Seventeen years after slaughtering all but one member of a family, a vicious serial killer known only as "The Sandman" awaits execution. But first, his jailers allow a minister to visit the...
See full summary »
Seventeen years after slaughtering all but one member of a family, a vicious serial killer known only as "The Sandman" awaits execution. But first, his jailers allow a minister to visit the killer to give him last rites, unaware that the minister is a voodoo priest and an ally of the condemned prisoner. The priest places a hex on the Sandman so that when he is executed, his soul migrates into a new body made of sand. To sever his ties with his former life and achieve absolute power, the sandman must find and kill a man named Griffin, the sole survivor of the last family murdered by the killer. Written by
Patrick D. Rockwell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The main characters' age is depicted differently throughout the film. In the first scene, Griffin is seven years old and Sandman appears to be in his early thirties. Seventeen years later, as Sandman awaits execution, he seems not to have aged a day, while Griffin is a full grown man. However, the flashback scene shows Sandman appearing to be about 10 years old, while Griffin is depicted as a baby. Their age difference just doesn't match up. See more »
A serial killer, thinking he's the sandman goes on a rampage trying to kill families that match a certain description. He is caught by police just as he's about to kill his intended victim, a little boy Griffin. The sandman is locked away. He later kills himself and upon his reincarnation he takes up from where he left off and sets out to kill a grown up Griffin.
Incredibly low budget and looks very cheap, but it's not the worst film in the world. It is infact moderately entertaining with a pretty good story. The production team make the best of what little budget they have, using some very low budget camera shots in places allowing them to spend a little more money on some bigger effects shots else where.
The acting and direction is fairly average but doesn't lower itself to being bad or too cheesy. The sentimental bulls**t is also thin on the ground which is pleasantly surprising for a film like this where they would try and make up for the lack of budget with sentiment and crap dialogue in the script.
Fairly good, watch it if it comes on TV but don't go out of your way to see it.
7 of 9 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?