When his girlfriend suddenly disappears, leaving a cryptic note as her only explanation, Hank's comfortable life and his sanity begin to crack. Then, from the woods surrounding his house, something terrible starts trying to break in.
A stillborn baby girl is abducted by a morgue attendant and brought back to life by electrokinetic power. On her 16th birthday, she escapes captivity and sets out to find her birth mother, leaving a trail of destruction behind her.
Darren, Lou, Jo and Mas live a meager existence on the fringes of poverty. Indebted to the criminal kingpin of their social housing development, they routinely fear for their lives. On the ... See full summary »
Jon Vangdal Aamaas,
Aaron Thomas Ward,
After a family's "black sheep" aunt passes away, they're reluctant and creeped out to receive her cremated ashes. But when a series of strange, supernatural misfortunes beset them, they'll ... See full summary »
Jeremy Isaiah Earl
Fresh off being unseated as the ruler of Sakaar, the Grandmaster makes his way to Earth to start a new life. It's been over a year since Thor left Australia and Darryl has been struggling ... See full summary »
I saw a screening of this movie at the New Orleans Horror Film Festival. I bring this up because I think the audience response is very relevant to this review. The narrative of this film is so incomprehensible that it legitimately seems like four college students were forced to combine their individual screenplays into a single film. There is an unbeleivable amount of set up for subplots that have absolutely no pay off. The main conflict isn't ever really established until the "climax". And the characters undergo no growth whatsoever. Not only is the narrative incoherent, but the tone is incredibly incosistent. Many parts of this movie play as if they were in a comedic satire of the horror genre, and other scenes are played as if we are meant to be take them seriously. These changes in tone literally happen within scenes and indicate a lack of vision on behalf the director and editor. What utimately drags this film down is the fact that by the halfway point, you still can't tell if what is happening is meant as an intentional spoof of the genre of psychological horror, or as a legitimate entry into it. Around the half way point of this film, after some truly teeth-gritting readings of dialogue, I decided that this movie was not meant to be taken seriously. It was clear that if the director intended to make a serious film, they would have used different takes. But this revelation only lead me to ask what the point was? If they intended to make a satire of the psychological thriller/horror genre, why was that not made clear earlier on? Why was this satire randomly inserted into scenes and non-existant elsewhere? Based on the audience reaction after the conlusion of the film, I think it's safe to say I'm not alone in my criticism. As the theater emptied you could hear people asking each other what the hell they had just watched. Because of the inconsistencies prevalent in the tone, it seemed like no one was in support of it as horror film or as a horror satire. Although I am an arduant supporter of independent film, I cannot recommend you see this film should it become available to the public.
205 of 215 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this