The Redneg

2021

Action / Adventure / Drama

2
IMDb Rating 1.7/10 10 172 172

Plot summary

It takes place in a near future, in a fallen world after a devastating world war between woman and man. Only one percent of the world's population has survived the war and most of them are women. The few surviving men are being killed or captured by female groups, driven by the vision and the determination to build a new world, ruled only by women.

Director

Luc Ziann Photo
Luc Ziann

Top cast

Jake Sakima Photo
Jake Sakima as Noland
Kenneth Svensson Photo
Kenneth Svensson as The crucified man
Inna Syzonenko Photo
Inna Syzonenko as Kyra
Isabelle Pedone Photo
Isabelle Pedone as Zemora
720p.WEB 1080p.WEB
835.96 MB
1280*534
English 2.0
NR
Subtitles us  
23.976 fps
1 hr 31 min
Seeds ...
1.52 GB
1920*800
English 2.0
NR
Subtitles us  
23.976 fps
1 hr 31 min
Seeds ...

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by dakongreenhart 2 / 10

The Idea was There: the Execution was not. A Careless Production.

First and foremost, I was drawn by the title and, then, the story's potential.Upon watching the film, I noticed there's a lot that could have been improved with a few simple thoughts and considerations.Insofar as such, the opening credits and before could have used more theatrical techniques. There's a certain overture an audience expects from the opening scene that we weren't sold on before we saw the title of the movie. We should not only get a feel for what we're about to see, but we should have key understandings of what we're about to see before we're shown them.The person responsible for the motion graphics of the opening credits didn't notice how much of the text displayed on the right-hand side of the credits had no justified alignment: whereas, the texts on the left side were left-justified. It follows that those on the right should, then, be right-justified. Since we saw centered text in the opening credits, too, it makes any non-justified texts, like those on the right, more obviously design mistakes. Yet, these could have been simple fixes in post-production.The plot would have been more interesting if I didn't have to guess what was going on, or what the director wanted us to feel, so often. The formal summary contains facts which were never mentioned in the movie. For example, there was no evidence suggesting the main character was a former teacher or that his wife and child were lost in a war; there was also no supporting dialogue for the reference or mention of war, or any sort of spawning supporting scenes for that claim. Nevertheless, I did infer that Noland was mourning the loss of his family, but not for any particular reason or past.The setting in which this took place was unclear. I was having difficulty deciding whether I thought the film was more post-apocalyptic or medieval because in a post-apocalyptic world I'd assume the use of more advanced weaponry than what we saw, which were simple spears and wooden bows. All of the characters in this film wore clothes and had gear suggesting they could have had better options for weapons.Location planning was not at the forefront of thought for this film, evidently. Signs of recent human activity could be seen at some sites where this film was shot. For instance, towards the end of the film there was a deforested scene where it was evident that people (in real life) had been there recently to cut trees. Fresh machinery tracks can be spotted around the mud Noland walked. Again, as a viewer, if I were to be sold on the post-apocalyptic idea, those tracks in the mud should have been faded to indicate periods of elapsed time, or the scene should have been shot elsewhere or at a different moment, entirely. The final battle scene has this issue, as well. Tamara and Noland fought upon a flattened bed of dirt which was riddled with what looks like recent machine activity. Arguably, it would have benefited the scene more if someone raked away the tracks before filming. As another complete example, the dirt street outside the abandoned house in the beginning had not enough overgrowth to suggest the absence of human activity we'd expect if the world had ended.The flower scene seemed random. It was an opportunity for repetition that was missed because the purple flower we saw could have been found somewhere else in the film, too, perhaps, behind an ear, or in the hair, of the woman in white folding the laundry in an earlier scene to link it to us that our hero to stop and ponder his lost wife and child because the flower reminded him. If we saw the flower associated with those people earlier, it would have strengthened that scene's importance, given us a reason for him stopping there, and helped it not feel so random.Points were lost in the story arc because most of the characters had no developmental timeline, seeing as most of them were killed off immediately or dismissed rather quickly. As for one example, the man with the sling over his eye was never seen again after the abandoned house scene. So, what happened to him? What was the purpose of that character? That person could have been used again later, somehow, just as could have the 'traitor' woman. Where did she go after we saw her leave? We assume she died but we have no backstory as to why she had entered the film in the first place.We saw the main character eat bread, once, and drink a tea, but had no other supporting evidence to suggest how else he fed or watered himself. Before the ending, after "three weeks later" was displayed on the screen, we found Noland again without any gathered supplies or even a canteen to carry water. He walked by water a couple times in the film, but there was no commitment to the suggestion that he was drinking that water: he only touched it those few times and walked by it once.The rape scene was so absurd, entirely gross and in very poor taste. I had my hands on my face in horror as I nearly left the room; it was completely unnecessary! Personally, it cost you any bonus points I would have offered to this rating. If you wanted to depict the womens' disgust for man, you could have gone another route, like torture: it was mentioned in a speech scene just moments prior to this violation. It was ridiculous that Zemora untied Noland's hand afterward: we know it was done just to free the character; she had no real reason, otherwise.Later, when Noland was chased through a field by an archer who shot him with what we guess is a poison-saturated arrow: he suffered nothing in the aftermath. If possible, Noland should have entered that scene with more injuries, perhaps one to his eyes, knowing all that he'd gone through up until that point. An eye injury would have strengthened the choice to add that woman-in-the-woods scene that came after it; it could have been another reason for seeing such a mystical person. As it was, it was hard to understand the importance of that scene there. Noland's fight with that archer was much too downplayed, also. You geared us up as the audience to expect an awesome fight, but you let us down with a simple stabbing to end the encounter.The opposing languages and spoken dialects needed clarification. I wasn't sure why the caretaker was Swedish because the language of the women's tribe sounded like nonsensical Italian and Russian. Admittedly, the Swedish caretaker was a nice touch, and the choice for them was needed. I noticed the actor playing them was a little nervous for the scene, but it was cute and they did a nice job! Incidentally, the actress playing Tamara had one burst of sprinting speed during an uphill dash near the end of this film that was super impressive to me as a person.I don't know why some props were so randomly found. Noland found hand drawings and papers in the woods which were unexplained. How did those get there? Why would they have been there, anyways? There should have been a backstory, and that was an opportunity for depth that was missed.There's a major discrepancy between Noland's actions and intentions when there's a main character preaching inner thoughts about unity and love between men and women but doesn't live or act out those thoughts or intentions. In at least three different scenes we are reminded of this theme. But, just as it is, it becomes a mistake for the current ending because, then, we are reminded of Noland's lusts for peace and love-unity-once more during those final moments, but, then, we can just as easily remember: we spent an hour and a half watching Noland kill an entire band of women. Why is he preaching peace, love and unity among men and women without delivering it to us? He should have negotiated in this film. Even so, the ending would have been more believable if, after the final battle with Tamara when Noland knelt down facing away from the camera, he vomited in the dirt in complete exhaustion: which is real and what he must have felt in that moment. We could have empathized with him there. It could have been a symbol of him purging out the old, coming to a new understanding, or a spiritual rebirth. Remarkedly, with just that simple action at the end of that scene, it would have been easier to sell us on your theme of unity at the very end when he's floating in the water because at the end of any movie it makes more sense that a character's learned something by then. Above was a pristine example of an opportunity: both missed and overlooked.Several mechanical things could have been better, such as the filming camera should have undergone white-balancing between shots because many of the scenes have the tell-tale signs of negligent camera experience: the picture quality continuously switches between shades of yellow, green and blue throughout the entirety of this film for no intended reason.We didn't feel enough for the characters. So much more empathy could have been felt for them. An expert camera operator or director would have been able to guide us through emotions with their skills and a repertoire of different types of shots, angles and movements. We would have immediately noticed an improvement in the film in just this aspect, especially as an audience, because it would have been obvious if it were the case: we would have felt more.This film really does deserve a two rating. I wanted to give it a three, but only because I support these people having hopes and dreams. Best luck in the future! Thank you.
Reviewed by buddha-144-525401 1 / 10

Dumbest movie ever

This is just a bunch of men or should I say man against a bunch of women running around in the woods with nothing better to do than shoot each other with homemade bows and arrows. Supposed to be post-apocalyptic nonsense where the world had a war men versus women now there's just a handful of women after a couple of men with no plot whatsoever and with little men left how is the world going to repopulate at all like I said dumbest movie I've ever seen I feel dumber for watching it but I will highly recommend it to other people so that I ain't the dumbest one on earth anymore to the director please try again or should I say please don't try again.
Reviewed by mitchmurdock-978-575585 2 / 10

Not sure what they were trying for...

Poorly written, poorly directed, poorly filmed. The "hero" must have some type of narcolepsy because he falls asleep at the most inappropriate moments. A dystopian future where the women are taking back the planet. The men that are left are so stupid they probably deserve to die. The writers and directors are clearly not a fan of women and miss every opportunity to create strong, believable female characters. The premise of the film is interesting but these are not the guys to deliver it. What could have been a decent idea was lost in weird, unexplained tangents and story lines that simply peter out. I hate to bash someone's efforts, especially when they obviously took a great deal of time, but this was juvenile and disrespectful to both women and men.
Read more IMDb reviews

4 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment