All right... compared to "Citizen Cane" or "Mutiny on the Bounty", it might be a couple of stars... but it's not supposed to be a serious grand epic.To think the Soska Sisters made this movie in film school for $2500, IMHO, they deserve an academy award. Warner Bros or Universal, couldn't even get a van on location for that! What the hell do you haters & whiners expect?Yes, it contains gratuitous, cartoonish, over the top gore and violence, BUT THAT IS THE NATURE OF THE GENRE! I found the movie hilarious, fast paced and extremely entertaining.When rating a movie, I believe it is only fair to consider such factors as budget and genre. To really dog a movie like this, is like dogging a 1963 VW Bug compared to 2014 Porsche. It just ain't fair. For these reasons I rate "Dead Hooker in a Trunk" 8 out of 10 stars...

This movie is fun. And a ride.Which makes it a fun ride.Relying more on creativity than budget, Dead Hooker In A Trunk, follows the exploits of a group of friends (highlighted by twin sisters, who also directed) throughout a day of pure madcap madness after finding (drumroll) a Dead Hooker in a Trunk.The violence is over the top, characters lose eyes and limbs...AND KEEP GOING and the quips and one liners never stop...and I mean NEVER.Has to be seen to be believed. Pick it up.No, I meant it. Pick it up.

Dead Hooker in a Trunk (2009) * (out of 4) Badass (Sylvia Soska), Geek (Jen Soska), Junkie (Rikki Gagne) and Goody Two Shoes (C.J. Wallis) discover a dead hooker in their trunk and that's about it. The Soska twins directed, wrote and stars in this movie that seems to have gotten some pretty glowing reviews but I'm a little confused as to why because I found the film incredibly hard to get through. The film isn't a complete disaster so I'll start off with the only good thing. I think the vision of the film was actually quite good and it's hard to believe that this thing was shot for just a couple thousand dollars. I give the sisters credit for certainly having an eye because they've made this film look quite professional and that there is saying quite a bit considering how most low-budget horror films look. With that said, the rest of the film was pretty much dreadful with the story being the most annoying thing. I'm not really sure what the point of the film was except to come off like a Quentin Tarantino movie and mix countless genres together with quick dialogue, over-the-top violence and other bizarre matters. The problem here is that none of it works as the story never makes a bit of sense and the characters are all just annoying to the point where you're hoping they all die. The movie has one drawn out sequence after another and sometimes we get some graphic gore but more often than not it's just dialogue full of F-bombs. The performances aren't the greatest in the world but they are slightly better than we typically see in this type of picture. I know many are calling this a "terrific homage to grindhouse pictures" but I found the film to be far from that. I guess people will have to make up their own minds but while the Soska girls show talent here, the final result is quite horrid.

one word describes this - terrible. I am being nice here too. This mindless garbage should not be seen by human eyes. The acting is as good as a high school play. The script has so many 'F' words in it that you can't possibly follow this. The sisters have mass issues - one being their hatred towards all men. The only male lead is the biggest wuss in all cinema. He makes Charlie Brown look like Rambo. How many times do we have to see the dude vomit? I get it already. All the main character does is swear and act like she is bigger then the man upstairs. What world is this? I had to turn this stinker off midway because my brain started to hurt.