Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Leofwine_draca SAWNEY: FLESH OF MAN is another stab at low budget torture porn, made with maximum relish. The director seems to be trying to make this film as grisly and unpleasant as is humanly (and inhumanly) possible, and he certainly succeeds in that. But while in horror terms he summons up an appropriately oppressive atmosphere, in terms of scripting and narrative this is a complete dud.The legend of Sawney Bean is a classic slice of Scottish folklore that's interested me for a long while. I've even visited the locales where he and his clan were supposed to live, so when I heard about this film I was eager to see it. What a shame, then, that Bean is reduced to such a typical cannibal killer with nothing to distinguish him from the bad guys of a dozen low rent American slasher flicks.The film deserves kudos for casting the creepy and imposing David Hayman as the titular killer, but then proceeds to waste him for the entire running time, filling his mouth with B-movie lines. The plot involves one character ending up in his clutches, then someone goes looking for the first and becomes the next victim, and so on. Realising how thin that plot is, the writer throws in the most predictable 'twist villain' ever, alongside a random monster, but none of these elements makes this film anything more than completely forgettable. No story, no merit...

Theo Robertson Most serious historians consider the myth of Sawney Bean to be exactly that - a myth , someone who never existed and a dark fairytale . It's interesting that people who consider Bean to be based in reality can't agree on where he lived . Some say he lived in Ayrshire whilst others say he lived in Galloway . If you can't even agree on where someone is supposedly to have lived that might tell you something . No one said films had to be realistic especially horror films and this movie uses a premise of " What if a descendant of Sawney was living amongst us in present day Scotland " and from the opening titles reality goes right out of the window It's not so much the lazy exposition of using captions and voice over that's the problem but feels the need to end it on a long mega laugh out loud that wouldn't feel out of place in a pantomime but if you're expecting high camp you're going to be disappointed if not alienated down to the lack of humour and excess of graphic gore . The action then cuts to a Doctor being driven through the snow clad mountains of the Scottish Highlands of 1990 . Right so the Sawney descendants of Ayrshire / Galloway have relocated to the Highlands ? You can guarantee that no matter what it'll never be revealed why Sawney's descendants have left their ancestral home . The Doctor is supposedly about to deliver a baby to a woman hooded and tied to a giant wooden cross but doesn't get to do this because the man who drove him there pulls out a shotgun and shoots him . So someone went to all the trouble of getting a Doctor to deliver a baby and then shooting him without delivering a baby . It doesn't make the slightest bit of sense but since we're now two minutes in to the running time things can only improve . Except they don't because we're treated to abysmal acting and a plot full of holes and contrivance such as busy city centre streets not having any CCTV cameras Where the film does deserve some credit is for its cinematography and for a film that obviously didn't cost a fortune it does give the proceedings a haunted bleak feel , so much so it makes VALHALLA RISING seem like a musical comedy . However this is often negated by performances that give the impression the cast are reading out their shopping list . The only exception to this is David Hayman who thinks he's appearing as a villain in a pantomime . Sawney is also portrayed as a religious Scottish maniac but for some reason no one thinks of asking him if he's a Catholic cannibal or a Protestant cannibal . Now that takes some swallowing

yo-520-863674 I Did not know what I was expecting when I began to watch this, so I looked at the trailer, and it really stood out for such a B grade movie. When the first girl goes missing, she really shows you the fear that a person would feel like if they were in that situation. the cast were great, and the camera effects were up to pa. and it did stand out from the many horror movies that I have seen. This was a fantastic movie, even though it is not for everyone. It is really a great idea for a horror movie, and the actors I admit were in their own unique way. Things do happen that you don't expect, but I guess, that what makes a good twist on a movie. Overall fantastic movie and it worth a watch. Gyes you could get all the action from your girls watching this, because there are a lot of scenes that she may want to close her eyes and hold someone. Loll. its quite gruesome really I give it an 8 out of 10

JvH48 I saw this film at the Imagine film festival 2013 in Amsterdam. As could be expected from the synopsis on the festival website, a lot of blood&gore was prominently showcased. Somewhat less expected is that we got it together with several quotes from the Bible, a combination that was not really explained.It was a good idea to use the journalist as binding element to tie the story together. There was also a parallel story about a police inspector, who for a long time failed to solve the mystery of the disappearing people. Of course, his superiors were not happy about it. (*** warning *** spoiler ahead ***) In hindsight, we know why he failed. His connection with the underground (literally) operations were left unclear, however. Could he be a distant relative of the "insane family of inbred killers" (quote from official film website). Maybe such an explanation is not really necessary, but I certainly missed it to wrap up the plot.All in all, I gave a so-so (3 out of 5) score for the audience award when leaving the theater: it was certainly well written and well executed, but lacked a consistent story and a plot, not even some sort of reason why it all happened as it happened. Of course, for those who are willing to read between the lines, it can be that the initial visit of a doctor to assist in the birth of a baby, being the last living survivor of a species that lived on human remains (as per the voice over), may serve as a vehicle to explain what happened after the prologue. That this cannibal family is "legendary" does not suffice for us, who know nothing about local folklore and related legends. This could have been explained better to prepare us for the desperately needed context. The 90 minutes running time is not that long that it cannot bear an extension with another 5 minutes to allow us connecting the dots. What remained is a lot of bloodthirsty killing without any purpose. This film ended nearly last (45st place out of 48) for the audience award with average score 5.39.