The Traveler (2006 Video) User Reviews

Almost unacceptably bad

[Heislegend · 3/10 · 22 February 2007]

Sometimes movies with potential try hard and fall just short of being good. In some ways "The Traveler" falls into that category. In other ways it falls so short of what should be considered film that it's downright sad.

Let me start by saying that if this is a student film, it should probably get a decent grade. It's story had potential, the effects are fairly good given the budget, and it genuinely made me (a real horror fan) cringe from time to time. The problems? First of all, the production values are are poor. Extremely poor. In fact I think I've made home movies that took longer to produce. Half of the fun of watching horror flicks can be the bad production, but this is just too much. Then you have to deal with the "actors". I use quotations because I'm fairly sure the makers of this film just asked friends and possibly strangers on the street to be in this movie. It's so bad that it makes a somewhat promising story and makes it almost unbearable to watch.

Why the 2 extra stars? As I said, the story isn't bad (think TV show "Survivor" meets your gruesome untimely death by way of creepy British guy)...it's just executed very poorly. Add another star for some practical special effects that were more than I expected (probably where the entire budget went for this film if it had one to begin with). All of this gives you a finished product that, if more time and a little more money had went into it, could easily have been a real contender for a good horror flick. I really wanted to like this piece of indie horror...I just couldn't.

Even surgeons would flinch at this one.

[Someguysomwhere · 3/10 · 21 September 2010]

The Devil (with a proper British accent) holds a bunch of people hostage in a infamous abandoned old house.

Among them are a married couple who got stranded there because their car broke down. The other four (or five?) are hikers who were camping out at the old house before said couple showed up. They get cozy and the hikers tell the couple stories of evil doings in the house years ago and how it's a regular pilgrimage for them. Enter the Devil shortly thereafter, Britishing all over the place, telling them they can't leave and that he wants to play a game. They have to choose which of them is to be tortured and killed first.

What can I say? --Low budget, using the tried and true 7 or 8 people you've never heard of out in some remote or secluded area. In this case, a house. Very graphic, gory violence. Acting at, or slightly above porno. What's that you say? --You're innocent? --Never seen a porno movie? --I don't believe you! --But let me put it this way: If you randomly picked out someone off the street, their performance would be as good if not better. But to be fair, and not use a broad brush, I'll except the guy who plays the Devil. He seems to have some experience.

The movie had "some" merit for me (I gave it 3 stars, didn't I?) because I found the situation the people were placed in an intriguing psychological one though this aspect unfortunately was not explored in any real depth and took a back seat to the violence which I thought was exploitive, over-the-top, and unnecessary. The psychological angle, the real dilemma of people leveraged by someone (if not the Devil) to choose another human being for torture and death, intelligently explored, could have yielded a very tense, nail-biting, on-the-edge-of-your-seat film. My loss, I guess. This movie is what it is. It's not pretending to be anything else.

Finally: While it has some merit, as I've explained, I don't believe this is a movie one rushes to see. Rather, you should just let it come to you. For example, you could wait until one day a friend or relative buys the DVD and invite you over. Or, for a day when you're not thinking straight and buy it yourself. Love, Boloxxxi.

Traveling further down the Tomb of Terrors box-set (movie 3 of 50)

[movieman_kev · 3/10 · 5 November 2013]

A varied group of people are held captive by a supernaturally charged being known only as The Traveler, who tortures them both physically and psychologically in the guise of a game for reasons unknown, They must try their best to escape.

Some of the gore effects, which. Truth be told, are really the bread and butter of this movie, are surprisingly well done given the low-budget. Yet this is offset somewhat by less than stellar sound effects. Plus a villain that bears a passing resemblance to Kevin from "The Office" remake isn't particularly what nightmare sauce is made from either.

Shockingly Inept

[radioman_ · 1/10 · 22 June 2007]

Well, I give it a 2 for the gore, but otherwise this film is worthless. Heck, I just went back and gave it a 1. With this movie I have finally decided I'm too old to finish movies that start off as poorly as this clunker. SPOILER: For 10 minutes an uninteresting couple with nothing much to say drives around lost in the country. This bit has to be seen to be believed. Were they all on 'ludes when they edited this section? I saw this movie for free and I still paid too much. That silly movie about the giant walking turd monster was like Citizen Kane compared to this bowel movement. Your life will be better if you skip this puppy. Your entertainment dollar would be better spent on gas to go driving around running over stray dogs while dressed as Edna Turnblatt.

Awful, Just Awful

[oddboggle · 1/10 · 20 May 2007]

Okay, so this is a low-budget horror flick. I get that. That's no excuse for not having at the start a solid script. I mean, before anything, get the script in the best shape possible. Don't just hope it'll come together on the screen. It won't. The script would've been much better if there was more of a connection between the characters and their fate. The philosophical note at the end rang empty, because, frankly, we just didn't care.

The directing was just as bad. There was a sense that the director rushed it without considering the flow of the scenes. You think that everything was just padding to get to the gore shots.

The acting was on an even keel with the script and directing. Doesn't anybody rehearse any more?

The one star I give it is for the gruesome effects.

So why did I watch the whole thing? I'm one of those people who has to finish what they start watching. (I need to stop doing that...)

Oddboggle

Reposted from Rotten Tomatoes

[goji54 · 7/10 · 28 July 2007]

I DID NOT WRITE THE FOLLOWING REVIEW BUT WANTED TO REPOST IT HERE TO PROVIDE A MORE BALANCED VIEWPOINT. THE STAR RATING WAS THEIRS ALSO....

Seven people are trapped in an abandoned house by a supernatural force, and an immortal man with monstrous strength (Burke) soon appears and forces them to torture each other to death. But he is keeping his most special, most terrible plans in reserve for young married couple Alan and Suzan (Skocik and D'Allesandro (with Hartely providing the voice of Suzan).

Once in a blue moon, I come upon a film that I can say is fairly decent, but that I will still never watch again and that I am hesitant to recommend to anyone else.

"The Traveler" is one such movie.

I have never seen violence this graphic and terrible in a movie before. I'm the first one to admit that I'm a bit squeamish when it comes to slasher-flicks and torture scenes--I know the reality of severe pain, so I can't stand watching it staged on-screen, and you'd probably laugh if you saw me squirm and look away while viewing many movies--but it's rare where I am shuttling past extended sequences because they are making my skin crawl and because they are just too horrible to watch.

"The Traveler" features six such terrible, extended, extremely graphic scenes. And the violence mostly looks horribly realistic--only once did I think "that looks fake"... but that could just have been because I was zooming past the guts spilling out from one of the characters at x4 speed.

I did watch snippets of each of the death sequences (yeah... most everyone in the house dies most terrible, anguishing deaths, and I don't consider that a spoiler in the day and age of "Saw" and the various imitators, of which this is one).

REPOSTER'S NOTE: THIS IS AN ERROR. "THE TRAVELER" WAS NEARING THE END OF POST-PRODUCTION WHEN "SAW" WAS RELEASED, SO THERE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN AN INFLUENCE.

The violence looks horribly realistic and the well done sound effects make it even more stomach-turningly believable. The best (or most horrible) torture sequences were the one where the "host" takes a spike and a hammer and shatters a victim's teeth one by one--and we get a top view so we can see it happen-- the one where another victim gets hoisted into the air on a meat-hook that penetrates the roof of the mouth and exits through an eye-socket, and the one where a victim's face is literally shaved off.

Despite my revulsion at the graphic violence, despite the fact that I will never consider watching this movie again, I admire the technical know-how that went into creating it.

This is a well-made film over-all. There are a few clunky moments here and there--tinny dialog, flat acting, a special effect here and there that don't come off quite right--but overall it features decent camera-work and staging, it's free of all the padding and time-filling garbage that ruins so many horror movies, and it even offering a story that's interesting and engaging, What's more, the director has the ability to honestly assess what worked and what didn't work in the movie; the camera lingered on the gore and special effects that worked with terrible convincingness, while those that clearly didn't work as I'm sure was hoped are passed by with fairly quick cuts. (There's a "regenerating head" sequence that I think fits this bill.) Too often, low-budget filmmakers allow the audience to see their film's shortcomings too clearly by dwelling on them. Not so with Skocik... he's clearly a filmmaker with a good eye, and I'd be interested in seeing what he might come up with in the future (even if I have to shuttle past portions of the movie).

Not for the squeamish, but definitely for every true horror fan

[raymio17 · 9/10 · 9 October 2006]

Think you have a strong stomach and have seen so many horror effects that nothing can bother you anymore? Ask yourself that again after you've seen this flick. This is very bloody, disgusting fare but supported by a very interesting script that makes it all plausible and very entertaining if not always palatable.

The story revolves around an arguing couple lost while driving to an aunt's house and drawn inexorably to a strange house in the woods. Several horror pilgrims are camping out in this house because of the strange and bloody things that have happened there. Little do they know what will happen to them soon.

The horror works so well here because it is so unexpected and happens so matter-of-factly. And while gruesome to the extreme (things happened here that I've never seen before and I've seen a lot of horror movies) it is not just violence and gore for it's own sake, it is all part of a bigger story that unwinds to a fascinating conclusion.

I'll admit this movie had my skin crawling and that doesn't happen much from movies anymore. The direction is great, the acting passable, the effects phenomenal, and the writing is very original and entertaining. I highly recommend this movie but be careful what you eat beforehand...

Could've been better, but not bad.

[CarlB1961 · 6/10 · 12 March 2009]

Twenty-nine year old Alan Chesterson is a man who seemingly has it all. He's a successful accountant with a respected firm, he has a beautiful wife, and friends who like him for who he is, not just what he has. Every thing seems to be roses for him... until one night, while arguing about children with his wife Suzan, a promising artist, a devastating revelation comes to light: years before, when Suzan was a child, she had been abducted and sexually assaulted so brutally it left her incapable of bearing children. The rapist was never caught, and she was left forever traumatized by the incident.

Guilt-ridden over inadvertently opening these old wounds, the next day Alan suggests the two take a little vacation out to Suzan's mother's cabin, to get away from their troubles and do some catching up. Suzan accepts.

But things start going wrong for our couple when they become lost in the woods of rural Pennsylvania. After driving for hours without any luck finding their way back to the main highway, their car breaks down. As luck would have it, a ramshackle long-abandoned house stands nearby. Hearing laughter coming from inside, Alan and Suzan decide it's some kids having a party and go to inquire some assistance.

The "kids" actually turn out to be a group of friends in their late twenties to early thirties camping out in the living room: married couple Linda and Scott Clark, Linda's brother Tony Wallace, African American Dan Strife, and amiable southern guy Mike Barrett. The group explains to the Chestersons that the house, nicknamed "The Death House", is their favorite hangout, and that they hiked there on foot for several miles. Mike does offer them the use of his cell phone, but can get no signal. He takes a look at their car, but can find nothing apparently wrong with it ("You're even runnin full on wiper fluid.").

With no other choice, the Chestersons decide to spend the night in the old house and hike into town for help tomorrow. As they make themselves comfortable, their new friends reveal the house's rather gruesome history: nearly everyone who ever lived there had met with some grisly end, including an old woman who fell down the stairs and was eaten by rats and a couple who killed each other. The house was also the residence of a serial killer who murdered several women and buried them in the basement. Not only that, but psychic investigators had detected a powerful demonic presence in the same basement. The group also reveals that several of them had had eerie experiences in the house in the past, but since nothing bad had ever happened to them in all the times they had come up here, they still like to hang around for the thrill of it.

After a tour of the house during which Scott, an amateur graffiti artist, shows off his work, they head down to the basement. Several small animals are nailed to a beam, perfectly preserved after many years. They also notice a thick white fluid dripping from the ceiling. Suzan becomes uncomfortable, having flashbacks to her childhood experience in which she was held captive in a similar basement, and they decide to head back upstairs.

As they hang out, joking around and making small talk with the campers, the sound of crickets outside... abruptly stops. Then the sound of footsteps coming up to the front door. It opens and a well-dressed, cultured, middle-aged British gentleman enters. After setting down his briefcase, this unexpected new guest turns to the seven bewildered people seated on the floor with an unpleasant smile.

"Hello." And thus, a night of endless terrors begin.

The visitor, who refers to himself as a "traveler", explains that he has always made the best use of the people who come to this house. He has something special in mind for this current group of "guests". He wants to play a game: "I'm going to torture you all to death." They must each vote to determine who will be picked to die. This will go on until only two are left alive, at which point he will decide who the only survivor will be. Refusal to play is not an option. A wall of fire at every exit prevents them from escaping. Self-sacrifice will not be tolerated. To show them how serious he is, the Traveler easily tears one of Mike's arms off, then chisels his teeth out one by one before driving the chisel into his nose and through his brain, killing him.

He then leaves, giving them time to prepare themselves for the next round...

A brutal and unflinching trip

[milkhole213 · 7/10 · 27 October 2021]

Even with about 25% of the Tomb of Terrors box set to watch I can safely say The Traveler is the best thing in it. I kind of already knew that as it was one of the few films I had watched from it when I first purchased it many years ago along with another good film Soul of the Demon. The Traveler has some of the same deficiencies of other films in that set- an overlong length (almost 105 minutes), dodgy acting and very limited sets and production values. Where The Traveler differs is in having a fairly interesting and unique mysterious plot, an unsettling ambience, a good villain and some stunning low budget gore scenes.

The Traveler is played by a guy with a British accent and is easily the best actor here. The rest of the cast are kind of poor though not awful. A group of people end up trapped in a deteriorated house and he makes them vote on who he will brutally torture to death in front of them. His sinister motives have something to do with one of the women in the house who has a dark past. His true identity isn't too hard to figure out.

The true highlight of The Traveler is the utterly brutal and innovative torture/death scenes. I won't spoil them but it's as if Olaf Ittenbach moved to the US and decided to add a dose of pretentiousness to his gore-fests. The gore here isn't quite as plentiful as Olaf's movies but it has his nasty, brutal, mean-spirited feel like in Black Past or The Burning Moon. It's not the fun, party gore of Premutos. I won't spoil the gore scenes but they are both innovative and unflinching in their brutality. The best is saved for last in a truly harrowing, vile, brutal and reprehensible torture death. I adored it of course. The dude doing the gore effects here went on to a healthy career including some big budget films. The effects aren't top notch and vary in how convincing they are but the sheer brutality and innovation make them stand above countless low budget splatter-fests.

The Traveler isn't perfect- it is overlong with about 10 minutes of a couple driving around at the beginning and another 10 minutes or more of people exploring a decrepit house. Some of the drama feels very forced and the dialogue can be weak at times. Also, the story manages to be both confusing and obvious at the same time. The gore isn't relentless but the torture deaths are placed at a regular interval throughout so you don't go too long without carnage. There's even a nasty, bloody scene of the survivors trying to take out The Traveler with conventional means. Despite some downsides the upsides of The Traveler makes it not only the gem of the Tomb of Terrors box set but a gem of ultra-low budget splatter/horror cinema.