IMDb > Sasquatch Mountain (2006) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Sasquatch Mountain
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Sasquatch Mountain More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 29 reviews in total 

12 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

Not another Sasquatch movie!!!!!

Author: cojosh from United States
9 September 2006

I just don't get it! The myth of Sasquatch is one of interest, but no one can pull off a descent film about the creature. This movie strikes out. The best actor in this flick is the monster, but none of the characters have no motivation or reasoning behind the decisions they make. The sasquatch doesn't stir any feeling either. This leaves the viewer in an awkward position. You can't back the humans or the booger! The climax fails and doesn't deliver anything other than an overwhelming feeling that you just wasted much precious time. I really thought this movie would be a little better. Alas, it gets 1/10 in my book.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Worse than I Ever Could Have Believed

Author: thelancinator ( from United States
28 January 2007

I am as lenient as it comes with 'B' movies and Straight to Video releases but there always comes a time when I come across a truly bad movie and this is one of them. I cannot even begin to describe all the problems this film has, but I'll give you some of the major ones. From the beginning of the film, the soundtrack is out of sync with the video. At first I thought this might have just been a read error with my DVD player, but after stopping and starting the movie a couple of times, I realized it was in the film. And I don't know about the rest of you, but when the dialog is out of sync with the video it just bothers me a lot! But perhaps this was done on purpose to distract you from the ungodly horrific dialog and acting in the film. I love bad movies, but not this bad. How they got Lance Henriksen (Alien 3, The Quick and the Dead) to appear in this is beyond me. Also, the distinct lack of gore was puzzling since this movie is unrated! I have no idea why it carries no rating since the violence and language is on par with somewhere between a PG-13 and an R rating. And I got all of this after watching only half the film. This movie takes the prize of being the very first film I couldn't even watch through to the end. Please, do yourself a favor and do not watch this movie. As bad as I make it sound, you might even find it worse. About the only good thing I can say about this movie is that Cerina Vincent looks good, after that, it pretty much ends what's good about the film. As for the others that rated this movie highly, all I can figure is that they are related to someone in the film.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

Some movies....

Author: Asteri-Atypical from Orlando, FL
21 September 2006

Some movies make you think.

Some movies make you laugh.

Some movies are guilty pleasures.

Alas, this is not any of the above.

Yes, Sci-Fi Channel is continuing on its mission to re-define "Science Fiction" as "brain-dead horror aimed at 9-year-old boys who find pro wrestling enjoyable".

The plot of Sasquatch Mountain is beyond stupid. Was it envisioned by someone deluded enough to find it quality? Or was it envisioned by someone who was selling out to an idea that a substantial number of fans WANT this drivel? We have become stupid enough as a nation without Sci Fi Channel trying to dry up what's left of our brains.

Oh, yes - DON'T BELIEVE the evaluations written by LIARS who are somehow invested in the movie PRETENDING to be fans who actually enjoyed it. First clue - these people voted this movie a 10/10. That's impossible. Even someone who is a fan of this kind of lunacy would never consider it among the BEST movies around. Don't believe the liars.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Awful and Cheesy

Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
24 May 2008

A group of thieves heist the bank of a small town and shoot a deputy. While escaping from the police chase, their van crashes another car on the road. They make the driver hostage and they run to a forest, followed by the "men-of-law". Meanwhile a "big-foot" chases both groups, and they join forces against the "thing".

"Sasquatch Mountain" is one of the most awful movies that I ever seen. The story and the dialogs are ridiculous; the camera work and the edition are terrible, maybe because the restrained budget; even the sexy Cerina Vincent is not able to save this garbage. In respect to the veterans Lance Henriksen, Tim Thomerson and Rance Howard, I am not writing any word about their performances. The authors of the favorable reviews in IMDb (ten stars?) misleading the readers are probably included in the payroll of this cheesy flick. My vote is one.

Title (Brazil): "O Demônio da Montanha" ("The Demon of the Mountain")

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Solidly in the bottom 10% of Sci-Fi Channel originals

Author: Jack from Minnesota, USA
10 September 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Some low-life criminals rob a bank in a small town and the local yokel cops chase them through the woods, and Bigfoot attacks. To say that I couldn't care less about any of the characters would be a huge understatement. Everyone in here is a secondary character, the type who get killed by Sasquatch and nobody cares. A good story is built around good, likable, sympathetic characters, not paper thin clichés; Anybody who bothered to stick with their creative writing classes past ninth grade knows this, but the Sci-Fi Channel just can't get it through their heads. The first characters we meet (after the video tape segment at the beginning is over) are one of the bank robbers and some sleazy waitress at a diner. They're both typical low-life's: They've known each other for four days, and they go in the back of the diner to have sex. The girl gives the guy her phone number, he walks out to his truck, tosses the paper on the ground, and rushes off to the bank. A cop sees him throwing the small piece of paper on the ground, and tries to arrest him for littering in the middle of the bank robbery. These are probably the two most well-developed characters in the whole movie.

But that's not the worst part. What utterly ruins this thing is the director. The entire movie is shot with some sort of weird, grainy, extremely washed out looking video effect. It looks like a worn out video tape. One can almost imagine the director saying "I am an artiste!". Good grief. It's just an ugly film to look at. And there's about a thousand fast forward moments; cars will be driving down a road, all of a sudden they fast forward a few hundred yards, then they're back to normal speed, then they fast forward some more. This effect is used whenever and wherever possible. It makes me wonder if the director is Ewe Boll's protégé or something. This is the sort of stuff amateurs do when they forget (or never knew) that character and story are the important things, and start thinking that playing with the knobs on the video equipment is what makes a movie good. It's actually rather sad. About halfway through it started getting politically correct, the white cop told the Native American cop that he could find his way through the woods just fine all by himself, so then he takes one step forward and falls in a hole. Remember what I said earlier about paper thin clichés?.

Overall, this is the crappiest movie I've seen in quite a while. I don't know what it is with Sci-Fi Channel Originals. I mean, how on Earth do they manage to make such utter garbage, week after week after week? If you just go to a video store and pick up some straight to video flicks that AREN'T Sci-Fi originals, usually half of them are fairly good. One in five is actually really good. But Sci-Fi manages to make 25 out of 26 of their movies absolutely terrible. It's getting harder and harder to believe they're not doing it on purpose.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Abysmal creature feature

Author: t-birkhead from United Kingdom
22 June 2007

I tend to watch a lot of creature features, even though they tend to suck but this one nearly put me off them for life. There is no gore or nudity and virtually no blood, meaning this could probably be a U certificate if not for the bad language. Aside from Lance Henriksen and Tim Thomerson, the acting is pretty much dreadful. The plot is actually reasonable, and the screenplay tries harder than most to give its characters back stories and some kind of interest. Unfortunately the screenplay is far too talky, mostly risible and the few good lines are generally wasted by the poor acting. The direction is ridiculously amateur, turning every scene with action that could potentially be good into a blurry non-event. Most heinous of all is the underuse of the sasquatch, which makes this barely even classifiable as a creature feature. The sasquatch is certainly the most likable character, since it doesn't have to utter any rubbish dialogue and manages to bump off a few of the cast members. Even though it looks like it wandered onto the set from a completely different movie, its still a likable looking big hairy beast. Still, it doesn't provide any reason for watching this one, which isn't even redeemed by the mighty Lance Henriksen. It makes me sad that such a legend appears in this kind of dreck. Avoid it like the Ebola virus

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Decent entry, if not overtly spectacular

Author: slayrrr666 ( from Los Angeles, Ca
10 September 2006

"Sasquatch Mountain" is a pretty decent Sasquatch movie.


A group of bank robbers, lead by Vin Stewart, (Michael Worth) Travis, (Craig Wasson) Wade, (Ruffealo Degruttola) and Kayla, (Karen Kim) making their escape, crash into Erin, (Cerina Vincent) deep into the woods. Trying to make an escape from the pursuing Police Chief Harris, (Rance Howard) they come into contact with a strange creature in the woods that begins picking them off one by one. Seeking shelter in the home of Chase Jackson, (Lance Henriksen) who helps them to reveal that the mysterious being is a Sasquatch. Forced to work together, the three teams are forced to work together to make it out alive.

The Good News: In the recent tradition of the Bigfoot/Sasquatch movies come out, this is pretty much a middle of the road affair. The fact that the Sasquatch is never able to be plainly seen until the end gives him an air of mystery that few have. We only catch glimpses or blurred focus shots, making it hard to detail tell what is out there, and this makes the viewing if the creature pretty hard to do. It's not that there's much of an opportunity to catch a glimpse of it, but that trying to get one is pretty hard. The viciousness of the creature is pretty apparent early on, and it never really has any problem providing gory deaths. We get a back-breaking bear-hug, a neck broken, a very brutal beating and a couple mangled body aftereffects no less. This also has some good action sequences throughout that are nicely used to keep it moving along. The chase in the middle and the eventual rescue are a perfect illustration. There's several great suspenseful stalking parts coupled with some great gun-play and fighting. A couple of deaths certainly doesn't hurt the cause, either. The ending assault through the forest is just as good. The reason for the conflagration is pretty ingenious one, and has some creativity to it. That was one of the best parts of the film.

The Bad News: There really wasn't a whole lot against it, but they are serious errors. The biggest distraction is the camera that shoots it. It makes it look very unprofessional and like something that was shot on the cheap in someone's backyard. Normally, had this been used for only a few scenes, it would've been a little more tolerable, but it lasts throughout the whole film and it really grates on the nerves. This really lowers the film a tad. Also lowering the rating is the Sasquatch himself. It's great that it's hard to see him at times, but when we do get to see it, it looks really bad. It's got the tradition appearance of being a bunch of carpeting left-overs strung together into some vague form of a hairy beast. It rarely looks imposing and basically just relies on it's actions to generates fear towards it. It's a major distraction from the rest as it looks pretty bad. They got the dirty part down but it doesn't look that good. It also got a little slow in the middle where the attacks come at a slower pace. It doesn't send it out on as high a note as it could've since it pretty much stays that way through until the ending. There's a couple of small little nit-picks here and there that I didn't like all that much, but they won't detriment as much as the other bigger problems. However, those big problems are big ones to overcome.

The Final Verdict: It's not that spectacular a Sasquatch film, and comes in right in the middle of the recent wave of movies featuring the beast. It's got too many problems to be anything more than a guilty pleasure, if you actually check it out.

Rated UN/R: Graphic Language, Violence and attempted Rape

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 15 people found the following review useful:


Author: Paul W from United States
10 September 2006


I gave this movie a three out of ten. That is only because I am a sucker for really horrible monster movies. However, that being written, this movie was quite terrible. The acting was ridiculous and the character interactions were so random that I had a hard time realizing what was happening a few times. The monster was a very uninspired, run-of-the-mill man in a monkey suit, but at least the monster looked more believable than the sasquatch in the Sasquatch Hunters.

Lets start with the characters. The movie composes of an innocent female, four or five bank robbers, and several law officers. It was kind of fun trying to figure out which group was actually the most stupid. I cannot begin to understand some of the decisions made by the characters. For instance, around midway through the movie, the robbers and cops come across each others' paths. A stand-off ensues, with everyone holding their weapons aimed at one another. Then......BAM!!!! They all just start randomly shooting into the woods, I guess targeting Bigfoot. Then, in the very next scene, the two groups of conflicting interest are running through the woods, determined to fight alongside one another.

Then, as if the acting weren't bad enough, there is no real plot to the movie. It starts off like a really, really, really horrible version of From Dusk Til Dawn, but then ends up with only one sasquatch. The director and producers must have decided it to be a good idea to just through in an assorted batch of people, a farmhouse, and one Bigfoot, and Lance Henrickson, who I believe may have lost all his talent in choosing roles to parts not included in theatrical garbage.

Now, onto the few cool things. The Bigfoot in this movie must really dislike guns because it seems every time someone shoots a gun, Bigfoot is sure to just appear out of nowhere, run up to the attacker, hit them, and then run off. These parts were somewhat surprising and it is kind of cool to see a Bigfoot just run up and mix things up a little. However, you would think a gigantic, 600 lb. ape that smells like "a mixture of skunk and mother's milk" (in the words of Lance Henrickson) would be pretty easy to discern from the background noises in a quiet forest in the middle of nowhere.

This movie was terrificly bad. Three stars is so generous for this Sci-Fi channel, below average (and that's hard to be worse than the average Sci-Fi movie), mental masturbation flick. You might come out of the movie drooling on yourself, trying to remember why you watched this movie in the first place.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Terrifically bad

Author: dwixom4 from United States
3 March 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

My wife and I watched this movie and I cracked up through the whole thing because of the wonderfully bad acting. The 3 older gentlemen were good character actors, but for the rest: I've seen less ham on a hog lot. As for the "beautiful hostage", I was cheering for bigfoot to rip her up - just punishment for her acting abilities - but, alas, it didn't happen. If you have a Saturday afternoon to waste - like we did - it will surely bring a lot of laughs. I was done with my opinion, but apparently there is a minimum amount of lines for this site - how stupid (go ahead, ban me) - but let me go on to say I wouldn't pay money to rent this movie but I have always been a fan of the bad acting genre - this movie rocks in this respect. Back to the beautiful hostage, her obvious assets on her chest must have been the cause of the R rating. Unless, of course, silliness rates an R.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

More of the same?

Author: feistybritches from United States
25 September 2006

Not a terrific movie but being a Sasquatch/Bigfoot fanatic, I wonder why every movie about this subject needs to make this creature so vicious????? There are very few documented cases of a Sasquatch being vicious. I think a more original idea would be to have these stupid folks in the woods being hunted by something that they THINK is a Sasquatch only to have it be something else entirely. Perhaps make the Sasquatch a hero for a change. Let the creature slyly give the fools in the forest help without them knowing it until the end. The whole vicious Sasquatch thing is getting on my nerves. There has GOT to be a different angle on this subject.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history