May (2003) (mini-review++)

(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)

(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)

acting 8

directing 7

effects 7

editing 7

writing 8


3.7 out of 5 🐙


Written and directed by a man named Lucky (McKee), May is a tale about a young woman who is anything but. Her parents’ psychotic child rearing left her with no friends, save for a doll in a glass display case. May can talk to the doll, but she doesn’t really know how to talk to people. Upon seeing Adam (Jeremy Sisto), her heart is set aflutter, and she decides to make him her own. Suffice it to say, she doesn’t get her man. Her broken heart and the destruction of her doll, in what will go down as one of the most disturbing scenes in horror history, send her over the edge.

This horror film is a study in character over stylish murders (but don’t worry, you’ll get your fill). Whereas typical slasher flicks waste little time on the monster’s motivation, the bulk of this film is getting to know May. She may be fucked up (botched animal operations tickle her fancy) but the “normal” people around her, such as Polly (Anna Faris) the cruel, nymphomaniac receptionist at the veterinary clinic, are far worse. May is someone you worry about and you like and you feel sorry for when things go terribly for her. And when she begins to do terrible things.

Angela Bettis’ turn as the kind and socially incompetent May is the meat of this movie. Bettis exudes innocence and loneliness. She is so naïve that she does not even know what she does not know. Even Poindexter knew he was a nerd. Hopefully McKee will continue to deliver horror (or any other genre) films with rich characters. There’s nothing like a good decapitation, but it’s even better when either character in that equation has something going in their head.







(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.

(2) Octopuses (0-5 🐙, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)

(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feeling…not that SW score is scientific…but this one is even less so

(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant)

Leave a Reply