Review: King of the Ants

[Stingy Jack]

With Stuart Gordon (Re-Animator) directing, audiences can expect to do two things: cringe in disgust, and then laugh out loud. Although not really a horror film, King of the Ants is Gordon's latest romp into the realm of midnight-black comedy, and fans will find a couple of things to cheer about, even if the film as a whole leaves them feeling cheated.

Newcomer Chris McKenna plays Sean, a down-on-his-luck housepainter who meets Duke (George Wendt) one on-the-job afternoon. Duke recruits Sean to take a job working for Ray (Daniel Baldwin), a local construction mogul/small-time crime boss. During a drunken stupor, Ray convinces Sean to kill off a snooping accountant (Ron Livingston), which he successfully accomplishes. However, once they no longer need him, Ray and his goons deliver Sean the beating of a lifetime in the hopes of causing him to forget the crime. The oft' underestimated Sean manages to escape (not without taking a meaty bite from the neck of one of his tormentors), and plots his revenge.

Chris McKenna allows himself to be subjected to Gordon's sick vision with guts, filming full-nude scenes, and, at one point, a humiliating episode in nothing but a pair of filthy underwear. The result is a realistic, gritty portrayal of a character the audience is supposed to like, even while he is doing dispicable things. Unfortunately, McKenna's more seasoned supporting actors all fall flat, leaving the cast feeling more like a pitch for new-talent McKenna than professionals hired to show a story. The only exception here is Ron Livingston, whose death scene is one of the most disturbing I have watched in recent memory, due to it's realism from simplicity.

Another scene from the film that makes it worth watching (and the only other truly compelling scene in the film) is the goons' torture of Sean in a shack at Ray's desert ranch house. Like Hell's perscription for amnesia, Sean takes one whack to the head by a golf club once a day, for several days. During this time, Sean is also assaulted by horrific (and oftentimes, vomit-inducing grotesque) hallucinations, as the beating make-up is slowly and gratuitously applied to McKenna's frat-boy visage. The torture is so horrible, and so painful to watch, that we begin to demand that Sean deliver proper restitution long before his revenge arrives.

Because of this, the film's ending leaves us feeling cheated. We wait for Sean's revenge; and we wait ... and wait some more. When it finally arrives, Sean is surprisingly forgiving, disposing of his tormentors quickly and effectively. Their deaths, compared to what Sean has sufferred, are so light and tame that we still feel as if Ray and his men have won ... even though it is Sean who walks away.

Even though this film left me unfulfilled, it has its share of rentable moments. Just don't expect it to be a horror film, despite it categorizing itself as such. King of the Ants is definitely black, assuredly gross, but in no way horrific in the sense of the genre, thus making it unworthy for the horror fan's collection. Which is just as well. It is a film you'll want to see, but never need to see again.

[ShankS]

for some reason, the thread title made me think one of those old b&w giant insect radiation films was being re-hashed and reviewed.

[Stingy Jack]

LOL! Yeah, I was a little misled when my wife brought it home. The art on the DVD has it crawling with ants, but ants really only appear at one point in the film. I, too, expected a "Willard-type" film, only with ants in place of rats.

[orangestar]

I agree with a LOT of your review. Chris McKenna was amazing but you could tell the other actors were just doing it for the paycheck. (by the way, I didnt even realize that was Ron Livingston! He went to my high school :D)

First of all, IMHO this is a horror movie. An incredibly graphic and disturbing one. This stayed with me for a while. The brutality of Seans attackers is so extreme, and its very very hard to watch. You are rooting for revenge from the very first hit.

I also agree that the revenge was a little tame. Although it was very entertaining to see a Cheers cast member get decapitated.

Overall, I think (horror or not) this is a great movie. Not for the faint hearted. Im so glad I own it, and *bonus* I got it free!

[kpropain]

Originally posted by ShankS
for some reason, the thread title made me think one of those old b&w giant insect radiation films was being re-hashed and reviewed.

LOL so did I

[Stingy Jack]

Originally posted by orangestar


I also agree that the revenge was a little tame. Although it was very entertaining to see a Cheers cast member get decapitated.

And have his head barbecued, to boot! (What the hell does "to boot" mean, anyway?)

[ShankS]

.

[zwoti]

Originally posted by ShankS
for some reason, the thread title made me think one of those old b&w giant insect radiation films was being re-hashed and reviewed.

oh no, it's THEM

[ShankS]

run for your lives.

[bloodrayne]

.