd Rigney rather unique storyline and script. It is something that will not find a wider appeal to the general audience, given the graphic contents of the scenes and events in the storyline. But I am sure that there will be horror and gore fans out there that will find enjoyment in the script.

It is a pretty slow paced narrative. I had to check how far into the movie I was at a point, because it felt like I had been sitting through 90 minutes already, and it turned out that I was only 45 minutes into the 85 minutes run time. And I have to say that it was this incredibly slow narrative that killed the movie for me.

Of course I wasn't familiar with a single actor or actress on the cast list. And that is actually something that I enjoy when I sit down to watch a movie. However, it isn't like you're in for any Award winning performances throughout the course of "Headless". Some of the acting performances were fair enough, I will give the movie that much.

Some of the effects in the movie are good, and they are rather bloody and gory. And that, yes, that definitely spoke very well in favor of the movie, and helped to make the movie all the more bearable to sit through. I would actually say that "Headless" is worth watching for the gory visual effects alone.

It should be noted, however, that "Headless" is a not a movie that is for the faint or those easily offended, because there are some pretty disturbing imagery and scenes throughout the course of the movie.

"Headless" is a low budget movie, and it shows on the screen.

My rating of director Arthur Cullipher's 2015 movie "Headless" lands on a very generous four out of ten stars. Gore, brutality and grotesque imagery can only carry a movie so far.

Average

[r_manmdy · 5/10 · 23 June 2019]

I don't get the hype that some people write about. The movie is average and somewhat boring. The acting and dialogue (for what there is) are not so good. The story is also dull and gets repetitive. But, there are also some good things to say. Practical fx are on point and the music is well done.

Indeed a movie for real lovers of the genre, but it isn't groundbreaking.

Boring even at 1.25 speed.

[itrevorallen · 3/10 · 15 September 2021]

From the director of Found (2012), a great piece of horror cinema that explored relations between an elder brother (murderer) and younger sibling, comes this train wreck.

I had high expectations for this film, as I loved the brutality met with character relationships and development that was found. However, this film fell short, very very short, of my expectations.

This film lacked any significant plot or conflict, and instead depicted simple blood and gore tactics; something that's been done a million times before. So if your looking for another run of the mill gore plotless horror film; this should hit the spot. If not, I'd advise moving your attention to Found and stopping it there.

Follow up.. Even the murder methods and gore scenes in this film were repeats of Found's "Headless" movie depiction. We get it, guy likes to eat eyeballs that go squish, and explore severed heads with his eggplant.

3/10 no effort film, bad acting, recycled gore.

Just a guy raping severed heads. Horror has been done much better than this.

[gand7 · 1/10 · 8 September 2016]

So sometimes you watch a movie and you wonder what might have possibly been involved in the creative process leading up to the development of a motion picture and this one certainly seems to be simple to me. I'd imagine it was a group of guys sitting around a table and the conversation went a little something like this:

"So... how do we make a slasher movie stand out of the crowd?" "I know! We make it really EXTREME! The media always talks about extreme movies!" "So how do we do that? It sounds like a lot of effort." "Nah, we'll just put a bunch of stuff in that everybody hates." "So what does everybody hate?" "Oooh, everybody hates cannibals!" "And rapists! Even more if they're necrophiliacs!" "And torturers!" "Great! Make our bad guy all of those things and make it as gross as possible! We're done!" "Better throw in some incestuous undertones, too, that'll make it seem deeper and more complex." "Great idea! Now let's draw straws and see who has to go home and write the script tonight."

That's pretty much the vibe I got from this movie. I forced myself to sit through it to the end because I can't take a review seriously when somebody says "I turned it off half way" and that's that, but I really would have loved to.

I adore horror movies, but when the writers and directors just play the "gross" card it is the least creative, insulting, lazy, slipshod cash grab that a horror movie can be. It's also essentially a middle finger in the face of the genre's audience, and it's one we've come to expect more than any other genre audience out there, unfortunate as that is.

If you're going to watch this, I genuinely can say watch the first ten minutes and you've essentially seen the whole movie. It is entirely just a serial killer, cannibal, necrophiliac psychopath torturing women, decapitating them, eating their eyeballs and having sex with the severed heads and that is the entire movie. If that sounds like something you'd enjoy, have fun. I'd suggest not watching it around family or friends, though. It won't leave them with a healthy impression of you as a stable human being.

It was OK. Over the top grossout gore fest.

[rollwithit-35445 · 20 September 2015]

3rd review tonight. Reviewing a bunch of Indiana made movies because yeah I live here. This review as with the others, I factor in that these are really low budget movies with really no recognizable actors.

This movie was just repulsive. And I think thats the point. But they used the same gimmick too many times.

How many severed heads can you rape and it still be shocking? two? three? It seemed like it happened like 50 times. and by the 50th time I just didn't care.

Decent story though. Showing how the killer became who he was was interesting. Acting was OK. The sleazy roller rink guy and the blond female were pretty good. The kid with the skull mask was super creepy. He made the scenes he was in SO much better. Great 70s grindhousy look and feel to the movie. The filmmakers nailed that in my opinion. Worth a watch.

Such a missed opportunity...will appeal to 15 year-old Rob Zombie fans

[Bead1971 · 1/10 · 6 June 2018]

After watching "Found", I had such high hopes for this movie. Unfortunately, this movie will fade into the forgotten realms that poorly executed horror films fall into. First of all, this movie 'looks' amazing. It looks like the 70's and captures that vibe so well. Even the villains look almost classic from a horror perspective. But once a director goes to the cheap gore, you know they have nothing left in their toolkit, and that's too bad. This movie could have been a cult favorite or even a classic horror. But just shock for the sake of shock, you know the director has no clue on how to create suspense or tension. And don't get me wrong, gore doesn't bother me at all. I just recognize when directors go there and offer nothing else, you realize they are in over their head. I'm sure this movie will appeal to 15 year old Rob Zombie fans, but surely it's a missed opportunity for building a cult following for those who want more out of their horror movies.

But I'm holding out hope Arthur Cullipher's next movie will be much more sophisticated, as he is able to make a great looking movie. He just needs to focus more on the story and what matters most to horror fans who want more than easy, cheap gore.

Delightful gory nastyness

[ronnievanrijswijk · 7/10 · 2 August 2020]

The gory tale of an insane psychopath who was turned into a monster because of his horrible childhood, he goes around slaughtering women (sometimes men if they're in his way). It's just an absolute gorefest combined with other shocking acts of depravity, well it's very over the top but i enjoyed it. They also give you a glimpse into the maniac's psyche as well (which i won't spoil), there's a short plot of the supposed protagonist and her stoner boyfriend to fill the movie up but in the end we just want to see the killer mauling and slaughtering girls. Enough of me glorifying the gore, it's technically well made. The actors do their best but in the end it's just B acting, i think that Shane Beasly's the one who keeps everything interesting with his mad overacting. Are you a gore fan, just buy it once you find it anywhere. I asure you that it's anything but average.

Dingy, disgusting and forgettable

[Groverdox · 3/10 · 10 July 2018]

"Headless" is one of those grubby little horror movies that looks like it was made with a few effects, gallons of blood, and people who owed the filmmaker a favour.

It's sickening and tedious in equal measure.

The 'plot' is something to do about a depraved maniac who was kept in a cage by his sadistic mother and now wears a mask and kills people.

The movie is actually less concerned with the 'kills' than what he does to the bodies afterwards. Repeatedly, he decapitates the corpses (hence the title, I guess) and then appears to have sex with the neck hole. He also often removes the bodies' right eye and eats it, the camera showing white fluid from the eyeball running down his mask.

Something else about the movie, which is easily forgotten because it adds nothing to the experience, is that it is presented as a lost film from 1978. The only possible use for this contrivance is that it justifies the movie's dingy production value and the fact that the entire movie seems to have been filmed through mud - as today's filmgoers may believe movies made in the seventies actually were.

Hell, the original "Halloween" and "Last House on the Left" were actually filmed in the seventies and on a shoe-string budget, and they didn't look this bad.

If you like slashers, just watch the movie.

[kdog195 · 7/10 · 10 August 2015]

This film was everything that a lover of the slasher sub-genre enjoys: gore, nudity, blood, and limbs being sawed off. The film overall was pretty typical, but it held a few pretty unique tweaks that you don't see very often in a slasher film. I wont give too much away, but just how the killer toys with Jess at the end, and the childhood story throughout the film are cool little bits that made this movie stand out. However, the one complaint that I just can't get over is the sub par acting. Now, not get me wrong, I understand that this was supposed to be a lost 70s slasher film (which were notorious for bad acting), but it just got distracting. If you haven't seen the film Found, which this movie is more or less from, I would suggest watching it as it supplements Headless as a whole.

Headless More Like Plotless.

[DarkSpotOn · 2/10 · 3 October 2023]

Two stars only for two reasons: Some of the gore effects are alright, and the first victim and Jess look hot. Everything else in this movie was terrible. I actually really enjoyed Found, because Found has a message it's trying to send out, and the plot really wasn't that bad. This in other hand was nearly plotless.

The plot makes no logic. A mother and her daughter are torturing her child son, because she deemed him as evil, and cuz her husband left him??? That makes zero logic, and then the sister wants to have intercourse with her brother, and she lets him go? The same man she pissed on, and tortured him with her mom, she lets him go?? Of course he is going to kill you, where's your logic?

Then the screaming, we get constant scenes of the killer just screaming for no reason, and i had to turn the volume down to nothing, and he still yells like a infant. In this movie you'll see eyeballs being pulled out, about 5 times! You know instead of having 5 average eyeball scenes, why not focus and make one good eyeball scene that looks realistic like in Guinea Pig, that eyeball scene was actually terrifying, or Mai Chan Daily Life eyeball scene.

Lets talk about our victims? None of them have any depth, and none of them have any personality. All of them are there for the sake of being there, and none of them seem to care. They are forced into this movie.

What made Headless a sinister good watch in Found, is it was made as a Snuff Film, it was similar to Guinea Pig, Grotesque and The Butcher, here we got a slasher gore nonsense boredom fest. Hey if you are one of the people that likes crap like The Collector and Crazy Murder and slashers in general, this is for you. As for me, no. Really i just wasted my time with this.

Bloody, violent, uncompromising and yet a fun ride for seasoned horror fans

[DVD_Connoisseur · 10/10 · 25 February 2015]

Headless is Found's perfect sister film, a much anticipated tie-in that has so much to live up to. Scott Schirmer's Found (2012) took the horror world by storm, sweeping up dozens of awards at film festivals and gaining an instant cult following. Headless is Found's "film within a film", a no- holds barred, '80s nasty that pushes the envelope of good taste and has a lasting impression on at least one of its viewers.

To produce a stand-alone, full-length movie of Headless is no easy feat. Headless needed to shock on a visceral level whilst maintaining the original film's dark psychological edge and taboo themes. With expectations high, the potential for failure and disappointment was very real. The good news is that Headless delivers the goods. Scott Schirmer passes the directorial reins this time around to Found's special effects director, Arthur Cullipher, whilst maintaining co- producing responsibilities with Kara Erdel. The Found army can breath a collective sigh of a relief. The combination of talent here is a winning formula.

Headless is fast-moving, bloody beyond belief, boundary-pushing (there's one particular act of carnage that I've never on screen in such candid and unflinching detail before), psychological, hallucinatory, surreal and unpredictable. It manages to honour the themes of its predecessor whilst adding something new to boot.

The entire cast is excellent but special mention must go to young Kaden Miller for his chilling performance as the Skull Boy. The character's physical presence takes the movie to another level. It's a jaw-dropping pièce de résistance. With the presence of this character, we witness the killer's (played by a truly believable Shane Beasley) ride into a hellish insanity.

As an aside, I hadn't expected to see this movie so soon. At around 1.00am on a cold February morning, I realised I'd received an invitation to catch a preview screener of the film. Sleep was put on hold until the film had been devoured. In a way, this is how Headless should be viewed. It is a midnight movie, through and through. Perfect entertainment for a gathering of gore- hounds or the genre enthusiast who needs something new to rekindle his love of the modern horror movie.

Whilst being released in 2015, the '70's (and early '80's) atmosphere is soaked into every frame. With faux print damage, big hair, cheesy dialogue and zero political correctness, this is like uncovering a hidden gem in a filmmaker's cupboard. If The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Last House on the Left married and had a child, its name would be Headless.

9.5 out of 10. Close to indie perfection, this is unmissable. From the moment the credits start, your senses are reeling from the physical insults delivered to the characters from the original Headless footage. Nasty but nice.

Unique

[necroninja-98486 · 7/10 · 23 April 2015]

I didn't know what to expect at first. I thought because it was such an old movie that it wouldn't be all that good. But it was! It was so different. Not your usual slasher movie. It wasn't boring, & even though there wasn't anything remarkable about the storyline, it was the brutality, the sickness & the retro grittyness of the movie that makes it so good. I would've given it one more star if the acting was a tad more convincing & the special fx were a little more realistic. But all in all, I don't think you will be disappointed if you enjoyed movies like: House Of 1000 Corpses, Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Dani Filth's Cradle Of Fear...

One of the most awful movies I have ever seen - Pathetic. Does not even deserve a 1 star.

[ervijaykumar · 1/10 · 4 November 2015]

I am writing this review just to warn you that this movie doesn't deserve a second of your life. Don't go by the 5+ rating for this movie. This movie is one of those most pathetic movies out there where you really won't want to waste a second of your life watching. This movie gives you nothing in terms of entertainment or story or cinematography unless you are yourself sick enough to enjoy such movies. There are still much better movies out there like Chainsaw Massacre series, Wolf Creek, Devil's Rejects etc. Go and watch them if you haven't. Just don't waste your time on this pathetic film. Even the nudity is not filmed such that one can enjoy. It is a soft porn torture movie which you'll regret after a minute into the film. The trailer of Wolf Baby at the starting really made me want to puke. I watched this movie by fast forwarding. I would recommend you to skip it and really Don't waste your time on this movie at all!!!

Boredom Level - over 9000

[benny_5 · 2/10 · 3 February 2016]

I don't want to give away too much information on this flick, if you decide to give it a shot. But let me tell you: it sucks. I came to this little movie because of a list of movies, called the sickest, vile movies ever made... or something. Doesn't matter anymore. I got curious because this movie took the top spot on the list. Number one. Sickest, depraved movie of all time. A bigger thing than "A Serbian Film", "The Human Centipede" or "Martyrs". That was a promise to me. I was never more disappointed in my life like I was after watching this piece of crap. It is not shocking or anything like that. It is just stupid and boring. The cinematography is a joke, the acting is even worse and the plot is an insult to everyone who has ever seen a movie. There is no tension and there is no likable character at all. The director is trying to shock the audience with the shown brutality but fails miserably. The killer and his victims are just so stupid it's unbelievable. The first kill shows perfectly, what's wrong with this film. The perverse, depraved murderer with his abusive childhood cuts the victims top open, plays with her breasts, then penetrates her with his machete, which is the worst penetration scene i have seen all my life. This killer is just so unlikely, this shot just killed and penetrated his own credibility for me. But take a look for yourself. Normally I would rate a movie so bad like "Headless" with one star, but I add one more star for the sick ideas. The implementation just got messed up.

Not worth the time

[koushiro22 · 2/10 · 28 August 2019]

I'll be brief; the movie tries to shock you with over the top gore, but it just comes off as boring and passionless. While we get to see why he turned out as depraved as he is, it doesnt make the rest of the movie better. The ending, where it shows him locking himself in a cage just to get a regular nights sleep - giving a perfect example of his damaged mental state - is the only true terrifying part.

Gross, inappropriate, stupid

[carrollpatrickmichael · 1/10 · 27 April 2017]

So dumb. Too violent, too gross, terrible story and ridiculous premise.

Hard to believe people actually watch and enjoy this. I am a huge horror movie guy but can't stomach this trash.

People claim that the violence and grotesqueness of the effects, plot and ideas presented in this movie are subversive or ironic. But in fact they are just stupid and this movie presents too much crap that the filmmakers can't justify the crassness.

As Charles Barkley would say TURRIBLE.

Brutal, disgusting, sexual...a great time

[kenny-karoly · 7/10 · 4 September 2020]

I've taken a long break from the ultra violent flicks and needed something good to pull me back in. Glad I started here. Make to look like a lost slasher film from the heyday of popularity (mid 80s) yet pulls no punches with it's brutality and the disturbing nature of the killer. Given enough backstory into the nameless psycho to know why he does what he does yet let's us still guess where he went from there. It's a wonderfully sick film that will stick with you for a while.

Missing the point of horror satire and film in general.

[Impatotec · 2/10 · 6 March 2019]

Making a good horror flick is not easy, and I'll never make a statement saying otherwise. There's a certain.. artistic awareness and comprehension you need of the genre to even be able to make satire of it. I've seen the film Found on which this was based upon (a film within a film), and, while my edgelord 18 year old self loved the film for its gore, and shock value, I've come to respect the performance and twists, even the outta nowhere coming-of-age story it presented on a seemingly rather low budget. Now, as my googling capabilities have determined, the film was both written and directed by the dude who did special effects for Found, and it was even financed by a kickstarter which is really neat. The problem is, I don't think he had the first clue about what made the.. uh.. original a pretty decent horror film.

Having stated before, I'm a pretty hardcore edgelord. No gore in film is enough to make me feel uncomfortable, and I've seen just about all the practical effects can offer. What my uncreative little frontal cortex understands of filmmaking is, the moment you show your goriest scene in the first few minutes, it kinda loses it's edge later on.

Focusing on the plot- it's the exact same serial killer story you've seen every time since Jack the Ripper felt like he appreciated the confines of a womb. Kid gets put in an absurdly aggressive home with mom and sister tormenting him emotionally and sexually and one (1) decapitated rabbit propels him on his crusade of vengeance. Now let me get this straight- the acts of murder can be done so well in a psychological sense, adding to the mental state of the killer as the story progresses, as can be seen in Angst (1983), with the whole plot advancing from it. But Headless just throws that outta the window and gets you a good old fashioned skull-fornicating with a ladies head. Okay. Someone optimistic would say, yeah okay, now is this sets a base for his future adventures- will he descend into even more depraved waters, does the head symbolize the duality of man or his conflicting consciousness of murder, empathy and need for love? Does he want to stop, or reach some metaphysical goal? Let's continue. He kidnaps another lady and in an expectation subverting twist he cuts her head off and fornicates with it. Now you're thinking: okay nice one, you got me, now what other messed up stuff can you show me? Take a big bloody guess what the next 4 murders heavily feature. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom showed less poking into someone's brain with a tool. The flashback scenes would be great if they didn't feature the absolute cheapest pseudo-Freudian reasons for his trauma your unborn child has seen a million times already. Yeah, I also remeber when my mom kept me in a cage and my sister took a leak on me, but when I broke out, the spooning I did was not related to her eyeballs. The cinematography was nice and emulates the 70's horror film alright.

Pretty good for an underground film

[poeslenore-12272 · 7/10 · 18 January 2020]

While headless severely lacks a real or understandable plot, having watched it multiple times I still can not tell you what any of the victims real role or point in the film is other than to be killed, and the acting of the 'main characters' if you could call them that were bland and forgettable, the killer skull boy really makes this film for me. I really enjoyed a film that seemed to center more on the killers perspective and this strange warped reality he has that seems to play in with his past not to mention the amount of emotion that you can read off of this character even though he mostly wears a mask and rarely if ever speaks. He is definitely not like most slashers I've seen and seems to be purely sexually driven unlike most who are driven by vengeance or twisted survival.This film brought me back to a feel of classic slasher films with hand made gore props, that raw feeling you don't really get with CGI riddled films now a days. Don't go into this film expecting the best movie ever instead go in expecting a first time low budget film. Its a film you can enjoy for its killer and its gore and more perspective visuals but not its plot.

Disturbing and that's it

[aronharde · 3/10 · 15 April 2024]

In 2015's "Headless" we are introduced to a skull masked killer that abducts and tortures women. This movie was a short sequence from the movie "Found" (2012) where the young protagonist watches a V/H/S named "Headless". We only see a short sequence with some disturbing imagery which was stretched to feature length in this movie. I thought that "Found" had its strengths but also weaknesses like the acting and overall failed to entertain. This movie's strengths and weaknesses are in the same areas. There are some pretty good looking effects that enhance the torturing scene with brutality and realism. In general the movie is more violent and cruel. However the plot is almost non-existent and therefore pretty terrible. The acting is also really bad and it was hard to take any of the characters seriously. Basically the only strength this movie has is its effects and the disturbing imagery shown throughout but apart from that the movie fails and most aspects. [3,5/10]

Holy Hell! What was THAT?

[arfdawg-1 · 9/10 · 18 April 2015]

The Plot.

In this "lost slasher film from 1978," a masked killer wages an unrelenting spree of murder, cannibalism, and necrophilia.

But when his tortured past comes back to haunt him, he plunges to even greater depths of madness and depravity, consuming the lives of a young woman and those she holds dear.

This film is unrelenting and border on those classics of the 70s like I Spit on your Grave for it's depravity.

It is one sick movie that is some how mesmerizing and oddly touching, as the plot unfolds with flashbacks that tell us how this sicko got this way.

I could not take my eyes off it and there is very very little dialog.

It's a must see.

The best movie about a killer that copulates with severed heads ever.

[gorechef · 10/10 · 16 March 2015]

You ever see one of those horror flicks where the killer does all manner of inhumane and despicable things to their victims? Of course you have. You ever wonder just how they could have become so depraved and what could possibly motivate them to continue their sadistic and cruel behavior? Maybe you have, or maybe you didn't put any further thought into it. Have you ever been disgusted and repulsed to the point where you couldn't continue watching?

I'm asking all these questions, because the answers are simple: You will. Whether or not you have, you'll find out. And... you just might be.

If you haven't watched FOUND by Scott Schirmer, you should. Its based on the novel of the same name, by Todd Rigney. That story contains a film within itself, and that film is HEADLESS. Easily one of the most brutal and integral parts to FOUND, it was a throwback to 70s underground indie horror exploitation that drove the killer in FOUND to commit his own atrocities. FOUND was so well received by the underground horror heads, that it spawned a successful crowd- funding campaign for a full length HEADLESS feature.

I now understand how such a cruel and demented killer could be created. I could feel his pain. His nightmarish hallucinations could drive any one to such lengths.

While this film contains incredibly horrific acts of intense brutality, they seem natural for the monster committing them. By the time it was over I realized had thoroughly enjoyed all which I had witnessed. Then again, I'm a fairly twisted individual that knows it's all just entertainment. Yet, to be entertained by such heartless acts, to cheer along at the ghastly images, it makes me wonder... What the hell is wrong with me? Also, what the hell is wrong with Arthur Cullipher and Nathan Erdel?

Cullipher has masterfully crafted a film that is as equally beautiful, surreal, atmospheric, and lucid as it is sickening, perverse, gut-wrenching , and unapologetic. He and several colleagues from FOUND (Scott Schirmer, Nathan and Kara Erdel, Leya Taylor, and Shane Beasley reprising his role as the killer) have given us a peek into the mind of a demon not spawned from Hell, but birthed of the torment that was all he had ever known.

Plot and story are definitely present, and certainly not pleasant. Headless could have easily just been a load of graphic, sexualized violence to satisfy the sickos - and we get plenty of that - but a tale is to be told, and you will understand just where its "headed" right from the start.

This film feels like it's from 1978. It looks gorgeous, and sounds equally appropriate. They made sure to use the right clothes and vehicles to get the proper atmosphere going. Don't even get me started on the roller rink. The killer's house is dingy and disgusting, he's living in a filthy old run down building on a farm.

Shane Beasley provides an incredible performance as the Headless killer. In the original short from FOUND, he didn't have to do much but kill women, eat their eyes, and hump their heads. He gives so much more in this role for the feature film. We know and experience not only the horrors and pain he inflicts, but those he has suffered as well.

Kelsey Carlisle, Haley Madison, and Ellie Church give great performances in their roles, proving they have what it takes to be scream queen material. There is an abundance of opportunity for wailing and agony from the victims in this film, and by its very nature, these women must scream!

There is comedic relief in all this gruesome slaughter. Brian Williams' Slick Vic is a sleazy 70s roller rink tycoon scumbag asshole, paired perfectly with Ellie Church's Betsy. Their on- screen chemistry is undeniable. It's like they are married or something. I also thought the hitchhiker scene was pretty hilarious, without even trying.

The FX are all practical and top notch. There are gallons of blood, killer gore, gruesome mutilations, and those special things that only the Headless killer does to his victims. Everything looks great.

The music and score are so perfect. At times the score is haunting, and it even gets chilling what music will be heard during some of the most gruesome scenes.

The bar just got set higher for indie horror. This film is absolutely everything I imagined it might and be much, much more. This will surely go down as one of the sickest, most well-executed indie films ever. It has instantly rocketed into my top 3 ever. I loved every second of this sick, twisted movie!

Extremely gory throwback slasher fun.

[BA_Harrison · 8/10 · 18 May 2015]

Headless began life as a fictional film within a film: an obscure late-70s slasher featured in 2012 indie horror Found. Now, as the result of a successful crowd funding campaign, it has been turned into a movie in its own right—a gloriously demented, retro-styled gore-fest that holds nothing back in its depiction of a mentally deranged and extremely vicious, mask-wearing, machete-wielding killer at work.

Director Arthur Cullipher starts as he means to go on: before the opening credits are over, he's already shown us a disgustingly gruesome decapitation, his antagonist (Shane Beasley) proceeding to scoop out and eat an eyeball, before boning the severed head in the neck—the killer's preferred modus-operandi. And so it continues, with numerous nubile young women meeting the same grisly fate, the wholesale slaughter interspersed by freaky hallucinatory scenes and disturbing memories from the killer's childhood, when he was caged like an animal by his mother (Emily Solt McGee) and tormented by his sister (Olivia Arnold/Jessica Schroeder).

It is through one of these flashbacks that we see how the sadistic sister made the mistake of unlocking the door to her sibling's prison; unsurprisingly, the lad seizes this opportunity to rid himself of both his tormentors, and, accompanied by his imaginary friend, a small boy with a skull-head, sets out on a long and bloody path of murder, one that ultimately leads to a roller rink where he targets the employees, including pretty waitress Jess Hardy (Kelsey Carlisle). Will Jess's decapitated and defiled head be added to The Killer's collection, or can she turn the tables on the sicko?

From the outset, Headless does well to capture the atmosphere of a genuine 70s slasher, with a gritty lo-fi look, great attention to period detail, and authentic sounding music. The film also delivers plenty of impressive old-school practical effects, although the level of depravity on display is far greater than anything I have ever seen in a genuine slasher from the purported era—even the most extreme examples. Not that I'm complaining: it's the mean-spirited violence and general deviancy that makes this such a blast…

How could any self-respecting gore-hound/sleaze-fan not have a good time with the following: horror hottie Haley Jay Madison getting a machete up the holiest of holies, before having her breast sliced off, and losing both of her legs to the madman; The Killer using a pretty hitch-hiker's head to get his rocks off on a pile of dismembered corpses; the twisted sister quenching her caged brother's thirst by urinating on him; the mother feeding her son a freshly severed rabbit's head; Jess's waster of a boyfriend having his junk cut off; The Killer doing his special routine on his own mother (including boffing her bonce!); and roller skate-wearing waitress Betsy (Ellie Church) doing the dirty with her sleazy boss before being chased topless across the roller rink by the killer. Trust me when I say that it's ALL done in the worst possible taste.

My only complaint with the film—and it's a small one—is that the whole ritual of decapitation, eye removal, and head-humping eventually becomes a little too repetitive. I know it's The Killer's signature (and an unmistakable one at that), but I'd liked to have seen him switch things up a bit. After all, variety is the spice of life—even for a criminally insane mass murderer with a creepy skull-headed boy for a best friend.

giving head, literally

[trashgang · 8/10 · 16 November 2015]

If you have seen the flick Found (2012) then you know that one of the brothers is addicted to horror movies. When he do go watch one or pick one up at the local store all titles you see are real existing flicks except for one, Headless. That particular flick took a main part in Found and it was a so-called lost flick. The fun part is that Headless can be found nowadays. It's supposed to be shot in 1978 but we all do know better.

Were Found went deeply into the characterisation this one here is pure horror, and I must say a good one.

If you can't stand brutal horrors then don't go watching this little stinker. The story has a weird part with the child and his skull for example and it do explains a lot towards the end but what they made was an ode to those gory flicks from the seventies. This isn't a slasher this is a gorefest. It did remind me somehow towards the cult classic The Last House On Dead End Street (1977). What you get is pure horror with extreme parts like using the severed head for having sex, a lot of decapitations, gratuitous nudity, dismembering females and sickening parts.

I liked it a lot storywise because it do make sense, the effects are for a low budget so well done, congratulations to that section, and it never got a weak part.

A must see for those geeks out there who do like a lot of gore and can take sexual depravity. My cup of tea.

Gore 4/5 Nudity 2,5/5 Effects 4/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5.