Bug Reviews and Ratings



  • November 24, 2009
    Not quite horror...but really great movie. Left me itchy afterwards. It's not at all the run of the mill studio horror crap, it's a pretty twisted look at paranoia and mental disease. Not for the faint of heart, but great great acting.
  • November 21, 2009
    Very good movie about paranoia (or wasn't it?), the acting was awesome, I believed every word from them!
  • November 19, 2009
    Wow, that looks really freaky!!! I'm intrigued.
  • November 18, 2009
    Completely original and out of its mind. The story/characters are so convincing that it makes the movie 10x better than it theoretically should have been. The dialogue was realistic and emotional, staying away from corny sappy monologues. The look of it was also really well thoug...( read more)ht out and effective. It is an addictive experience throughout, you can't wait to see and understand what is the root of the character's dilemma.
  • November 10, 2009
    this movie is garbage..........i mean wow talk about a fail
  • November 6, 2009
    Found the movie rather boring.
  • October 26, 2009
    I really enjoyed this movie. I watched it today for the first time on demand from comcast, I didnt even know about this website, i was on google looking to find the meaning of this movie, i didnt understand what exactly happened and why, but thats a good thing that a movie can ma...( read more)ke people wonder, i loved it. The beggining of the movie slowly pulls people in and it ends great. I liked it :)
  • October 23, 2009
    Great movie a must watch
  • October 11, 2009
    1 estrella pero huy q fue eso de las peores creo q ganba esta no se q pasó
  • October 4, 2009
    Boooooring...A pure waste of time. Guess the critics gave some good rates just because its a Friedkin's movie
  • September 16, 2009
    makes u wonder "r they there or not?"
  • September 9, 2009
    This movie was horrible. Thought it was going to be scary, not even close. The movie doesn't contain any bugs. Even though the director was going toward the direction of a psychological thriller, still have to say: not even close. No theme, no story line, boring waste of time. I ...( read more)give it a D. The only thing stopping it from being an F would be the way the actors really played their parts as well as possible, and Ashley Judd got completely naked.
  • August 27, 2009
    not scary & not interesting but disappointing without resolution...
  • August 23, 2009
    There are no bugs in this movie.
  • August 16, 2009
    Bug is a conspiracy theory film gone off the deep end. The cast did great work with the script and the stylized shooting worked very well. This film had the potential to be a great film revolving around a government conspiracy, or at least a conspiracy in the mind of a deranged...( read more) individual. It ends being just an average film. The true madness being shared by Agnes and Peter was too rushed and just floundered to a horrible ending.
  • August 14, 2009
    Even though it wasn't a success at the box office I consider Bug to be one of the greatest comedies of the new century.
    Sit back and be prepared to split your sides at this paranoia filled romp!
  • August 4, 2009
    Some good acting and Ashley Judd naked. Other than that a waste of time.
  • August 1, 2009
    So weird but hypnotizing movie. Descent to paranoia... excellent Ashley Judd !!!
  • July 29, 2009
    A return to form by Billy Freidkin, although for the life of me, I can't make out what this film is truly about.

    Putting that to the side, the acting is pretty great across the board. It was nice to see Ashley Judd back on screen. She literally chucks herself into this film a...( read more)nd I really liked her work here. Michael Shannon did a great job as a very damaged veteran. He is all kinds of odd in this film and there is a tension in his performance that makes him really interesting. Harry Connick Jr. also surprised me a great deal. His take on a jailbird nightmare made for a good watch.

    Ultimately the story is very ambiguous and extremely theatrical, I get the feeling that this would be more suitable and effective on stage. At the end of the day this is very watchable material that left me wondering long after it had finished.
  • July 22, 2009
    Un huis clos social très réaliste qui se transforme progressivement en délire paranoïaque. Très casse gueule mais plutôt réussi. Acteurs parfaits.
  • July 14, 2009
    could of had more going on, dragged out too much but the end ws AWESOME gives you alot to think about later to discuss, what does it all mean.
  • July 13, 2009
    Incredibly gross and equally pointless.
  • July 12, 2009
    Fascinating and disturbing; and compared to what I've witnessed in real life, it was alarmingly believable... much more so than in those drug-induced psychosis scenes of "A Scanner Darkly", "Requiem For A Dream", and "Spun".
  • July 12, 2009
    Possibly my favorite Willliam Friedkin film! Just as challenging as his previous films, but more full of life. I loved this film so much. I found it an incredibly touching and sympathetic look into the minds of crazed meth addicts.
  • July 9, 2009
    This is one of the few "horror films" that is actually an "actors film".

    By that I mean the characters (there are really only four with any major screen time) are well developed, with the two leads getting the opportunity to REALLY show some range. And it is the two leads (Ju...( read more)dd & Shannon) that really make this film work as well as it does. Which (for me) was good, solid, but not GREAT.

    The film succeeds in creating a creepy, claustrophobic, manic environment. However there are moments when the environment (and the acting) seems like "too much" and starts to feel a bit over done...almost cartoonish.

    There are a few "gore scenes" that felt sort of tagged on to make it more sellable as a "horror" film. But I feel like the story is intense enough that these scenes ended up cheapening it more then enhancing it.

    Michael Shannon (as with Revolutionary Road) "knocks it out of the park". Few people can pull off "obsessive compulsive nut job" like Shannon. Judd is impressive as well, but not as consistently as Shannon.

    All in all it is a pretty solid psychological thriller.
  • July 8, 2009
    PAN AND SCAN. Su simpleza escénica se trabaja muy bien en términos cinematográficos, pero lo que hace que todo funcione son las actuaciones de Judd y Shannon, que saben matizar la evolución psicológica de sus personajes. Harry Connick Jr. no está a la misma altura, pero no es ter...( read more)rible. / The simplicity of its staging is cinematically well managed, but what makes everything work so well are the performances by Judd and Shannon, who add the necessary nuance to the psychological evolution of their characters. Harry Connick Jr. is not at the same level, but he isn't terrible.
  • July 4, 2009
    Bug, before i write further about this stupid little movie, if you think there is a "Bug" in this movie that attacks humans, well my friend you're wrong!

    Bug started out good, it was captivating and you think things would be better and scarier, but it doesn't. I hate the tactic ...( read more)of making horror movies, without showing the horror it self.

    And a remarkable hilarious, forgetful plus painful ending.

    4/10.
  • June 6, 2009
    The story of a spiralling and infectious delusion
  • June 4, 2009
    i don't think i could handle this...i have panic attacks when there are flies in the room.
  • May 30, 2009
    I'm curious but not sure if I want to see it. The title, umm...dunno!
  • May 27, 2009
    Spoilers ahead. This might be one of the most terrifying movies (and one of the most interesting) I have ever seen. Ashley Judd, who I have never really paid attention to, is brilliant as a lonely woman who begins a relationship with a young man who seems to be all right at first...( read more) glance, but the audience eventually realizes something is wrong with him. Very, very wrong. He is obsessed with bugs, sees them everywhere, believes they are in his body and in his brain. She finds her trapped in his paranoid way of thinking.

    The final scene is the most brilliant. It is an awful scene of the two of them her home - it's covered in aluminum foil to "scramble the signals" the bugs give off. The two of them are bloodied from (self-induced) bug bite wounds. Judd's lengthy ending monologue is a terrifying vision of a woman overtaken with paranoia - she hyperventilates as she works frantically to connect the dots of every mystery she's ever been presented with, involving everyone she's ever known in their delusional conspiracy theory.

    Brilliantly directed, written, and acted, this is one of the best psychological thrillers I've ever seen. Although I wouldn't have thought from the trailers it would be something I could recommend, I rescind that and recommend it *highly*.
  • May 10, 2009
    didn't like this one much, surprisingly..
  • May 10, 2009
    now I wanna see the play!! what a mind job!!
  • April 21, 2009
    A movie about a gulf war vet who has extreme paranoia. Who meets a chick and infects her with his paranoia. It was decent a one time watcher..
  • April 18, 2009
    I don't think the advertisements for this film sell it right. They're pretty misleading and give the film an unnecessary pure horror appeal. Many friends of mine hated this pretty much because they went into it expecting a supernatural thriller. I think Shymalan's THE VILLAGE suf...( read more)fers from a similar marketing flaw. The ridiculous teasers and trailers for these films feature selective filmography highlights like "from the director of THE SIXTH SENSE" or "from the maker of THE EXORCIST," which for many non film culture types can basically translate to "if you liked that other film they made, come see this, it's more of the same."

    At its center BUG is a medical drama in almost Cronenbergian territory. It is very scary to me, as is real life mental illness, but never solely a genre horror film. It has the very peculiar and deliberate structure of the stage play from which it is adapted, and that will probably annoy most horror audiences more than the film's other challenging aspects.

    The film is quasi-horror in the way REQUIEM FOR A DREAM (2000) is concerning the terror of drug addiction. BUG is an extremely unpleasant and traumatizing film about the true horror of unchecked and untreated mental illness, particularly paranoid schizophrenia and post traumatic stress syndrome.

    Some may think the performances are over the top in the last act, but the picture, and play, are appropriately told subjectively from the protagonist's perception. You don't get the full effect without it. The transition between the gritty naturalism to the expressive and surreal comes in a key scene (don't want to spoil) which again really brings to mind subject matter David Cronenberg would approach. Michael Shannon and Ashley Judd or in top acting form as always, and Harry Connick Jr is shockingly good at playing menacing..

    This is not a picture for everyone and I wouldn't recommend it for many people I know. It can be psychologically hard to watch if your not conditioned to the type of cinema. But if you appreciate the subversion of genre, cinematic envelope pushing, and filmmakers who believe the cinema to be an art medium, this film might give you some serious food for thought.
  • April 16, 2009
    In a word: intense. Finally finally FINALLY Ashley Judd is in a good movie again! And in a seriously unglamorous role, which she latches on to after a wobbly start and then goes for broke. As does her co-star Michael Shannon, most actors would have difficulty with these highly...( read more) demanding parts.

    Most people know William Friedkin as director of "The Exorcist." For me, "Bug" is much better. There is a commonality to the method of horror in both films, it is essential that the audience believes what the characters in the movie believe, otherwise all tension is lost. "The Excorsist" hinges on a belief in the possibility of demonic possession, otherwise you're stuck looking at a kid with a green face and the worst case of preteen acne ever seen for an hour. "Bug" relies on a more earthbound, and on the surface less farfetched, premise: infestation of tiny parasitic insects.

    ****SEMI-SPOILER ALERT****

    The genius of Friedkin's approach here lies in the unknown. We never actually see the bugs ourselves, which might have disappointed a lot of horror fans. But this technique adds an entirely new and scary dimension: are the bugs real, or are they manifest from advancing paranoia? The movie is like one long stomach vice, starting slowly with a very deliberate character buildup, which is a critical element: once we get to know these people, then we tend to believe - or want to believe - what they see as real.

    ****END OF SPOILER****

    One more note, Harry Connick Jr. is seriously unnerving from the instant he appears onscreen, making this a great trio of performances. I don't understand why this is ranked so low here - "Captivity" has a higher Flixster rating, for godssake! Let me urge that if you like your horror to be more mental than messy, let "Bug" scurry across your brain and avoid extermination for days.
  • April 14, 2009
    all I can say is WEIRD! (not scary)
  • April 13, 2009
    OMG....the height of freaky ass paronia...painful to watch but damn distrubing...you won't forget it.
  • April 6, 2009
    I was told Bug was a horror/thriller but i found it to be more of a psychological drama. The movie doesnt really go anywhere,its quite boring and would of made a much better short film but instead it goes on and on without getting better. Excuse the pun but the characters bugged ...( read more)me. My mind kept wandering and by the end i was left wondering if i could recreate the tin foil and light room,it looked groovy and space-like (in the end i decided i did not have enough tin foil).
  • April 3, 2009
    The worst movie I've ever seen...I want to take back the hour and 42 minutes I spent watching this crap-a-thon.
  • April 1, 2009
    well umn just seen this movie 4 the 1st time n think that this is a freaky movie 2 watch.,..its got a good cast of actors/actressess throughout this movie..i think that ashley judd, lynn collins, michael shannon, harry connick jr, brian f o bryne play good parts throughout this m...( read more)ovie..its got some good special effects thorughout this movie...i think that the director of this Drama, Mystery & Suspense movie had done a good job of directing this movie because you never know what 2 expect throughout this movie its a freaky movie 2 watch n its quite jumpy as well
  • March 14, 2009
    was confused about what this movie was actually abotu when it was advertised. i actualyl expected to see killer bugs or something , but when i found out what the movie was about it dissappointed me and i was quite upset that i wasted money on this SHIT!!!
  • March 10, 2009
    I had to give this one my "TFU" rating.
    A totally freakin' weird movie, but I have to say the acting was good and made you want to watch.
  • March 8, 2009
    Imagine all the fun and games that could happen if you let a paranoid schizophrenic into your life when you too are slightly mentally unstable...Yeah? Warning; you might end up finishing this film with a major case of WTF on your mind.
    Those who were predominantly just after a g...( read more)orefest will be sadly mistaken, as this appears to be the "thinking" man's horror.
    Based on Tracy Letts stage play, and in some cases the movie really does play out like a stage play, the intimate environment sustained really helps create an atmosphere that gets under your skin... no pun intended, if you know what I mean?
    Maybe it's just me, but I found that suddenly I became very itchy/fidgety throughout watching this. So, you might say that it ticks all the boxes in the uncomfortable factor! With very strong performances from both Judd and Shannon this turns out to be an increasingly effective psychological horror.
    However, not entirely sure I could stomach it again... and in some ways also really kinda regretting buying it on DVD now.
    Anyone want to buy a copy of Bug? It's just brimming with self-mutilationary goodness...
  • March 3, 2009
    William Friedkin's return to film is nothing short of shocking. This was originally a play, so that means very minimal locations and it's very dialogue heavy. Not that any of that is a bad thing, as I personally relished in each and every second of this film.

    Paranoia and delus...( read more)ion abound in this gripping tale as a down-on-her-luck woman (an almost unrecognizable Ashley Judd) meets the man of her dreams. The only problem is that he isn't the knight in shining armor she expected. Do to loneliness she quickly becomes attached to this new man, and goes to unreasonable extents and believes every word that poor out of his mouth. Even if they're about bugs that are transmitting signals to the military. What seems like an episode out of The Twilight Zone of the Night Gallery plays out a lot better than expected, and Michael Shannon does an EXCELLENT job with his character.

    By all means, this is not a horror film, as the trailer marketed it to be, so go into it with an open mind. If you do, then you'll enjoy the trip.

Summary


Bug Summary