This movie already annoyed me before it even properly started… The first screen depicts a written message in which is stated that hundreds of girls get abducted and sexually abused every year, and that the producers of this movie wish to illustrate these crimes as graphic and realistic as possible in order to warn parents and potential victims about the dangers of meeting up with strangers. Seriously, shenanigans like these make me furious because A) you honestly don't need to show explicit rape footage and sadist murder in order to pass the message of kids having to be wary of strangers and B) it's 300% hypocritical! If you want to make a raw and shocking exploitation movie, that's perfectly fine, but don't pretend even for one second that cinema like this has a deeper social moral or an educational task to fulfill. Perhaps my rant is slightly exaggerated, but pretentious messages like that at the beginning of a film irritate me enormously! Furthermore, I honestly don't understand where all the commotion with regards to this film comes from. Some people (mainly the haters) call it a rip-off of Wes Craven's "Last House on the Left", whereas others (primarily the fans) refer to it as an unofficial remake of that same exploitation landmark. To me personally it's just another entry in the "rape & revenge" sub-genre of exploitation cinema that is admittedly a lot more similar LHOTL than most titles. Throughout the 1970s and early 1980s, and then once more in the years 2000-2010, there were dozens of movies cashing in on the success of LHOTL (and, ironically enough, Wes Craven stole the idea of Ingmar Bergman's "The Virgin Spring") so why would one more form a problem? The only significant difference that "Chaos" has to offer is that it goes another step further when it comes to depicting misogynous cruelty and repulsive murder. Two young girls, Emily and Angelica, have planned to go to a rave in the woods, much against the will of Angelica's mother. They arrive so early that the rave hasn't even started yet, so they tag along with a guy named Swam who claims that he has ecstasy in his cabin. They end up in the hands of Chaos and his accomplices. Chaos is a dangerously deranged psychopath and rapist, and the poor girls' final hours will be excruciating and miserable. Then, in good old LHOTL tradition, the rapists somehow end up at the parents' house and another violent confrontation ensues. Yes, the violence is sickening. What Chaos does to the white girl's nipple and especially how he kills the black girl is truly disgusting and will make even the most hardened horror viewer squirm in his/her seat. But let's not exaggerate, neither. "Chaos" is not the most depraved film ever made, even though I'm sure that is what writer/director David DeFalco likes to believe. Kevin Gage, who's biggest moment of glory was to appear in Michael Mann's "Heat" in 1995, gives a more than solid performance as the titular sicko Chaos, but in spite of that he will never grow out to become a cult/exploitation icon like Krug Stillo (David Hess) did after "Last House on the Left".

I'm always up for a video nasty and Chaos had some buzz around it in (very underground and minor) horror circles so I figured, "What the hell?" and gave it a shot on Netflix. I don't regret having seen the film but I can't find any reason to recommend Chaos, even to fans of extreme horror.First off, this is a total rip-off of Last House on the Left. I call it a "rip-off" because it's not an authorized remake, even though the entire plot right down to the marketing campaign was lifted wholesale from Last House. It really is amazing that the filmmakers haven't been sued - I guess Wes Craven doesn't want to make his movie look even worse because of its faint resemblance to this cinematic turd.I'm not a very big fan of the original Last House ... I can see why it's an influential and possibly even important film but it my opinion it's aged in dog years since its release. Still, Last House is an Oscar-worthy masterwork of genius compared to Chaos.Everything on display here is garbage. The acting almost uniformly sucks and Kevin Gage (who amazingly appeared in Heat) is the only actor who shows even one iota of screen presence. The whole look of the film is cheap, poorly lit, and not even the least bit menacing. The pacing is terrible and the plot cannot even sustain itself through its fairly short run time. Adding to the embarrassment is an intro crawl that claims DeFalco made the film to "educate" and perhaps save lives. Someone should tell Dave that 1) his asinine film actually makes people dumber, and 2) the graphic content is so extreme that no one who could possibly benefit from the biting "Don't take drugs from strangers or you'll end up as rape-snuff" message would see this film in the first place.There's ultimately NO reason why anyone would want to watch this film, except for the violence. And you know what? The first murder is legitimately gruesome. Chaos (Gage) cuts off a girl's nipple in graphic detail - we can tell that it's latex but it's still rough - chews on it for a minute, then stuffs it in her mouth until she vomits. Then he flips her over, murders her with a knife, and rapes the corpse. Gross. The second murder is also rough but leaves a lot more to the imagination.That's it. Roughly five minutes of screen time, and that is the ONLY thing you'd want to watch in this film. I'm a serious gorehound so I can understand the appeal but I've got to tell you - the rest of this film is so inept and tedious it's hardly even worth a rental, much less actually buying the DVD. And there's just no excuse for ripping off other directors' work and not even having the decency to credit them. Dave DeFalco is an untalented plagiarist but I'll give him this much - he at least managed to bait Roger Ebert into an argument, thereby giving his crappy film much more attention than it legitimately deserves.

One wouldn't expect an individual to own up to how genuinely effective this film is when said individual refers to Wes Craven's "Last House on the Left" as "mediocre." (The junk Craven has been churning out since Scream 1 deserves that label, not "Last House.") A viewer should have the maturity to admit that he found a film shocking even when he disapproves of it. Note one viewer who claims the film is nasty and overly graphic and yet lame at the same time. Is it possible to find a film "dull" when one obviously had such strong reactions against it? Or, to quote Stephen Thrower, is it possible to be bored and outraged simultaneously? The answer is obvious. At least Roger Ebert, a critic I despise (note that his parry to the filmmakers' defense, had the honesty to admit that the film affected him and that he could not deny its impact, and this was in a zero star review. But some people can't stand to admit when they are genuinely bothered by a film like "Chaos," so they try to have it both ways, so they cop a stance of combined disaffectedness and moral/aesthetic outrage. I.e., "The viewer doth protest too much." As for the predictable, banal, and tiresome claims that the violence and rape don't "help the plot," not all movies -- or books, for that matter -- are about "plot." No one complains that the philosophical inquiries in a Bergman film don't "advance the plot." "Art" and "Exploitation" have more in common than originally meets the eye, as evidenced by the source material for Wes Craven's original film. So stop obsessing over Alfred Hitchcock and his plot-driven style of film-making: his method is not the only valid method with which to craft a thriller. Besides, the obvious is right in front of your nose and you can't even see it: this film's story is about the depredations that befall the two teen-aged girls. The thing done to them in the woods ARE the plot. Get it?

Kevin Gage is good as the killer/rapist. He cuts a nipple off one of the girls, makes her eat it, kills her AND THEN rapes her. He shoves a Crocodile Dundee sized knife up the other girl's butt. Nice moves but without any merit. Everyone else in this movie is an embarrassment. The acting is painfully bad.This is another film that's supposed to be a message ABOUT torture porn instead of simply BEING torture porn; the film begins with a written message saying as much and hopes that by alerting parents and potential victims to the scaries out there, maybe it will save a life.What a joke. What a wimp of a filmmaker. Who cares if Roger Ebert didn't like your film? I didn't like it either because it totally sucked.