Industrial Deals Beauty Summer Reading STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Starting at $39.99 Wickedly Prime Handmade Wedding Rustic Decor Shop Popular Services gotpremiere gotpremiere gotpremiere  Introducing Echo Show All-New Fire HD 8, starting at $79.99 Kindle Oasis Nintendo Switch Water Sports toystl17_gno



There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Showing 1-8 of 8 reviews(Verified Purchases). See all 44 reviews
on November 10, 2011
I stumbled upon "King of the Ants" while browsing a filmography of actor Daniel Baldwin. I was intrigued by the title and had no idea what to expect when I rented the movie from Amazon.com. The story centers around an amiable young drifter named Sean Crawley (Chris McKenna), who is hired by shady construction contractor Ray Matthews (Daniel Baldwin) to "spy" on accountant Eric Gatley (Ron Livingston), and report on his activities. When Sean visits the accountant's home things go terribly wrong and he ends up killing Gatley. Matthews and his buddy "Duke" Wayne (George Wendt) reproach Sean for the murder and refuse to pay him. They viciously display their animosity by torturing Sean and repeatedly bashing him in the side of the head with a golf club.

Daniel Baldwin is a Twitter pal and distant cousin of mine. I know him as a charismatic, savvy, humorous dude who wouldn't harm a fly. It was something of a shock to see him portray loathsome brute Ray Matthews with such agility. In truth, the characters of Ray Matthews and Daniel Baldwin are polar opposites, a fact which led me to the realization that Daniel Baldwin is an exceptionally fine and vastly under-rated actor! Chris McKenna was equally as impressive in his role as Sean Crawley. By the end of the movie it was Sean who took out his vengeance on his tormenters.

If you're looking for a "happily ever after" ending, avoid this film like the plague. There are few redeeming players in the drama but the special effects and acting are superb. If you have the stomach to wade through all the violence and gore this flick is well worth viewing!
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 16, 2017
Trippy as heck! Love this movie!
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 24, 2016
Hard to watch at times, but I.m sure you'll like it as much as I did.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 27, 2004
When I saw Stuart Gordon, the man responsible for films like Re-Animator (1985), From Beyond (1986), among other films, was coming out with a new movie called King of the Ants (2003), I was excited, as I think within the realm of horror movies, he's always managed to certainly bring a level of creativity and present disturbing imagery that seemed to be missing from many of the films in the genre. I had no idea what to expect from King of the Ants, but I did have fun with the film. Was it his best? Not in my opinion, but even a mediocre Stuart Gordon film is better than a lot of the horror junk we saddled with by the major studios.

The film stars an actor named Chris McKenna as Sean Crawley, a drifter type currently employed in painting peoples houses. During one of his jobs, he meets Duke, played by George Wendt (Norm!), and said meeting changes his life as Duke introduces him to his boss, a somewhat shady character named Ray Matthews, played by one of the lesser known Baldwin brothers, Daniel, I think...anyway, Matthews owns a construction company, and is trying to land a particularly lucrative city contract, except an accountant in city hall named Gatley, played by Ron Livingston (the actor who played the main character in the 1999 film Office Space), seems to have evidence that may jeopardize Matthew's chances, so he enlists Sean to follow this accountant around, and collect information. As Sean follows Gatley around, documenting his movements, he gets taken by Gatley's wife, Susan, played by Kari Wurher (if you watched MTV in the late 80's, you'll know who this is). Sean reports back to Matthews, and things seem to be going well, but then after a late night meeting with a drunken Matthews, Sean is offered a chance to make a lot of money, at least more than he's ever seen. Only one catch, Sean must kill Gatley. After the dirty deed is done, Matthews reneges on the deal, claiming he Sean shouldn't have taken him seriously as he was drunk, and has only brought more heat down on him, and begins to put pressure on Sean to leave town, as Sean is the only link between Matthews and the recently murdered Gatley. Well, Sean, won't leave without his money, and begins to squeeze Matthews, which is the wrong move, as Matthews and his henchmen decide to take Sean to a secluded location and beat him upside his head over the course of many days, so that he won't even know his own name, much less anything about else. Sean gets the beating, for sure...but manages to escape...and eventually bring all his pain and torture back to his tormentors, one way or the other.

So what did I think of the movie? Well, it was certainly more serious than the films I mentioned at the beginning. Also, while it didn't contain the level of visceral gore of some of Gordon's other films, it did have enough to cause the casual viewer a great deal of wincing. The brutality of the beatings Sean endures, a daily whack with a golf club to the head (a 3-wood, I believe), and the ensuing physical deformation made me a bit queasy. And then there was the nightmarish hallucinations Sean suffered during his torture, which was pure Gordon on the level of a Re-Animator...I won't spoil it, but it will stick with you long after the movie's finished (think of the transformed Chet character from the movie Weird Science, but much worse). I liked the overall concept, but I thought some of the plot elements unnecessary and even awkward. The whole bit about Susan, who works at a mission that Sean ends up at and spends a couple months recovering, and her eventually taking him into her home, just completely farcical. Sure, people don't always have the best judgment, but to take an indigent drifter home with you to stay with you and your young daughter shortly after the brutal death of your husband seems like the very worst of ideas. It was obvious that it was set up to help further along the plot, but it was just so unbelievable. I think Wurher's character was meant to sort of see Sean as some kind of lost puppy dog type, harmless and trustworthy, but it was just very difficult to swallow. The story did have some other fairly glaring plot holes, but it moved along pretty well, but was pretty predictable. Some of the performances seemed odd and disjointed, but the more brutal scenes overshadowed a lot of the weak elements. Look for the character of Beckett, played by Vernon Wells. It took me awhile to recognize him, but I finally realized he was the same person who played the biker Wez in The Road Warrior (1981). This isn't a wholly slick production, having a somewhat gritty feel and texture, but I thought that played nicely against the main character. Also, time has not been a friend to George Wendt. And if you want to see Kari Wurher all nekkid, then this is your film. She bares a lot, almost to the point of being gratuitous, but hey, I can't really complain. Overall, after watching the film, I couldn't help feel like a lot of opportunities were missed, as the movie seemed to get bogged down a bit in the middle, but the ending does make up for a lot. As with most Gordon movies, if you have a weak stomach or delicate sensibilities, you may want to pass this one up.

Presented here is a good looking wide screen print along with a few special features, including a 15-minute featurette, commentary by Stuart Gordon and Chris McKenna, and an original theatrical trailer. I guess if I learned anything from this movie it's that that George Wendt sure sweats a lot...

Cookieman108
11 comment| 4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 14, 2014
SPOILERS

I lost interest in the movie once the main character escaped from his torturers and went to a homeless shelter to be consoled by his own victim's widow. I stopped watching it.

I like a good revenge movie like anybody else does but personally I can only get on the revenge bandwagon if the protagonist is completely in the right. Maybe that's the point the director is trying to make? That revenge movies are really superficial and emotionally manipulative for that reason? I don't know.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 5, 2010
This movie is very hard to find. I found it here and for a great price. This movie shows the under dog can win
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 2, 2013
wasn't too sure what to expect out of this one but it turned out to be a pretty good movie.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 26, 2015
I've seen this about 20 times!! Chris McKenna's character found his 'true calling'
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Customers also viewed these items

$7.14
$13.03

Need customer service? Click here