Feast 3: The Happy Finish: Review By Bryan Yentz

So this film’s subtitle is “The Happy Finish”? Hmm… Yeah… Well, just who exactly is going to be happy once this little puke-caked bloodbath is over? Surely it’s not the characters from the previous entries—hell, after what they’ve been through, death would seem like quite the relief. It can’t be the over-sexed beasties because they don’t even get to finish their meal, and… Well… It definitely can’t be for the viewer because once the mariachi steps on screen and the credits roll, they’re ain’t nothin’ to be happy about—not even slightly enthusiastic over. In fact, this “final” installment feels like one big bile-drenched middle finger flicked in the direction of the mass of fans the series has garnered. Not a happy finish… Not a happy finish one bit.

Picking up directly where Feast 2: Sloppy Seconds ended, the film takes the first five minutes to… Well, actually recap the whole thing. You’ve got Honey Pie trying to flee the dire situation, Biker Queen, Old Man and so on, holding out on the rooftop, then you’ve got midget libre Thunder being blown sky-high by Hobo’s explosive. So yeah, that’s right where the movie picks up—and from their—drives recklessly towards its horribly weak climax. The plot remains the same for practically the entire duration of the cinematic grue. It is as follows: the survivors—trying to escape the moster-infested town—meet with some new carnage-fodder... And that’s it… Yeah… That’s pretty much it. Yup…

As I stated in my last review for “King of the Hill”, I love when some form of entertainment takes something so simple—and builds on it. Builds on it so much that the overall simplicity is non-existent because of the brilliance and ingenuity placed into something which was originally thought so basic and insignificant. That said, Feast 3 does not do this. It doesn’t so much as try. Instead, they present one or two ideas that could be infinitely developed—and then squander them with the laziest, most half-assed approach possible. In one portion of the film, we discover that the Pukers weren’t just a gross-out gimmick in Feast 2. In fact, the Pukers have escaped to the sewers as one melty, psychotic collective. While this could have been interesting to see the survivors not only have to put up with the series’ mainstay monsters, but a cultish group of walking boils as well, the movie tires with its own concept after one initial scene where Tat Girl fights one of their own. The sequences that follow depicting this mental group are purely a test in not having a seizure. Seriously, who’s idea was it to have the entire scene shot in the dark with a single strobe-light illuminating everything? Really? I’ll give that at first—within the beginning frames—I thought it was fine. But for an entire “fight” scene? Come on. And I say “fight” scene because you really can’t tell what’s going on other than people crowding, screaming, and one Puker gal having a fist run up her south side to extract her intestines.

Another aspect of the film that had potential was a brief idea that was sparked about five minutes out from its closing. One character takes the carcass of a creature as they force its internal siren to activate (for those unfamiliar, the creatures have a sort-of “alarm” inside of them that appears to be a massive eyeball and flailing flagella). In turn, this character drives a motorcycle with the blaring body strapped to the back, in order to lure the other beasts away from the survivors. Once again, this could have been developed so much more in terms of style and execution. This could have made for a climactic chase scene, or… Or anything! Instead, we’re treated to a single, forgettable shot of the character driving away; crazy eye-tentacle-thing screaming.

On a technical level, well… There really isn’t one. Direction is nonexistent, and the film only had one shot that I actually liked (it’s a stationary, long-shot near the end that has the survivors walking up a cement ramp in the background, as charred wreckage burns in the foreground). Camera work is spastic and frantic, appearing as though they just strapped the cameras on the backs of ravenous dogs following a trail of fresh meat. Not to mention that there were way too many night vision shots, especially when they were completely uncalled for in the first place. And while it can be argued that Feast 2 was frenetic in its camerawork as well, it all comes down to HOW you do it. Feast 2 did have spastic filming techniques—but it also seemed to have direction and thought behind it. Since Gulager and co. weren’t so constrained in terms of location, they were able to experiment more with how they wanted to film something. That said, I enjoyed what they brought to Feast 2 (see my review for more on that one) because it felt like they were actually trying to make a sequel. Even more so was that the emphasis on this hyperactive direction as well as music balanced out all of the things I disliked about it. And speaking of music, this was yet another aspect that while pushed in Feast 2 (as I stated above), was completely and utterly forgotten about here. While Feast 2 was far from a memorable original score, it at least TRIED. Something, which Feast 3 doesn’t even attempt.

When it comes to characters, after witnessing the only character I cared about get offed (in more ways than one) in the first five minutes, I honestly didn’t think that the film could really disappoint me after that. The rest of the survivors from Feast 2 are just as they were before—completely unlikable and perfect candidates for a vicious death. Like the moments of night vision, the newcomers that are brought in are completely pointless. By now, everyone that’s seen a Feast film knows the formula. Whenever a character is introduced, the probability of them living long enough to actually do something other than die a horrible death isn’t that likely. Here, we get three (I believe) new bloods. One’s a nerdy ninja that uses Baraka-like blades (you know, the guy from Mortal Kombat) to fend off his enemies. There’s “Sh*tkicker”, the badass, gun-totin’ womanizer. And then there’s the retarded, cloak wearing character named “Prophet”, who aside from actually being retarded—seems to have some kind of obvious power over the nasty beasts. Like I said before, anyone investing the time here should know the formula—thus, it’s incredibly easy to guess what’s going to befall someone as soon as they enter the shot because the film seems to have less faith in them than we do.

For everyone watching this for shock value, that even disappoints. I know this is weird saying it for a Feast movie, but here it goes anyway… All of the violence here feels so forced that it’s not gross at all. It just comes off as it is: A bunch of immature people writing gags they think are funny/horrendous. Once again, that feels really damn weird saying that for a film such as this and not the others, but in Feast 1, it all felt comic and fun, just because of how archetypal crazy it all was. Feast 2 began showing its wear, but it’s definitely here that the zaniness to all of the gore and bloodshed feels empty. There are a handful of scenes that try to surprise and make you turn your head in disgust, but honestly—after seeing the baby’s demise in Feast 2, do you really think you’ll wince or hang your jaw in this one?

And then there’s the ending. The ending… Even now, I have no idea what to truly say…

Because the back of the box insisted that the finale was “the mother of all endings”, I was expecting to see some epic showdown with the survivors, pukers and monsters all dukin’ the crap out of one another; I’m talkin’ a motorcycle ridin’, sword swingin’, limb flyin’, explosion rockin’, monster eatin’, puker pukin’, people screamin’, blood flowin’, karate-kickin’, gun blazin’ ending to end all endings. Not what I got… Not what I got at all. The film goes from its seizure-inducing tussle to a brief bout against one of the survivors turned monster. The fight is very brief and everything anticlimactic… Now for the kicker… What follows in the films moment of closure is SO baffling that I had to make friends of mine watch it, just to further express my surprised disappointment. In one sense, this five second moment works because it shocks. But it doesn’t shock for any good reasons. It shocks because it is SO stupid and doesn’t fit at all into the film—not even within this realm of cinema where we’re asked to believe certain things such as monsters in order to have a good time with it—this straight-up doesn’t have any place or bearing in the saga that is Feast. The best way I can put this ending without giving it away is this: Let’s say you’re working on something and you reach a moment where you need some help. You turn to a friend and ask them to pitch an idea for you. As it is with most friends (at least a lot of the ones I have), the first idea that passes their lips is something so sarcastic and idiotic that you—and even the friend that said it—knows wouldn’t even be bothered with. It’s just a joke—nothing else. Well, in this case, it’s as if that someone in need of an idea, actually went with that horrible idea that spawned from his buddy’s mouth. Such a pathetic idea that no one in their right mind would ever do, lest they purposely want to piss off their audience. What’s worse is that the commentary with Gulager and co. concede to actually having a story and ending which looped back to Bozo, his wheelchair-bound brother, and Tuffy from Feast 1… So yeah, they sacrificed that to do something like this. If anyone had told me that this was how the trilogy was going to end, I would have called you a liar. A damn, whor* liar.

You might have noticed that I hardly mentioned Feast 1 during this review. That’s simply because after this entry, I don’t want to be reminded that anything after Feast 1 was made. Feast 1 was a fun, original little monster mash that screwed with the genre just enough to make it worthwhile. I enjoyed it. All Feast 3 has served to do is remind me how much better that film is then the drivel it so messily birthed. So yeah… I guess I did get something out of it.