Things haven't been exactly peachy for director William Friedkin ever since To Live and Die in L.A. You wouldn't be remiss to expect great things from the guy that directed Sorcerer, The Exorcist and The French Connection - exceptional thrillers all. But alas no, the gods of the late eighties and nineties instead sought fit to deliver upon us a series of lame Friedkin flicks about things like: an adulterous wife (plus a car chase!), a man eating Ent, Tommy Lee Jones practising knife Kung – Fu in the ancient arboreal realm of Oregon and, not to be forgotten, another sterling foray into acting by one Shaquille O'Neill.But something changed in the mid-aughts, and it almost seemed like the director took a more critical look at the previous two movies he had directed at this point in his career and decided to make something within the same ballpark thematically, but direct and streamlined. Enter Bug – an intimate, claustrophobic thriller that just might be one of Bill Friedkin's stronger movies. Bug is the story of Agnes White (played magnificently by Ashley Judd) , a woman whose life seems to be in a state of stasis. Agnes lives in a motel quite literally in the middle of nowhere, and spends her days working as a waitress in her friend R.C.'s run-down bar. But when the sun sets, things go bump in the night, and she is plagued by constant anonymous phone calls from mute callers. A sordid past is implied in these calls, and our protagonist attributes these calls to her violent former husband Jerry. Paranoia seeps in, and Agnes seeks out solace in excessive wine and drug-use, as well as a "friends with benefits"- type relationship with R.C. One night, a party in Agnes' room is joined by a tall, dark and handsome weirdo named Peter (Michael Shannon in one of his best movie roles) and the story sets off from here. Agnes and Peter enter an awkward, but heartfelt relationship as both of their pasts begin to intersect in increasingly manic ways. At its core, Bug is a chamber drama about two people and how their personalities seep into one another in an attempt to heal their own emotional trauma. We slowly become aware of the turmoil that torments Agnes - a crippling tragedy tinged with guilt sits at the very core of her being, alongside the very tangible threat of an angry, fresh out of jail husband. In contrast, Peter is aloof, almost dazed, and at first he provides a degree of comfort to Agnes. Things slowly start spiralling out of control after the two have sex, as Peter starts seeing invisible insects crawling inside the motel room.The motif of the insect and infection is interesting, as it becomes a dramatic cornerstone. In simplified terms, the movie presents the idea that relationships between people in extreme emotional and mental states have an element of absorption (or infection, if you will) wherein ideas and norms from one person are internalised wholesale by the other one. This creates something of an endless chain of small ideas propagating from one host to the next in an endless loop. This is interesting from both a personal and an ideological level, as it seems to indicate how certain belief systems like conspiracy theories, and cult-like religious beliefs can be accepted by intelligent people. Agnes is a prime example of that, - losing her son has made her vulnerable to an almost pliable degree. Peter, the only person who offers her comfort and empathy, becomes a corrective force in her life. The side effect is that she internalises his worldviews as her own, as they present a modicum of escape as well as a way of externalising the reasons for her own grief. The movie presents this as a human way of dealing with grief, a form of self-defence mechanism that is dependent on the presence of other people.So, when it comes to its core story-line, the movie is relatively successful. Structurally, the first act is solid where you get a satisfying introduction with a core mystery with a well-defined emotional centre. The second act plays with the viewer by making them question things about the characters, and the infection angle remains intriguing throughout. It's a shame though, that it ends on a less than interesting note. But larger blemishes appear around the third act, as the movie takes a number of dramatic shortcuts that are largely unsatisfying or just plain lazy. The escalation towards the finale seems clumsy – a poorly explained and contextualised murder is topped off with a long-winded series of monologues where the characters narrating their own demise.The acting is stellar, Judd delivers a layered character that goes through a cavalcade of emotions through the movie but is kept together by a proud but very vulnerable frame. Towards the end, the character shifts into overdrive, and Judd delivers an almost hysterical sprint through every single human emotion, from elation to catatonia and back all within the span of few minutes. She sells Agnes' hesitant attraction towards Shannon's character fairly well, and deftly shows of the different emotional beats at the appropriate moment. Overall, the performance is almost a textbook showcase of a dizzying number of emotional situations through which Judd swiftly and effortlessly navigates. Shannon is also extremely impressive, honing in on a more consistent acting style. There are a few moments of whiplash- inducing intensity that ends up feeling a tad overwrought, but that seems more like a necessity borne of the script rather than the actor's fault. He successfully generates empathy, without ever presenting the character as psychotic or emotionally oblique.Bug is a solid piece of atmospheric film-making, with some genuine craft on display. The ending is hokey, but overall the movie absolutely will get under your skin.

Veteran filmmaker William Friedkin brings some cinematic flair to this film, Tracy Letts' screen adaptation of his own play. Considering that Friedkin had created one of the finest horror films of all time, "The Exorcist", and one of the finest cop vs. crook thrillers ever made, "The French Connection", it's interesting to see him go back to a more intimate sort of filmmaking. This story has a scant few characters, a very limited number of locations, and a hook that shouldn't really be taken at face value.Ashley Judd is luminous in a deglamorized character role as Agnes, a honky-tonk waitress who one day makes the acquaintance of a stranger, Peter (Michael Shannon, who played this part on the stage). Peter starts out as normal but soon reveals some major psychoses, with a particular fixation on the tiny, tiny insects that are supposedly living under his skin, feeding, and breeding. It does not take very long for the vulnerable Agnes to be susceptible to his words and actions.The acting quintet is rounded out by Harry Connick Jr. as Jerry Goss, Agnes' no-good ex- husband, Lynn Collins as the saucy R.C., and Brian F. O'Byrne as a dedicated doctor. They're all good, but "Bug" truly belongs to Judd and Shannon for 102 minutes. They just act their hearts out, and keep you riveted even as things get increasingly strange.The final third is the most stylish and bizarre, with Friedkin and company creating a memorable vision, and feel of madness. While the director and screenwriter don't miss opportunities for humor, they remain true to the overall grim tone of the material.Although not exactly a conventional horror film (that might be suggested by the title), it is creepy in its own way, and is gory and visceral enough to suit certain tastes.Friedkin and Letts reteamed for the equally compelling "Killer Joe" several years later.Eight out of 10.

I guess this is so often referred to as a horror film because it doesn't quite fit into a specific genre. Some horrible things happen, certainly, so horror is one of the things the story is the fewest miles away from. The acting is great, and though it isn't a high quality production, the cinematography is smart. I enjoyed the plot, but I felt it went too far too fast. The transition from sad to insane is so fast, it feels forced, and by the time the end comes, it's hard to take it seriously anymore. It should have felt like a tragedy, but I couldn't decide whether to roll my eyes or laugh at the absurd extremes of the final moments. This will entertain lovers of the weird or the crazy. If you're looking for a horror film or a sci-fi film, you'll likely be disappointed, although it's often presented as such. Furthermore, don't pay too much attention to the synopses usually offered, as they tend to suggest a type of movie quite different from what this actually is.

This is an excellent film. It starts out very unassuming and builds slowly on some levels but quickly on others. Early on there is an intrigue that grabs the viewer. I found this to be one of the most well done films in the last 20 years, tremendous acting and directing. But more of an Alfred Hitchcock than Ridley Scott. As someone else pointed out, the trailer is extremely deceptive. But note the title is singular making it a word that can have more than one meaning; it is a play on words. This is a psychological thriller, but to call it horror -- or black comedy as some reviewers -- is missing the essence of what's really happening. Great dialog and intense emotional innuendo. If you plan to sit and just be entertained you may want to opt for something simpler. If you like having your mind bent a little, than this is a great choice.