Scar (2005) User Reviews

More terrible low budget horror crap.

[poolandrews · 3/10 · 23 February 2008]

Scar is set in the small town of Wrightwood in Fort Lauderdale where Tom (Randy Wayne) & his friend Jenny (Ashley Nelson) are investigating the death of Zack (Brad Pennington), Tom's best friend & Jenny's boyfriend. Their attention turns to a log cabin in a nearby forest where Zack was killed a year ago, his death is still shrouded in mystery & they hope to discover the truth once & for all. What they find is beyond their imaginations...

Co-written & directed by Rahil Bhorania this is a really dull, lifeless & bland ghost story. I wouldn't so much call it a haunted house flick as a haunted log cabin flick which was probably down to the budget as the makers could only afford a small log cabin rather than a proper house! The script by Bhorania & Stephen Goetsch drags on for what feels like forever, it drags badly with an extremely thin storyline which would struggle to fill out an episode of Tales from the Crypt (1989 - 1996) & even if it did manage to fill out an episode it would still be rubbish. You don't care about anyone or anything, it's so slow it becomes a real chore to sit through. There's a distinct lack of action or dramatic incident too, virtually nothing happens for long stretches & it really started to test my patience. The dialogue is poor & forgettable, the character's are dull & the story is utterly lifeless. This is the sort of film where the budget dictates what happens rather than the script, one to avoid.

Director Bhorania doesn't do anything special, the camera remains fairly static & it's pretty much point & shoot stuff. At least it doesn't go down the route of shaky hand held camera movements & quick cut editing but that's hardly any recommendation on it's own. Forget about any gore because there isn't any apart from a bit of fake blood, certainly nothing to get you gore lovers out there excited. It's not scary, the plot has plenty of holes, there's no tension or atmosphere & a really rubbish ending too.

With a supposed budget of about $500,000 the film is alright if you take the ultra low budget into account otherwise it's awful. How the makers manged to convince Dee Wallace from films such as 10 (1979), The Howling (1981), E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (1982), Cujo (1983) & Critters (1986) to appear in this I will never know. Low budget film veteran Joe Estevez (uncle of Emilio Estevez, Charlie Sheen & Renee Estevez as well as brother of Martin Sheen) has a small role as the local Sheriff.

Scar is the sort of dull, forgettable & downright lifeless low budget horror film that didn't do anything for me at all. I seriously doubt most people will find anything remotely enjoyable in this, there are much better films out there.

I wanted to like this, but...

[lagriff05 · 4/10 · 16 June 2007]

(written September 2006)

Sadly this just is not any good at all. Another low budget horror flick that's not worth your time unless you eat this stuff up. The story looked interesting and original from the back of the box, so I popped it in, eager for a good suspense/thriller movie. But no, it's not good, at all, and if you put it in expecting a good movie then you will be thoroughly disappointed. The acting is bad all around, especially Tom (Randy Wayne), who can't manage to put any real feeling into anything he does, or, even worse, Fred (Paul Darrigo), who's horrible "acting" was actually enough to make me cringe in embarrassment.

The plot goes nowhere, and the whole 'mystery' is absolutely ridiculous when it's revealed near the end. The blood mostly looks fake, but there is some good gore (albeit the fact that it's pointless and does not help the story at all). I can't even say this movie was a fun experience, except for Jenny (Ashley Nelson), who was a decent actor at most, and very good looking. Served as something to look at, especially since she was often clad in short shorts or tight white T-shirts. Probably the only redeeming factor of this film.

Scar

[Scarecrow-88 · 4/10 · 15 August 2009]

After witnessing the murder of his best friend while the two were backpacking in the woods, Tom(Randy Wayne), along with the dead guy's girlfriend, Jenny(Ashley C Nelson), decide to return to the town where it happened. Tom's memories of that day are cloudy so he hopes to understand more about the women responsible for his pal, Zack's(Brad Pennington) demise. Finding the cabin where the two women lived, Jenny encounters the ghost of young woman Zack attempted to sleep with, and the touch of her hand causes a frightening developing scar. This scar could represent the stab wound caused by the accidental ax murder of the girl at the hands of her mother who was attempting to kill a local she thought was raping her daughter. Tom must figure out how to stop the scar from eventually killing Jenny or else lose yet another friend. As Tom and Jenny seek answers, some disturbing truths arise, regarding a video store clerk's actions in the deaths that occurred to the mother and daughter that day along with the father who found his family dead. Tom and Jenny encounter a hostile town sheriff(Joe Esteves)and a chain-smoking motel owner(Dee Wallace) who also dabbles in spiritualism along the way.

Tom and Jenny soon believe that in order to cease the supernatural occurrences that continue a relative of the mother and daughter ghosts must be found.

Kooky plotting and bloody ax murders, with a more substantial role for Dee Wallace than usual for such a low-budget supernatural slasher flick(..nowadays, she's often in cameos). The whole scenario with the father of the murdered family yields a really wild twist, and his reaction to seeing his wife and daughter's spirit certainly is a startling moment in the film, towards the end, for he might just hold the answer to how the horror can end. Joe Estevez has the role of hick son of a bitch sheriff who berates our heroes, warning them to get out of his town or else. His fate is not pretty. Poor Wallace battles the evolving scar(..she also witnessed the ghost girl, touching her), almost surviving, only to be on the receiving end of an ax toss meant for a fleeing Jenny.

The plot is mostly confined to Wallace's motel(..where Tom and Jenny have a room), the haunted log cabin(..where the repeated cycle, of the horrible day when the girl and her mother perished, continues, with alive male victims, unknowingly, substituting her boyfriend), and videostore with the weirdo who operates it holding a terrible secret concerning his involvement with everything that takes place. Wayne and Nelson aren't exactly the most appealing leads, but I've seen worse performances. The violence is mostly victims(..males who wind up in the role of the boyfriend the girl was supposed to be making out with when the mother surprised them)falling prey to ax wielding mom who swings with a vengeance. Low budget is certainly a detriment to the filmmakers and several of the ax attacks are blatantly obvious computer generated efforts that show badly.

Argh!

[CarlB1961 · 6 April 2006]

Ohhh... Ohhhhhhhhhhhh!... OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Terrible, TERRIBLE horror movie! It's senseless crap like this that has single-handedly given the low-budget horror industry such a bad rap.

Two dumb, unlikeable high school/college friends are out hiking, one of them is seduced by a cute blonde, then gets killed by her crazy ax-wielding mother. But here's the twist -- THEY'RE BOTH GHOSTS! A year later, the surviving guy and the dead guy's former girlfriend go back up and... well, I don't really care, and neither should you.

This movie is an abomination! The story is paper thin, with plot holes you could stick your head through. The characters are completely unsympathetic (not to mention annoying). The ghostly mother and daughter's motives are never explained, and the acting...

I really can't say the acting is all that bad BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY!!! I swear it seems that half the time the male lead was reading his lines straight off the script! The ending makes absolutely NO sense, and, worst of all, the cute blonde ghost-daughter never takes off her bra, making the entire movie totally pointless.

STAY AWAY FROM "SCAR"!

A complete waste of time

[no-bugs · 1/10 · 9 December 2005]

Here we go again. As if there ain't enough crappy movies out there. This is an insult to the movie industry and to all the viewers. It should be considered a felony to release material such as this. The cast is unskilled & awful. Seems like there's no budget what so ever and the film crew is a bunch of voluntaries working for free. The story is thin, the sound quality horrible. Sometimes it's very hard to understand what the main characters are saying, but this is not due to the poor sound only to the actors/actresses - they are mumbling. Had to turn it off and rest after a while, my brain couldn't take more of this punishment. This movie is a bad joke. I'll never get this 1½ hour back!

People! You have been warned.

Ghastly

[ctomvelu1 · 1/10 · 10 January 2010]

First of all, there are several movies called SCAR. This is one from 2005 and it is best avoided. A young man and woman visit a remote wooded location right out of EVIL DEAD to try and figure out who killed the guy's buddy the year before. There they encounter mother and daughter ghosts. Throw in a nasty sheriff (Estevez) and a wacky local hotel owner (Wallace) to ease the boredom and stupidity of it all. Incredibly badly acted and scripted. It is embarrassing to see the wonderful Dee Wallace in this, although she gives it what little bit of class it has. And I assume she wouldn't be in it if she had had a better offer at the time.

Should be listed under comedy, not horror!

[twg88 · 4/10 · 2 June 2007]

Just came back from a movie night with my friends. We rented a movie and we were ready to rumble with a horror movie. We were ready to be scared! But already from the first couple of minutes of watching Scar we found out that this wasn't as scary as we hoped it would be.

The first thing you notice at the very beginning of the movie is how bad the quality is and it seems like its made with a cheap camera from a crappy store. Another thing you notice is that the cast can't act!

Although this movie wasn't the best when it came to quality, it sure was well worth seeing it. All through the movie the room was filled with laughter and we had heaps of fun when we were making fun of the actors, plot and the whole movie:) And we actually screamed a lot during the movie because of a couple of scary things.

If you're looking for a horror movie- DO NOT WATCH THIS ONE! If you're looking for a good laugh and a good time with your friends-WATCH IT! I won't see this movie again- ever. But I actually had a good time watching it, because it was heaps of fun! HaHa. Good Luck!

Stupid story, but worth watching for a few of the actors.

[Arlis · 5/10 · 13 October 2006]

I usually can't make it through a bad movie. I turn it off and go on to another, but this one the actors made me want to finish.

I bought about 10 movies that K-MART had out because of Halloween and they all looked like they would be low budget crap, but I am a horror freak and love a lot of the low budget crap. I watched one of them called 13 SECONDS and it was one of the worst movies acting wise that I'd ever seen.

I was reluctant to watch this one, but decided I would give it a try and I set there watching thinking they focused way too much on a story that was stupid, and was very laughable.

The acting was bad for the most part, the directing was dull and I can't say enough about how dumb the story was but thats all the bad things I have to say about it.

The production wasn't as low budget as I expected. The sets and such were okay. The special effects weren't Tom Savini great or anything, but they weren't that shabby.

I love Dee Wallace-Stone and have the highest respects for her, so it was good seeing her, shes a great actress. Joe Estevez is likable, but I don't think he's a great actor, just simply unique and I like that about him. Charlie Sheen is the only one in that family that has real talent if you ask me - Martin's okay but no better than Joe. Dee and Joe couldn't hold this movie up with their smaller parts, but star Randy Wayne did a great job keeping this stupid story interesting.

Randy Wayne is a guy I'd seen on a few MTV shows and then forgotten about. He is a natural in my book, he doesn't seem like a guy thats just reading lines, he seems to play the part well. There's a few lines in this movie that I thought he could've done better, but thats up to the director to re-do it. He's going to play in the new DUKES OF HAZARD - THE BEGINNING movie coming out in 2007 and I am glad to see that. The new movie is cast much better than the last. Johnny Knoxville and that other idiot from American Pie sucked as Bo and Luke and made the Dukes of Hazard movie one of the most worthless films I have ever watched. Lets hope Randy Wayne does a much better job and helps make that movie better, like he did for Scar.

If You like any of the actors I've mentioned - watch this film, other wise don't waste your time - its pretty bad.

Low grade.

[RatedVforVinny · 4/10 · 14 December 2019]

A bit unfair with such a low rating but this movie has been done so many times and by far better film makers. Still it can be watched and enjoyed at some base level.

hilariously cheesy

[laughing-tree-1 · 9/10 · 23 April 2006]

Just to let you know.... this movie is incredibly cheesy but good at the same time. It isn't creepy, scary nor freaky. But Roy's accent and just the lines are just hilarious. i suggest if you want to just watch a movie for the hell of it and have a good laugh. you should get this!!!

the acting in this movies is not the best but Definitely not the worst. okay so it's just another crappy movie but it's a good crappy movie.

*SPOILER* people that haven't seen it LOOK AWAY!!! the movie makes sense until when they go to say thank you to BILL and when Dauphne kills Roy. how is bill dead? how did Dauphne kill Roy? i don't understand.

Come on, was not that bad

[me_penfield · 6/10 · 8 October 2006]

Agree with the poor quality production and actors, but it was mildly entertaining. A bit cheesy-horror, but then again, isn't that a genre of its own? Plenty of cheesy-horror buffs will like it. Sound was similar to telephone-quality, and some scenes look like 8mm, and cheap film too..some scenes look like they were dubbed straight from a camcorder. I have seen worse in my time, however.

It will not please the Spielberg audience, but those who like "Evil Dead" and such may like it.

One more thing, take a look at the DVD cover and purchase accordingly! If the cover looks cheesy (which it does), then don't expect Jerry Bruckheimer or Tom Cruise

the movie was good

[redneckdan76 · 10/10 · 15 February 2007]

it ain't dawn of the dead but it was a good movie i believe, i ain't picky, i don't need a perfect Hollywood script, so i liked this movie, good story, decent actors, keeps ya interested. if ya get a chance to see it, id recommend ya see it. its a cross of a psychological horror and good ole fashion gore in the woods horror. but whatever ya want, its great. the lead dude has the voice of someone going thru puberty but ya get used to that cause the characters and movie take ya in after a while and if you're a true horror buff, you'll get into the movie deep, or at least i did. its a bit of a ghost movie as well, with its fair bits of gore, the story wasn't all that perfect, but who cares, it was a damn good movie, thats my opinion at least.

Disappointing but still watchable

[slayrrr666 · 7/10 · 26 January 2010]

"Scar" is a rather huge disappointment considering it could've been great.

**SPOILERS**

Worried about each other, Tom, (Randy Wayne) and his friend Jenny, (Ashley Nelson) decide to take a trip together to help him get over his suppressed memories of the past. Managing to find the location where a friend was killed a year ago while he barely escaped, things get even more confusing when Anne, (Claire Mills) comes along, claiming that the people who killed his friend, Daphne, (Rochelle Vallese) and Cassie Tipton, (Klara Jolesz) are her sister and her daughter who died years before they would've come into contact with him and his friend. Trying to get a handle on everything they know, they realize the true nature of the situation and race to stop the events from happening again that will terrorize the group.

The Good News: There was some good stuff to this one that helps it out. The opening is suitably creepy, as the set-up is classic for a slasher film, and with the actions within setting up the blood-trail discovery that leads into the woods' chase, it has a good starting point, and when a later flashback completes it with a better explanation of what happened, this one seems to start off rather well. The lone walk-through of the house is nice, since it has a creepy location to help this out and the action within is pretty creepy. That it's connected with a forest stalking that is fairly well-done and creepy makes it a triple-attack when the inclusion of the bone-hand is discovered and the ramifications it has to the story. That also plays into account with a bit throughout the film, wherein everyone who survives contact with them has a scar on their stomach which plays into the flow of the film very nicely and gives it a really creepy feel based on the ramifications it has more-so than the actual effect of it. Another big flashback, where we learn the true history of what happened with the family to earn them their current condition, is well-done, mixing in present-day knowledge of their antics and offers up rational and logical answers to that feeling, which is what should happen in that type of scene. The double-attack in the cabin, where the two big kill scenes occur, are the highlight since the first one is a great suspenseful build-up that provides some nice gore while the second, involving a witness' attempt to fight back against the ghosts, provides a creepy feel when it's all played out and the whole scene comes off nicely. The finale, which features everything from a chase through the house while brandishing an axe to a supernatural battle between the two sides that offers up some really original ways of doing so and finishing things up with a great suspense scene in the forest makes it a really great way of ending everything. The last plus here is the film's kills, which are pretty good. There's an axe impaled in the back and the chest, a decapitation, multiple slice wounds across the stomach and chest and an axe rammed into the head. These here are the film's good points.

The Bad News: There wasn't a whole lot of flaws, but the ones here are pretty big ones that are what hold it down. One of the biggest issues is that, while the film is in the beginning setting up its plot, things are unraveled so slowly that it's hard to really get into them properly, and as a result, it becomes confusing rather than creepy, which is what seems to be the intended result. The film doesn't bother to say anything that happened at the beginning to the friend, which leaves those actions confusing until bothering to spell them out in a flashback later that recaps the entirety of the scene before while adding on the results then, but this is done much later and only after they finally arrive at the motel, stopping for more exposition along the way so it can then get away with the extended recap. That is a continued trend with the film, tending to take too long to tell anything, and then when it does, it tries to think that the events are creepy when in reality, they aren't and are really just confusing since it piles on and piles on different elements in a never-ending series of twists that are just way too much to take in when it deals them out. The last half has a ton of twists, from the revelation of the ghosts to the owner's beliefs and the family member saga and then the finale in the cabin, which is a ton of things to go through and in the end this one just has way too much going on to really get much more out of it. Another big flaw is the film's tendency to really add in more stuff than necessary to compensate for the overabundance of plot, and the most notably and egregious is the inclusion of the sheriff. While there is a point to having him there, his scenes serve as nothing more than cannon-fodder and he wastes a ton of time doing a lazy investigation that seems to consist entirely of harassing the heroes without any sort of reasoning for why that makes logical sense, continuing the film's long-standing trend of featuring moments that are quite unnecessary. The last plus is the painful and utterly-terrible gore, as it's all rendered in CGI blood-splashes that aren't the least bit hidden and all too obvious. These here are the film's problems.

The Final Verdict: This here can only be called a massive disappointment considering this had all the potential to be something interesting, but in the end it isn't. Really only recommended to those who enjoy these types of horror-thrillers, while those looking for something more substantial should heed caution.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language and Nudity