The ABCs of Death
User Score
5.0 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 12 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 12
  2. Mixed: 1 out of 12
  3. Negative: 5 out of 12

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. samarathenymph
    Mar 17, 2013
    7
    i saw this a month ago, and, in a very general sense, it's awesome, it's an interesting idea to begin with: 26 segments, all about death in alphabetical order, then you have some great indie directors, like ti west, adam wingard, xavier gens, marcel... whatever his name is... takashi miike, jason eisener, need i go on? so, i had a lot of fun with this film, each of the segments has a distinct style, which is all you can hope to achieve in five minutes or less, and sometimes it is disgustingly violent, specifically with xxl, which made me physically sick, sometimes it's funny (in a sick way), specifically with nuptials, young buck, klutz and toilet, it's very artistic, which is one of the few things that are consistent in the film, because you have 26 directors, there is going to be a lot of inconsistency, but, for the most part, it remains good, the two segments that i found absolutely terrible are fart and miscarriage... WAS TI WEST EVEN TRYING? highlights include removed, dogfight, bigfoot, exterminate, hydro electric diffusion, libido, nuptials, quack, speed, unearthed, vagitus, xxl, young buck... yeah, a lot of them are great, wtf was amusing but weird, zetsumetsu was entertaining, (genital swordfights... really?), so yeah... i laughed, i cried, i screamed in terror, i screamed in disappointment, but i enjoyed myself, and that's what makes it so good samarathenymph xoxo… Expand
  2. wearetheothers
    Mar 17, 2013
    6
    the main problem is that this is just way too uneven to recommend, some of the segments are just disgusting, some are scary, and some are funny, but most of them could have been done better, dogfight, toilet, cycle, young buck, and libido are the best segments, xxl will make any normal person sick, and all of the japanese segments (dear god, i sound so racist) are terrible, especially fart... what the hell was that? but as a whole, it was unique, entertaining, scary and it does just what you expect it to do... watch it if you dare.… Expand
  3. HaithamBayazeed
    Mar 11, 2013
    3
    This movie doesn't decide what genre it has, great idea! BAD MOVIE! 3 for D letter segment
  4. marxblom
    Mar 10, 2013
    3
    The idea of ​​"The ABCs of Death" is not bad, on the contrary. The idea might have actually worked in a 2 hour movie, but as we saw on the screen is really bad. As a film of 26 segments can say that there are some good and some bad, but in this movie about 80% of the segments and bad, poorly worked, a waste of money that could is in the hands of several families of Africa and no doubt an aan attack to good taste."The ABCs of Death" would be better spent on TV with a segment of at least 20 minutes, but the way we see. "M is for Miscarriage" anyone with a camera and red dye could repeat that thread and maybe it would be better than what we see on screen (BIG WASTE OF MONEY). "I is for the Ingrown" gives us a sense of emptiness, because it explains nothing of what we see on screen. "G is for Gravity" is even emptier than the previous one where not even an actor can be seen on the scene (MUCH BETTER SEE A VIDEO ON ANY INTERNET). "Would be F Fart" is a violation of horror films like The Evil Dead I think this qualifies or segment with a black comedy. "L is for Libido" and "Y is for Young Buck" come to sound offensive by exposing young people to certain situations. These are examples of segments that do not work or work poorly and we give the impression that a boy twelve years old with a digital camera with the budget that the directors had managed to do something better.More segments are not all bad, bad, or regular. "D is for the Dogfigth" and an example of good use of cinematography and gives us the impression that this is not part of the film. The movements are perfect, the plot and clearly understandable, there was a good investment on the part of the director. "X is for XL" try conveying a message in the wrong way, but it failed in all one of the few segments that give a dose of suspense. "V is for vagitus" should have a movie solo, because the idea could be better crafted. This segment and the second makes us think we're seeing another movie.Well, if you want to laugh a little, have a little fright and feel sick with the twelve and twelve fake blood (because in certain scenes is clearly noticeable that the blood used and false, very false and FALSE) then go to the cinema and watch "The ABCs of Death", but have patience, because at times you will say exactly the theme of the segment "W is for the WTF!"… Expand
  5. certified_hater
    Mar 10, 2013
    1
    Was this supposed to be scary? Was this supposed to be a comedy? At the end of the day it doesn’t matter, when the only thing “The ABCs of Death” turns into is an example of what happens (most of the time) when directors serve as their own writers. In my mind, going down as a tonally confused version of something out of the “Faces of Death” series, “The ABCs of Death” is a compilation of 2mpilation of 26 short films, where the overall idea was to give 26 directors (from all over the world) each a letter of the alphabet and have them each make a short segment showcasing death using a theme which begins with their designated letter. But while we (the audience members) are lead to believe that each director has set out to work within the confines of their letter in order to bring forth something interesting, problems arise when it quickly becomes apparent how aggressively incoherent, aggressively disgusting (but not in a scary way) and just downright boring “The ABCs of Death” actually is.
    Much of this movie is a mixture of segments which are visually well crafted, but far too conceptually strange, segments that are meant to be funny, but are far too conceptually strange and the segments which are downright gross, and while aren’t as conceptually strange, are simply nonsensical. But maybe the biggest problem here is that most of these said segments aren’t scary at all. Even those directors, who came forth with the intention to scare, showcase segments of death tamer than anything you could see in an episode of “1000 Ways to Die”. A Quick Heads Up: The best segment (by far) is entitled “Q is for Quack” by filmmaker Adam Wingard, who seems to be the only writer/director thinking outside of the box. But even though this is one of the funniest film shorts I’ve ever seen (I’m not kidding) what you have to wade through to get to it, is sadly not worth your time. Anyway, I’m sure you can find this segment on YouTube or somewhere else for free. The only other segment which rivals Wingard’s film is entitled “X is for XXL”, which is undoubtedly the most visually impressive and is in fact the scariest segment in this supposed horror movie.
    Final Thought: Maybe I was naive to think that a movie entitled “The ABCs of Death” would be scary or even have a fraction of Twilight Zone-ish sensibility, but I would be shocked if said egregious lack of scares isn’t the final nail in the coffin which distractingly kills off anything good about this film experiment, as an entire piece.

    Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

    Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus    … Expand
  6. tylernorton
    Mar 17, 2013
    6
    very, VERY uneven, but still good, sick fun for those who enjoy good, sick fun... those who don't will absolutely hate it, dogfight was the best short in my opinion.
  7. extrafizz
    Mar 17, 2013
    4
    this movie must have been a wonderful concept on paper, but through some particularly craptacular segments, (YES TI WEST, I'M TALKING ABOUT YOU), the execution of the concept was just very poor, i do give it props for trying though, libido and removed tie for the best segment.
  8. epicmorganguy
    Mar 17, 2013
    10
    epic

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
43 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 16 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 16
  2. Mixed: 10 out of 16
  3. Negative: 3 out of 16
  1. The Guardian
    Reviewed by: Catherine Shoard
    Apr 26, 2013
    40
    The most intentional fun comes courtesy of N (for Nuptials).
    Read full review
  2. Austin Chronicle
    Reviewed by: Marjorie Baumgarten
    Mar 20, 2013
    40
    A good concept yields scattershot results in this horror-film anthology.
    Read full review
  3. NPR
    Reviewed by: Ian Buckwalter
    Mar 8, 2013
    35
    With 26 films, one for each letter of the alphabet, one might expect enough gems in the mix to make up for any stinkers. That's sadly not the case.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »