Cabin by the Lake (2000 TV Movie) User Reviews

Serial killer thriller with a twist

[smellthecult-com-1 · 7/10 · 29 November 2009]

Entertaining and amusing tale of a horror writer who researches a character in his book by living out their demented life. He kidnaps young women, drowns them, sinks them to the bottom of a lake, and tends to them like flowers, referring to them as his 'garden'. The whole underwater premise is pretty original. one I have not seen in a movie before or since, so kudos to that.

The underwater sequences are disturbing, and the whole concept is a creepy one. Well acted, well scripted, and with a penchant for dark humour, this is one most horror fans will appreciate, even though the gore and violence is kept to a minimum.

A good movie.

"How come it's always the cute ones that go missing?" Not that bad but not that good either.

[poolandrews · 5/10 · 31 January 2006]

Cabin by the Lake starts in a cabin by a lake (funnily enough) owned by horror film writer Stanley Caldwell (Judd Nelson) who is under pressure from his agent Regan Kendrick (Susan Gibney) to deliver his latest script titled The Garden of Flesh. However Stanley believes these things cannot be rushed & takes the credibility of his work very seriously so he does plenty of research to get things just right. For instance he has kidnapped a teenage girl named Kimberly (Daniella Evangelista) & has kept her imprisoned in a room chained to the floor. To continue & complete his research Stanley takes Kimberly out to middle of the lake, he ties a weight to her feet & chucks her into it. After observing Kimberly's reactions he thinks he can still learn more & kidnaps Mallory (Hedy Buress) to do the same to her, however she is rescued at the bottom of the lake by scuba diving Deputy Sheriff Boone Prescott (Michael Weatherly) while he is testing some special effect equipment out with his friends Duncan (Bernie Caulson) & Lauren (Colleen Wheeler). Since Stanley doesn't know that Mallory survived Deputy Prescott stages an elaborate trap, special make-up effect artists Duncan & Lauren construct a fake Mallory out of latex, they stick some cameras in it's eyes & chuck it into the lake. In theory the kidnapper will come back & they will have him on film, simple eh? Surely nothing can go wrong...

Directed by Po-Chih Leong I though Cabin by the Lake had potential but in the end fails to deliver. The script by David Stephens starts off very well as a decent straight horror film with Stanley killing someone early on & sets his eyes on Mallory but after she is rescued it becomes more of a dreary drama that goes nowhere. There are little bits of comedy here & there but it never goes all out for laughs & at the end of the day it comes across a bit uneven. It begins at a brisk pace but slows down, doesn't go anywhere & it goes on far what seemed like ages, the character's are somewhat annoying & no reasonable justification for what Stanley does is given & I'm not having the fact he needs to research a script as a believable reason for becoming a serial killer. Oh, & I hated the end too. On a positive note it's an OK watch, provides a certain amount of basic entertainment & there's nothing that wrong with it.

Director Leong films with a certain style & flair not usually associated with cheap made-for-TV films, there are some nice shots & angles & it's nice to look at. I loved the underwater photography & the garden he creates of floating bodies amongst aquatic plants, I'm not sure the water would be that clear though. There is very little tension or atmosphere as everything is revealed very early on & once the film settles down it's very dialogue driven. Forget about any violence or gore.

Techncially the film is pretty good & is better than you may expect from a TV film. The acting was annoying from everyone, Nelson is utterly forgettable & has no screen presence, Gibney as Stanley's agent is embarrassing to watch as she overacts & the teenage cast are unlikable.

Cabin by the Lake is an average film, it tries to mix horror, thriller & comedy but doesn't do a particularly great job. I think it's an OK time waster if your absolutely desperate but otherwise it has little by which I can recommend it.

A humorous thriller-horror!

[RodrigAndrisan · 7/10 · 13 February 2021]

It's not perfect but I like it, it's good! I liked all the actors but specially Hedy Burress as Mallory and Judd Nelson as the writer serial killer Stanley. The music is great too. I repeat, the film is not perfect, it has some weaknesses, I will not reveal them here, but even so, it's still captivating. It's not easy to give it some stars, precisely because of those imperfections. Here's what I'm going to do: the first hour of the movie, is excellent, is worth 10 stars. The remaining 31 minutes are not worth more than 4 stars. 10 plus 4 divided by 2 equals seven. And, if you haven't noticed already reading this review or from other reviews of mine for many other movies, I try with all sincerity to be the most critical objective possible, from all points of view.

A Good Thrilling T.V. Movie.

[movies2u · 19 August 2001]

I had been wanting to see this movie when I saw it previewed on the USA channel, and when it finally came on,I got to watch it. And, I was surprised! It was a good thriller/horror/comedy film. Although, it wasn't much of a comedy. Judd Nelson (The Breakfast Club) and Hedy Burres (Valentine) were great!!! It was an excellent T.V. movie. I still haven't seen the sequel "Return to Cabin By the Lake". All in all, it was a good film that I give an 8 out of 10. :)

i cant imagine i spent almost 2 hours watching this crap!!

[frustratedAwy · 1/10 · 1 May 2006]

i never made a comment on a movie, this is the 1st and may be the last, this movie is awful, the writer ,the script and the director made this film for the goofy audience, i've seen many thrill movies , sometimes you are not thrilled that much and you get a little frustrated but this one makes you angry, goofy scenario. Serial killer with no convincing motive , idiot policeman who leaves the only witness in a motel room beside the crime scene without anyone guarding her, and of course the killer returns and easily re kidnap her ...God i cant believe this, and the killer just vanishes and not once but twice with the same way. serial killer who killed 6 or 7 victims and the police deals with it as if he is a laundry thief or something!! this is what i can say, so do not bother and spend 2 hours watching this.

Cabin by the Lake

[Scarecrow-88 · 6/10 · 5 April 2009]

A horror screenplay writer, Stanley Kaldwell(Judd Nelson, perfectly cast), works on his scripts in a cabin near a lake on the outskirts of Los Angeles, actually committing the murders authored for films! While a series of these murders are indeed successful(..he kidnaps the girls, placing them in a van, using the barking sounds of dogs recorded on a cassette to lure them closer, latches their foot to a chain locked in the center bolt of a basement room with a sink and mattress, with a wall and marker available to address your feelings to the captor, receiving food, before being blindfolded, curried by boat to a place in the middle of the lake, chained to a stone weight, and dropped into the water to drown, finally, after death, taken to a properly prepared underwater garden), a final female victim, Mallory(Hedy Burress), selected because of a phobia towards water, is rescued thanks to underwater divers, two special effects artists testing equipment and a deputy, Boone(Michael Weatherly)helping them. Mallory knows his face, is quite a tough, less intimidated adversary, and agrees to assist Boone and the effects technicians which work at the lake in a workshop to capture the killer/kidnapper on a camera hidden behind the eye of a prosthetic likeness of herself, planted underwater where she was spotted..but the plan is less than successful due to Stanley's finding their camera and escaping their clutches as police couldn't secure his location in time. Even worse, Stanley kidnaps Mallory a second time, from her hotel room, returning the poor girl to his hidden lair where she was the first time! Can she escape certain doom a second time or will Boone be able to save her from Stanley who has special plans for his nagging agent as well?

Not a graphically violent thriller, but featuring rather disturbing, macabre subject matter, directed with tongue firmly in cheek. You couldn't choose a better candidate for a cold and calculating psychopath than Judd Nelson who is completely able to provide that icy detached black void of humanity as he pushes victims into the water without flinching. Nelson's eyes express a chilling darkness, and he's suitably able to convey a dark soul, who is clever and cunning. The film's sick humor derives from the fact that a film's screenplay writer is an actual killer who acts out the material, using the victims themselves as inspiration. The underwater garden is really a twisted visual image, the way he goes about tending to the bodies of the girls he murdered..all part of the work, and it's authenticity. Also, the filmmakers take shots at how the production process strips away a writer's integrity by altering his work, as his agent and director often make suggestions and lament about what's wrong with the screenplay..their fates after confronting Nelson at his cabin was probably a fantasy many writers for movies have had over the years. Again, the violence is tame, it's the process with which Stanley operates that produces impact. Far fetched fate of Nelson at the end is a liability because it removed realism from the movie.

Another Reason to Not Like Judd Nelson

[chris_king1976 · 1/10 · 20 February 2005]

I consider myself one of the last true lovers of the great B-movies. That being said, I find it odd that I dislike this movie as much as I do. The acting is atrocious, the sets are too sterile to be believed, the music is generic at best...I would go on, but I'd feel as though I was rambling. It seemed like a good thriller plot line, but throw in horrible direction, second-rate actors, and a crew that I wouldn't let film my kid's football game, and you get what we have here. On the plus side, the girls in the film are very lovely, and the underwater shots are done well enough. The underlying humor is probably enough to warrant a boring Sunday afternoon's TV viewing, but I certainly would not pay to own such a stinker of a film.

Gripping

[Kingslaay · 7/10 · 14 August 2021]

Despite not being a big production this modest thriller does pack a decent punch. Stanley's character is chilling and bad to the bone. He is borderline insane but we are intrigued by his character and want to see how far he'll take things. If you can overlook some obvious errors this can be a thrilling film. The unique way of killing his victims is certainly memorable and chilling.

Horrible

[Punk19 · 1/10 · 16 July 2005]

What was going through the directors head when he made this? Must have been "This will make everyone think twice." Because this movie defines the law of crime. No this isn't a movie to just pop into a VCR or DVD player and watch with your boyfriend. Because the movie is just plain crap. Nothing makes since.

Oh a guy goes around killing ladies for fun and for a book idea. So what. What do you want to do when you watch this? Sleep, sleep and sleep. This movie is a sleeper. Nothing original at all. Even the sequel is horrible. I wouldn't recommend this to anyone. Not even a child will understand this crappish movie.

decent acting and great music elevate the movie

[disdressed12 · 6/10 · 15 April 2007]

this is an OK TV movie,i guess.i think it's supposed to be a black comedy.it had some ironic moments,to be sure.i did not find it scary in any way,so i don't think it could be called a horror movie.i did think the acting was pretty decent.i really liked the soundtrack.i thought it was very unique.i felt it fit nicely withe movie.i did expect the movie to be better than it was,so in that regard,i found it a disappointment.it's a decent diversion if you want to kill 90 minutes,though i wouldn't say it's a brilliant movie,by any stretch.it was nice to see Judd Nelson in a different kind of role.i think he pulled it off well.not once did i think of the 80's teen movie "The Breakfast Club" which i think Nelson is well known for.to me,that's a sign of a good actor.and like i said,the acting was decent all around.it was just the movie itself that didn't quite work for me.I'll give "Cabin by the Lake" 6/10* for the acting and the great music.

Absolute and utter drivel

[Michael-96 · 1/10 · 19 August 2001]

This film suffers from a script that is only rivalled in its poor quality by the absolutely appalling directing. The film starts badly with a succession of puns, and just goes downhill from there. Predictable, poorly crafted and full of mistakes (particularly near the end of the film), this is the epitome of what the film-makers craft shouldn't be. A tired, confused script, and ideas copied from every other film in the genre - except that the director clearly didn't understand the theory behind them. Terrible, avoid this like the plague.

Good enough to own

[eepiwee · 10/10 · 3 February 2002]

I'll tell ya, I feel sorry for Judd Nelson and all the bad rap he gets; as far as his performance in this movie goes, he totally maintains the mood. Cabin by the Lake is a made-for-tv movie originally aired on USA, however, I now own it and it's sequel on dvd. (amazon.com) If you're looking to hand out oscars you might consider overlooking this one, but if you're looking to be entertained (as cheesily as possible) this is it! I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, everything is quirky from the acting to the music. The underwater scenes were done quite nicely, and the soundtrack isn't so bad either...however it's hard to find any other song from the movie other than "Cure" by the Wild Colonials. If you're a fan of Judd Nelson, serial killer movies, and overall cheesy fun, you'll be sure to add this flick to your collection so you can watch it over and over again. If you liked this movie, check out it's sequel...Return to Cabin by the Lake...it's really DEEP! ;)

Decent TV movie

[atinder · 6/10 · 22 January 2014]

Not bad for a TV movie, had a decent plot , I found some -what entertaining.

I didn't find it boring at all, it didn't really drag on, it's flowed really well.

As this was a TV movie, there wasn't any blood, w it's more about killer drowning his victims.

The killer was creepy in one or two scene, some of the under water scene were tad intense at times.

This movie kind of gave me the stepfather vibe.

The ending for sure reminded me a lot of the stepfather movies and acting was really good for a TV movie.

6 out of 10

Pure crap!

[Juliet Gabriella Kaleigh · 3/10 · 2 February 2000]

Cabin by the lake was pure crap! I read the tagline for it, and I thought it might be good, but was I wrong! Judd Nelson's character was on the borderline of funny at the start of the movie, but then he became amazingly annoying! Cabin by the lake was beyond phony, they may have had a few good dummies on the set, but the whole aura of the movie was fakes-ville. Don 't watch cabin by the lake past the first half-hour!

Outstanding Movie

[willie_pete60 · 6 April 2002]

Saw the movie a few nights ago on the Sci-Fi network...Terrific and great actions in the movie. The Scenery was cool. Kind of makes you wonder about people in a way....I really enjoyed the movie and the actors and actresses really outdid themselves in a very convincing way. Thumbs up for this one.....really confirms my fear of water over my head now! LOL!

this movie is terrible.

[jabbazio · 1/10 · 28 April 2005]

This was, by far, the absolute worst movie I have seen in my entire life. I have seen many, many movies, and this is quite possibly the most horrendous of all. My friend and I turned it on at 12 am, and couldn't stop watching it, it was that bad. Had it been just a little less awful, we may have been able to turn it off. It was kind of like watching a car accident - you know you shouldn't stare, but you just can't look away. To anyone desiring to ever see this movie......my friend and I would strongly advise you to find a better activity, but if you watch it, you will be able to fully appreciate true cinematic garbage.

Dumb, unrealistic and just plain creepy

[juliagulia4 · 2/10 · 1 February 2000]

The story line is about a movie writer's idea to make a movie. His movie is about a guy who drowns girls in a lake and makes them a part of his "garden". This garden is just a group of all the girls he has drowned, tied down with giants weights at the bottom of the lake. And occasionally, he'll scuba dive down there to look at them and "tend" to them. I won't give away the ending, but I'll just tell you that it's stupid. Judd Nelson does a good job of being really creepy, but the story is really unrealistic and pretty dumb. It wasn't that great.

Possibly the most incompetent police force in the history of cinematic law enforcement.

[gand7 · 2/10 · 29 March 2016]

Go ahead and assume that any review above a 3 out of 10 for this movie will either be from cast and crew or from those horror types who enjoy it when it's so bad it's funny. Why, you ask? Here's a direct quote from one of those reviewers: "It's Like Silence of The Lambs...but Even More Creepy" Yeah, that's what that reviewer wrote, and in all seriousness as far as I can tell, so you've been warned.

This movie is terrible. Not just your standard TV movie terrible, but full blown utter rubbish terrible. As I mentioned in the summary, the police force on display here would be lined up against a wall and shot for stupidity. I don't think I've ever seen as little effort put into catching a serial killer as appears in Cabin by the Lake. For instance, the police set up a perfectly viable sting operation to catch creepy guy Stanley at his "garden" and yet they wait for Stanley to realise he's in the middle of their trap before springing it. Stanley then proceeds to simply swim away whilst the police divers go to the location where he was, see he's gone, look at each other and shrug before surfacing and saying something like "Nope, I guess he's not there. Better luck next time." to which the sheriff instantly calls the entire operation off as Stanley ever-so-slowly makes the least ingenious escape in criminal history from the clutches of justice by basically swimming off to shore a few hundred feet away! SERIOUSLY??? Then of course, the one surviving victim/witness is pretty much treated like she saw a kid steal a t-shirt off a rack at Target rather than the only person who can identify by appearance and voice the guy that's kidnapped and murdered half-a-dozen teenage girls already. She's left entirely without protection or supervision at probably the only motel in town where, of course, creepy Stanley meanders on in and nabs her AGAIN! Michael Weatherly's "hero cop" character is just as useless as the others, as in the near final scene, he swims down to rescue two hapless, drowning females. He stops at the first one, with whom he shares his oxygen, but rather than send her on her way to the surface, he sits there with victim one, sharing oxygen with her, as they both casually watch Stanley slowly succumb to death and become a gnome in his own creepy, little garden. Justice is served, but wait, fearless hero, THERE'S STILL VICTIM TWO DROWNING AS WELL!!! MAYBE SHARE A LITTLE OXYGEN WITH HER, PERHAPS, BEFORE SHE DIES??? But no, of course he doesn't and she dies. Job well done there, Serpico.

I won't even go into the rest, but I warn you there's some hint of a Stockholm Syndrome romance effect in there, some blissfully simple horror buff types who can't seem to grasp the gravity of having come across the decomposing remains of teen aged girls and even some sort of Twilight Zone-ish paradox wherein Judd Nelson is apparently the sexiest man in California who turns the heads of sultry vixens with "do me" face and is flirted with by young bimbos as though he were Zac Efron in a Bugatti. Strange, indeed.

It's all quite terrible, and only now writing this, can I slightly chuckle under my breath because of the one final, stupid scene in which creepy Stanley is shown to have indeed SOMEHOW survived the vice-like grip and fox-like cunning of his implacable, dauntless police pursuers and now appears to be living it up as per usual in what appears to be the exact same city in which he did all of his hunting and kidnapping to begin with. A truly wily criminal, indeed! He turns directly to the camera, with his mustard-coloured suit, his awful wig and stupid, little soul patch and smirks as if to say just to me "I bet you can't wait to see the next one, can you?" And that, my friends, is the one and only reason this piece of crap movie is getting a 2 out of 10 on this rating.

It was worse than expected

[dugan23 · 2/10 · 1 February 2000]

If you saw the previews, you don't expect much from this movie. It delivers less. Judd Nelson reprises his persona from BILLIONAIRE BOYS CLUB, the crazy, soft-spoken, killer role. Generally, I like Nelson, but this is rubish. Plot is very weak. Big plot holes and premise (especially in last scene) is ridiculous. Michael Weatherly, playing the lake cop, was very miscast.

I look for this flick to hatch copy-cat, torture/killing cases. One of those films that you scratch your head and ask, "Why was this made?"

This One Swims

[dukevega · 8/10 · 31 August 2002]

In my opinion, most movies of this sort sink or swim (pardon the pun) based on the villain, and everyone else kind of falls to the wayside. This one swam. This villain was bad (as he should be), yes, but what I liked about Stan is that he really enjoyed his work, and I can somewhat relate to him as I have been dabbling with screenwriting myself. Judd Nelson played him just right, really giving the impression of a regular guy just trying to do his job.

Some other reviewers have questioned the genre classification of this film, and I'd just like to throw in my two cents. I looked up the individual who wrote this film, and he was a guy who had been in Hollywood for a while, so I'm thinking given the whole subplot with Stan's agent and the director, that this may be a dark (VERY dark) satire of Hollywood and the people who try to make a living in that town, much like "Swimming With Sharks", another fine film.

Some other reviewers complained about a lack of explanation as to why Stan does what he does, but I am not one of them. I'm sure Stan had a motive that made sense for him, and those last two words are what is key here: FOR HIM. Sure, we'd all like a reason for what he did, but the makers of this film are under absolutely NO OBLIGATION to tell us what it is. Personally, it made me wonder about his motives, and I found that much more refreshing than whatever motivation that might have been revealed. I mentioned that I am dabbling in screenwriting and one of the books I picked up said that as long as the screenwriter knows why his characters do things, that's all that matters. No one else has to know.

Good well-played villain, a darkly humorous look at the Hollywood system, and some wickedly funny moments add up to a worthwhile film.

Sucked, not scary

[jdcasgr2good4u · 1/10 · 25 February 2004]

The cover of this movie was so deceiving. it was crap, everything, especially the dead bodies looked soo fake. i couldnt even finish it it was so stupid. the actors besides Judd Nelson were horrible, no wonder they werent seen again. If you are looking for something scary dont even touch this movie a barney movie movie was scarier than this. i dont know who approved this movie to be able to go on the shelves but who ever did must have been an old deaf blind man or women. take my word for it dont waste your money. and if you do like this movie then you should really go see a head doctor or something you physco. not just that but then you also arent a real movie lover because the acting was appaling. what a peice of crap i want to jump on it until it dies.

An Intriguing blend of suspense and humor.

[Mp3_Pawn · 18 March 2002]

I have to admit, this movie truly did shock me. Within the first five minutes you'll feel totally engrossed by the plot. Most movies will lay it on you in bits and pieces , this one just hammers you immediately then leaves you wondering whats going to happen next.

The audio the video quality was outstanding for what looked like a lower budget film, but the full-screen only DVD bothered me. I'm guessing it was transfered this way because it was originally intended for TV. There was a double DVD released not long ago (Cabin by the Lake, Return to the Cabin by the lake) which can be found at Amazon.com and can also be rented at Blockbuster incase you are interested. (see link at bottom of review for direct Amazon page)

Overall , Judd Nelson does a fantastic job as the main role, the plot wasn't all that thick and sometimes was predictable, but always kept you wondering "Are they next?".

Movie Link : http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005RDAP/qid16506652/sr=8-1/refsr_8_67_1/002-2048647-8605661

Major Flaws Spoil This Suspense Flick

[sddavis63 · 2/10 · 1 November 2001]

The first two-thirds of this movie were - well - OK. It was shaping up as a rather average horror-movie about a mass murderer, and there was even enough originality to make it somewhat interesting. Then the whole thing fell apart in a laughable and completely unbelievable last half hour or so.

It's impossible to write about this movie without a few SPOILERS, so beware! THERE ARE SPOILERS AHEAD! BIG ONES! If you must watch this movie, don't read on!

The plot was not bad. The murderer in this case is a screenwriter (Stanley Caldwell, played by Judd Nelson), being pressured by his agent and a director to complete a script about a man who drowns young girls and then uses their bodies to create an underground "garden." To make the story more realistic, he engages in his own personal research - he actually does this to see how young girls react to being kidnaped and drowned! This was sufficiently unique to have gained my attention anyway. And for the first hour, it's not bad. It's not great, either, but it's not bad. The only thing I was left wondering about in the first hour was why (with only one exception) none of the bodies underwater showed any signs of decomposition? I mean, these girls were not kidnaped and drowned at the same time, and if one body was horribly decomposed, shouldn't there have been a progression of decomposition according to the dates the girls were killed? OK, it's a pretty grotesque criticism I confess, but it did leave me scratching my head. Aside from that, though, I thought the first hour was all right. But then came the last half hour.

I have questions, folks. The last girl kidnaped was under 18 I assume. (The posters in the police station for all the missing girls had a reference to "KidSeek" - sounds underage to me.) So, let's get this straight now. This underage girl is miraculously rescued, only seconds from being drowned in this underwater garden of horror. Apparently no attempt is made to contact her family, or if one is made, no family comes to get her. Instead, the girl is "drafted" to help the police with this one, except - wait for it - she's then (this girl, who had been through the trauma of a kidnapping, and then only hours before escaped being drowned in the grotesque "garden of flesh") simply left on her own in a motel, with no police guard, even though the murderer hasn't been found (I know he's presumed dead, but still - given the circumstances? Just leave her alone?) Then - how does he find her anyway? Did they put an ad in the paper saying "hey murderer, this girl is at this hotel without a guard, so go get her!" The kidnaping is replayed (boring!!) and then - another question - why kill the director and the agent? That was never explained.

I'd have given the first hour a 5 (average, not great and not a disaster) but the last half hour drags this thing down to a 2/10.

A different type of garden. Sick. Strange. Interesting!

[michaelRokeefe · 5/10 · 4 May 2001]

A down on his luck screenwriter(Judd Nelson)becomes a serial killer in order to develop a character for a new script. He kidnaps young women and eventually drowns them in the lake near his cabin home. He dives daily to see the girls he has anchored in an underwater 'garden'. One girl(Hedy Burress)tries to help put an end to this sicko's particular deviant activity.

Twisted and strong material for a made for TV presentation. The supporting cast includes: Michael Weatherly, Susan Gibney and G. Patrick Currie.

I liked the idea but trust me, this is not very good

[Stevieboy666 · 4/10 · 30 March 2020]

Horror film screenwriter Stanley is actually a serial killer who drowns young women and keeps their corpses at the bottom of a lake, a place that he calls his "garden". I liked this concept, and the underwater scenes with Stan caring for his victims are pretty creepy. The soundtrack heightens the atmosphere. However, at the end of the day this is a cheap looking TV movie with acting that is not going to win any awards and a plot where logic and believability go out of the window. The second half is is slow compared to the first. There is a sequel, it is even worse than this (I scored that 2/10)