There is a tendency among modern superhero (films) to portray their particular marked crusader as some sort of flawed, anti-hero - take Chris Nolan's Batman trilogy, Robert Downey Jr in the Iron Man films and The Watchmen.Bruiser was released in 2000, just slightly before this trend really took off. It's about a put-upon worker who wakes up to find his features have changed to that of a plain white mask. Therefore, now no one knows who he is, he seeks revenge on all those who scorned him. This sounds like a basic sort of superhero movie plot and, courtesy of zombie-lord George Romero, he adds a bit of horror into it too.Does it work? Sadly, not really.Although it could have been decent enough, it suffers from a lack of stars, a clunky script (Romero also wrote it and, as anyone who has watched his more recent zombie films will know he's kind off gone off the boil with his pen) and quite possibly budget. There's no real action and only a few kills. However, my biggest gripe was how our (anti?) hero was never really the put-upon loser he was billed as. Henry Creedlow works for a famous fashion magazine (think Vogue etc), has a beautiful wife, lives in a big house, drives a fast car and plays the stock market. From this we're supposed to feel sorry for him. Okay, he gets pushed around a bit, but, for me, it just didn't make him as much as a loser as the film suggested. Then there's the 'super villain.' Only he's not. Captain America fought Red Skull, with Batman it was the Joker. Here, the 'villain' is an annoyingly loud guy who sleeps with more women than Peter Stringfellow. He's not trying to kill anyone, nor is he trying to take over the world. He's just an idiot. Again, hardly someone you can truly hate (get annoyed by - yes - but not hate).Full marks for Jason Flemyng for his America accent. Maybe Bruiser will get a remake one day and give it a budget and a script makeover. In the meantime, probably one to avoid. Sorry, George - I still love Dawn of the Dead.

"I'm not in the media. I'm in the face business"Henry is a "nobody" whose life sucks ass. He works at a magazine company, with a lousy sleazoid of a boss, has a house that he cannot afford (and is unfinished, still needing renovations) and a gold digger wife who married him because she thought he was on the fast track to success, and, worst of all, awakens to find that his face is *gone*. Soon Henry discovers that his wife is screwing his boss, his best friend has been stealing money from him (Henry's wife was the one responsible for coming up with the scheme to siphon away hubby's income behind his back!), and his maid is taking the silverware while cleaning the house! Losing your face, your identity, in turn, causes Henry to lash out at those who have victimized him, saving the boss for last.George Romero's "Bruiser" (the film's title comes from the name of Milos Styles' magazine company) has another message that is less-than-subtle and has been considered the director's worst film by many of his fans. I have read for years how awful "Bruiser" is, but I didn't really find it too lousy, although there's nothing remarkable present either.The film condemns the wealthy, or at least the magazine industry, as soulless, heartless snobs, who seem to exist solely to remain profitable and successful. Styles, as evoked by Peter Stormare, is a despicable, crude, noisy clown who has a brash, poisonous air about him that wouldn't appeal to anyone if not for his position in life thanks to his magazine. One scene has Styles getting masturbated by Janine(Henry's wife) during a party at his home as Henry peers from afar in appropriate disgust.The film seems to insinuate that as Henry gets even with those who wronged him, his identity will return, to stop being a victim you can regain your dignity. I'm a bit indifferent towards the message: to use violence against those who have wronged you, to "stand up for yourself" (as Henry mentions at the end), you are no longer a "nobody", the blank face vanishes and a real human lies underneath. Flemyng, whose face isn't hidden under the white mask the first part of the movie, provides us with a somewhat sympathetic character who allows himself to be mistreated and duped by his wife, boss, and best friend, a film-flam man seemingly disabled of any desire to "climb the ladder" and rise above mediocrity. It's only when he takes a stand, that he can resurrect himself.The film ends with our "hero" once again in a lower level office position, which has me rather clueless as to the point Romero was trying to make to start with (sure he's not taking any crap from loud, debase employers who belittle and rip into their employees, but remains a lackey pushing a mail cart). Tom Atkins is ever so welcome as the cop out to catch the "faceless killer".A suicide victim, who shot himself while talking to a smart aleck radio DJ, is a recurring reminder to Henry that he can either remain where he is (always a victim) and put a bullet in his mouth, or no longer remain a member of the downtrodden. Leslie Hope is Milo's artist wife who puts up with his belligerent ways, but Henry spends time during the movie trying to convince her to leave him (she is also a suspect in the murder of Janine). The mask for Flemyng I thought was rather eerie, kind of reminded me of the Phantom of the Opera. Nina Garbiras is Henry's acid-tongued wife, Janine, with Andrew Tarbet as Henry's no-good friend (whose nice car, Henry soon learns, was purchased using the swindled cash). The finale is a showcase for the band The Misfits as Atkins and other police are trying to catch Henry, among the crowd of costumed freaks and goth/punk types congregating about as our hero pursues Milos (quite a laser light show; one particular laser can actually cut).

Bruiser tells the tale of Henry Creedlow (Jason Flemyng) who works as an executive on a fashion magazine called 'Bruiser' & he apparently lets everyone 'walk all over him' according to just about everyone he know's. Henry's boss is an a-hole & is having an affair with his wife Janine (Nina Garbiras) who is also stealing lots of money off Henry in partnership with his best friend James (Andrew Tarbet) & even his maid Mariah (Tamsin Kelsey) is stealing off him. Henry has become a nobody, he has lost all his identity & has become a faceless drone in the crowd who no-one notices or cares about to such an extent that Henry wakes up one morning to find his face has been replaced with a featureless, colourless white mask with no identifying features. Henry uses this bizarre twist of fate to his own advantage & sets out to punish those who wronged him & turned him into the faceless entity he has become...This French, Canadian & American co-production was written & directed by George A. Romero who has had a somewhat erratic career & Bruiser was in fact his first directorial film in seven years him not having directed anything since the Stephen King adaptation The Dark Half (1993) which is actually better than Bruiser but that's another story & after he had directed Bruiser it was another five years before he directed again with Land of the Dead (2005) which is also better than Bruiser but that too is another story. So, in the space of twelve long years Romero who was hailed as the greatest horror director of his generation during the late 70's & early 80's after making genre classics like Night of the Living Dead (1968), Martin (1977), Dawn of the Dead (1978), Creepshow (1982) & Day of the Dead (1985) only made one film, this. Bruiser is a departure from what Romero usually makes in one sense that Bruiser is an off-beat somewhat odd-ball psychological thriller rather than a straight horror flick but but it does retain Romero's penchant for social commentary as the whole film revolves around the idea of a man being a faceless entity in today's uncaring society & finally snapping in order to gain back his identity. As a basic high brow concept I thought the idea was fine & I quite liked some of the ideas & themes Romero explores here & I actually related to some of them (especially the fantasy Henry had about squishing the rude woman's head under the train wheels!) but I don't think the film does much with them & ends up like a boring slasher film as Henry kills a few of the people he doesn't like & that's about it. At almost 100 odd minutes the film goes on for quite a while & I did start to get bored with the concept well before the end, the supporting character's are all very unlikable which doesn't help & although it tries to be challenging, relevant & meaningful I personally didn't really take much from the film.Those looking at Romero's past films & hoping for some horror & gore will surely be disappointed with Bruiser, there's a brief scene in which a woman has her head squashed by a train although nothing too graphic is shown, a man is shot in the chest, there's a dream sequence in which Henry commits suicide by shooting himself in the head, a woman is hanged & that's about it. Was I the only one who thought Henry looked daft with that white mask face? I thought he looked like one of those stereotypical French mime artists with white face paint! There's no real scares here, the film has a nice clean middle class look to it but there's no atmosphere.According to the IMDb this had a budget of about $5,000,000 which does surprise me somewhat, I can't really see where all that money went to be honest. Bruiser was the first film directed by Romero not to be made in or around Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, it was actually filmed in Ontario in Canada. The acting is pretty good from a decent cast although Peter Stormare as the annoyingly obnoxious Milo Styles was a little OTT for me while genre favourite Tom Atkins has a fun role as a cynical cop.Bruiser is certainly something a bit different although while I did like the concept I don't think enough was done with it & to be frank Romero is better than this & should stick to straight horror which he thankfully largely has.

There is about 20 minutes of interesting movie here, in the opening preamble and in the grand guignol of the masquerade party. In between, this is poor.I love Romero films, for, amongst other things, their mixture of grotesque violence and gallows humour. With Bruiser, apart from the delicious viciousness of the set-up of our faceless non-hero, this provided some peculiar and unsatisfactory combination of Zorro and Death Wish, without atmosphere, coherence or even any real energy. Did the whole budget get blown on the set for the masquerade? I wanted to like it, was expecting to at least enjoy it in a time-passing way, and was only bored and frustrated by it.