Reviews written by registered user

Page 1 of 24:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
234 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

The Crooked Man (2016) (TV)
2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
SyFy production is SyFy., 15 February 2017

Michael Jai White!! Will barely appear in this movie! Sadly they used him as nothing more than a commercial, and as a huge fan of the man, I was disappointed. So don't watch it for him, you'll just get annoyed.

Now the movie itself: I wasn't as disappointed as expected. It had some nice elements to offer, the monster looked good for such a production and the acting was so-so. Was there really any horror? Far from it, no tension either, it's a straight serial killer movie, always knowing who is next to die and how.

But as previously said, it was not the worst thing out there. It was an OK way to spend 90 minutes, especially on a very boring night. Therefore if you are a die hard horror fan, The Crooked Man has little to offer, as little as White's presence, so the decision is on you.


Good sequel. Almost as intriguing as the first., 10 February 2017

I had fun with this one, mostly of course because it reminded me of the first, a vampire movie with a slightly different approach. It is quite obvious that the horror viewers are begging for anything unusual.

As vamp movies go, there are a few with "cojones", like Daybreakers, presenting a complete society or Priest, with a new monster look, a better dystopian background.

Now for Stake Land: a nice add-on to the genre, a small movie that was nicely welcomed by anyone. The second part succeeded throughout the movie but failed with the opposite side, where they should have worked just a little more. If that part would have been explored properly, I do believe Stakelander could have been easily just as enjoyable as the first. Nevertheless it is a good movie on its own and I do recommend it.

All in all, I do hope for a third part, and with a little more effort, maybe we can have a nicely almost indie trilogy. One to remember!


4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Nothing! That's what., 6 November 2016

Seriously, how can anyone be into this, calling it better, original, a nice surprise? It has the same moves, gestures, look like any other zombie movie done with a smaller budget.

I got bored out of my mind waiting for something to happen, hoping for a twist, a better ending, anything that would remotely make me feel better about spending time in front of What We Become, but nothing came. The movie is as predictable as possible, from head to toes, bringing nothing new whatsoever, and don't tell me it focuses more on the reactions of the people and not so much on zombies, cause I've seen that too, and way better also.

I won't recommend this one, tho I usually like the non Hollywood productions, as I find them bold, cruel and raw. But here I kinda knew nothing would develop and all it takes is around 30 min for you to realize it too. So if you wanna drop an eye on this one, do it at your own peril.


Within (2016)
3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Completely unoriginal but nicely executed., 2 November 2016

I've seen this far too many times, so it took few scenes to realize what is it all about. At a certain point I even got annoyed cause it seemed to keep the plot a mystery, but I managed to stay there and wait for the end.

Glad I did so, cause surprisingly enough, it had something to offer indeed. A better, darker execution, a possible more real situation, of course, not all of it, but I did enjoy it. As movies like this have you root for certain characters, here I was drawn into the family and hoped everything would turn out OK.

Again, my experience in these kind of movies taught me well, so there were no real surprises even tho they did focus on that, but without naming the movies they took the ideas from, or spoiling it, I'm just gonna say that you could watch this and not be completely disappointed. On a scale from 1 to 10 I rated it 5, cause it did some things different. But mostly, the same moves you've seen for a lifetime.


2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Different. And better., 1 November 2016

Lovely little movie right here, presenting a story rarely used, with a way better execution and quite good actors.

Stephen McHattie does it again, comes in and steals the show as a dark, mysterious man, just like he did in Haunter (2013). Teaming up with Enrico Colantoni, you can be sure to have at least a A- acting style. The plot itself is lovely to watch, if your eyes are set on the horror industry of course, and if you are able to appreciate smaller productions, do yourself a favor and find this one.

The visuals are beautiful, the story goes on at a good pace, the reveal is nice but the ending feels forced. Quick and easy, perhaps some more time was needed on the climax, but nevertheless I took the film for what it was, a nice change of direction, pace, and a different way to tell a horror story. I will definitely recommend this one.


Satanic (2016)
5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
I gave it 2 stars!, 30 October 2016

I only did that because 1 is the lowest point, so I felt generous enough and gave it yet another one!

I watch a lot of underground productions, trying to help the community out, reviewing movies that have no comments, warning people if necessary, advertising for others and so on. Few nights ago I stumbled upon Satanic, I saw who was the lead actress so of course it had to be done. Nothing out of the ordinary for starters, typical moves, acting, plot, until something else decides to happen.

And from nothing much, comes probably around 100 screams in 20 minutes. I actually got a headache from watching this one, and I am not kidding. The reveal itself is horrible, completely useless, just some scenes put there to shock, to allow this movie to call itself a horror. The real horror was in front of the screen, me, bored out of my mind but also trying to lower the volume without leaving the bed. The screaming won. I moved! Like hypnotized! This is all you get: screams, screams, screams. And of course no explanation.

I really wished Satanic was as the poster showed. Far from it. 2 stars! That says a lot. Not recommended.


Man Vs. (2015)
2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
A little under average., 21 October 2016

I think this one could have been quite an alright movie, if they had a bigger budget to it. Because once you see what it is all about, and those special effects, you're kinda remembered of the 80's.

Till the very end, my curiosity was tingling all around. I kinda knew what was happening, cause the plot leads you there, but still I was interested in seeing more. Perhaps a little more time was needed too, cause this one has only around 80 minutes, but for a small project, I think it hit the spot.

That of course doesn't make this recommended to any horror fans, or friends, but I am happy I stumbled on this little indie gem. It was a pleasant way of spending almost an hour and a half. I hope of more coming from the producers.


Average B- horror with an extremely small budget., 16 October 2016

I guess they could have shown something far worse than this, and for that I'll give it an extra credit. But bare in mind, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to watch Bottom Feeder.

So, if you're into creature movies, look elsewhere, if you're into low budgets, or indie projects, again, nothing to see here, try elsewhere, you are bound to find something, anything, better than this.

But if you do decide to play it, just lower your expectations, as much as you can, and watch it at your own peril. Some moments you will have to question your decision, others, perhaps acknowledge that you did a bad thing and probably there is no way out. I mean if you do get halfway, I guess there is nothing more to do but endure.


4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Gorier Wrong Turn copycat., 15 October 2016

Surprisingly enough, I rated this a 4 stars! But here is why: the actors did OK overall, I do believe it was the characters that had problems and not those on set. A lot of blood, plenty clichés, those lovely situations where our heroes could die, but of course they are given all the time in the world to escape and save the day.

If you compare it to other movies, like Wrong Turn, The Hill Have eyes, this one will fall flat. It looks cheaper, it uses the same moves you've seen 1000 times, perhaps C+ movie at best. If they tried better with the development of the bad guys, I think we could have been in for a good ol' B horror. Close but no cigar.

Overall, for a very boring night, it could fill up some time in a somewhat, meh kind of way. Just go without expectations and be ready for a plot that was written too many times already.


7 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Great performance by Rory Culkin., 15 October 2016

I enjoyed this one, because in my honest opinion, it had a lot to offer. From the great acting, to the dialogue, the effects, the plot, the confusion, everything falls quite lovely in place and the puzzle reveals itself little by little. I had fun here, I kept asking myself questions, I was waiting to see more, started to suspect on and the other.

It is a beautiful psychological drama, with some horror elements to spark the atmosphere, and pretty much no dull moments. So if you are a fan of the oldies and crazies like Identity, The Pact, Session 9, this one will fit the list just fine. Some will consider it better, some perhaps not so much, but you will find a lot of familiar traces here.

Jack Goes Home is indeed a little gem of a movie, that should be recommended and watched by more people because it surely delivers on so many levels. Of course, bare in mind, I did say, little movie. I won't place it up there, with your big budget productions.


Page 1 of 24:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]