This is a hard one to rate. On the plus side, the no-dialogue conceit works quite well, the slow pace is a virtue, and the lead actress manages to be charismatic even without any spoken dialogue. That said there are serious flaws. -the movie looks like it was filmed on videotape, giving it a cheap, unwelcome brightness and sharpness to its visual look. I found this a distraction. -too much of the extreme violence looks clumsy and badly simulated. -while the story is properly simple, it still doesn't always make sense. At the halfway point the lead character is murdered, after the villains previously murdered everyone close to her. OK, except they needed her signature on a property contract--how does killing her solve this??I'd say the film's second half is stronger, when the murdered woman emerges from the sea reborn, as some elemental pre-verbal creature to take revenge. The interlude with the young girl she befriends just after her resurrection is maybe the film's high point. But the flaws are glaring and keep the film from ever really taking flight. Also, yes I know we're in the extreme horror sub-genre, but why such fixation on genital mutilation? Is that needed to advance the story? Shock for shock's sake doesn't impress me. But in the end, I go back to the cheap videotaped look; making this on actual film would have been by itself a big improvement. So, not trash, but only partway successful.

I really wanted to like "Defenceless" but it's a movie that somehow isn't a sum of its parts. While the plot is relatively straightforward, the film's strength should come from its stylistic approach. This is a movie without dialogue - the powerful imagery conveys the tale, accompanied by a largely classical soundtrack.For gorehounds, there is some over-the-top violence. As with Savage's earlier "Marauders", some of this is taboo breaking but thankfully the more controversial deaths are off-screen.The beautiful Susanne Hausschmid is excellent as the lead, "The Woman". Without going into too much detail, this is a character who has to undergo a fair amount of torment, both physical and mental, during the course of the film. Hausschmid conveys what's going on in her mind brilliantly.Yet, despite its strengths, I was left feeling a tad empty after watching "Defenceless". I've not been able to warm to Savage's style.7 out of 10. Missing a certain something but an interesting exercise in cinema.

Nope. The arty pretentiousness of this movie does not make it an original horror film. Neither does its brutality (much of it poorly simulated) make it a edgy art film. But the combination of the two certainly makes it something - pure drudgery. This murder/revenge drama strains to be unique offering nothing more on its soundtrack than a musical score and some rather awkwardly dubbed screams. A prolonged and arduous torture sequence might stir some guilty giddy pleasure in those fond of exploitation, but by the time it occurs, it is likely such viewers will have long given up on watching. And those who might have appreciated its deliberate pace and elongated romance scenes are likely to be turned off by the sudden burst of graphic violence. Defenders of the film might argue that Defenceless does not play by the standards that have been set by horror films of the past and therefore is to be appreciated for being different. But originality is not a sufficient substitute for a well crafted drama.

Have you ever wondered how a magician pulls off a trick?If you watch "Defenceless", then expect to marvel in similar fashion, but do not expect any answers. Mr Savage has finally pulled a rabbit from his hat that has many of us scratching our heads. How did he do it? How on earth did the man manage to sustain interest for 98 minutes with no dialogue? Because Mr Savage has finally delivered a work which leaves us in no doubt as to the importance of story -- and what can be achieved in we concentrate on "the story". The story. And, still again, "The Story"."Defenceless" reminds me of the origins of "story". When a tale was told with grunts by pre-historic men in caves. Stick figures on walls. No special effects, no adr, no computers. Just story.How did he do it? By telling us a tale the old fashioned way. Not unlike the kind Hal Ashby and Bob Rafaelson used to tell in the sixties and seventies, but even they used some dialogue. Mr Savage does not use any. I love dialogue. Always have. Always will. I plot David Mamet like a nautical dove plots the course pf ancient mariners in times gone by. But, with "Defenceless", I did not need it.The story was all.How did he do it? Ask not. Any more than you would ask why pasta never tastes the same away from home as it does when you make it yourself. And, like a master chef, Mr Savage has finally delivered his piece de resistance: a meal fit for kings.The wonderful thing is, that I suspect "Defenceless" is the "appetiser". The main course is yet to come. I am hungry for more, and in truth, cannot wait.