Blood Runs Cold (2011) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
23 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
How the killer is able to see thru those glasses n with those eyes is beyond me.
Fella_shibby8 April 2021
I first saw this in 2012 on a dvd which I own. Revisited it recently on a fast forward mode.

Inspite of the film's runtime only 75 mins, it is a bit boring during the initial scenes. It has brief nudity n gory death sequences.

The special effects is lol and there are few mins of shaky cam stuff.

A character goes out to pee and he sees the killer upstairs in the window. However he ignores this for God knows why. A big wtf.

A character wakes up and after eating breakfast, she cleans up blood on the floor rather than calling for help.

A character's leg is injured brutally n her fingers chewed upon by a cannibal but she manages to run here n there n fight off the killer.

The acting n direction is very very amateurish and the isolated snowy settings was not utilized properly.
16 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A film of two halves
Leofwine_draca18 June 2015
BLOOD RUNS COLD is an ultra low budget Swedish slasher flick, shot in English and made on an apparent budget of just $5000. That it looks as good as films made for ten or even a hundred times the budget is testament to the skill of the director and production team. Still, it's a pity that the quality of the writing doesn't match the quality of the film-making, as this turns out to be a predictable movie in the extreme in terms of its non-existent storyline.

It's also a film of two halves, with the first half by far the worst. Not much happens here, other than setting up an uninteresting heroine and various supporting characters who are little more than fodder for the killer. The good news is that things pick up - considerably - in the second half, which is a straightforward action-packed slasher flick with some remarkably gory death scenes and some fun stalk 'n' slash moments. The gore effects are very well done on the budget and the narrative as a whole is relatively enjoyable if you like slasher films. Just a shame that the first half was so slow.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
OLD HOUSE IN THE WOODS
nogodnomasters28 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Winona (Hanna Oldenburg) is a stressed out musician who rents a house in the woods so she can go to the town bar. Here she meets her old boyfriend Rick (Patrick Saxe) who can't read a line and his two lively friends Liz (Elin Hugoson) and Carl (Andreas Rylander). They decide to take the "party" back to the house, one that has an unwanted guest who looks exactly like the guy on the cover.

The opening scene was a slasher special effects dream. The were cold faces covered blood and snow. The older dried blood had turned dark, almost black, while the fresh blood from the wound was bright red, dripping like Karo syrup. Snowflakes that had fallen on his coat was mixed with blood. Clearly they knew what they were doing with special effects. The plot wasn't very linear and the action starts at 40 minutes into this 77 ,minute film, which accounts for the teaser opening shot.

The acting was not impressive, these are all newcomers. They also needed better lines. Toward the end when a head is smashed, we see the guy move his hand to the rock on his face to steady it. They could have cut out a few seconds, but I guess a 76 1/2 minute movie doesn't sell as well as a 77 minute film.

Now in a Scooby-Doo mystery they introduce the kindly Mr. Carswell in the beginning so we can figure out who the villian is in the first three minutes. I have seen the film and I don't know who it is. As far as I can tell, the film was shot in the part of Sweden where everyone speaks English to P.O. the cannibals.

Okay slasher rental.

Parental Guide: F-bomb, sex, nudity (Elin Hugoson, Hanna Oldenburg)
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
oh dear
fewsternoble13 October 2011
This is my first review on here, i have seen many films over the years and quite often find myself coming on here before making the final decision on whether to watch a specific movie or not. Over the years there have been some appalling movies that have been marked way above their station, so i think it's time i had my say.

I watched this after seeing the couple of reviews on here, i sometimes wonder if i am watching the same film as previous reviewers, it was a reasonable effort, but even at 1hr 14mins it felt way too long and there was absolutely nothing new here, apart from the fact they tried to make it feel American for some reason.

The effects on the death scenes were OK, but the added touch of cold breath on a couple of scenes looked out of place as the effect seemed almost HD in quality, but the movie was of a lower resolution, hope that makes sense. Watch the movie and you will see what i mean.

2 stars may seem harsh, but i really felt as though i had wasted my time with this :(
26 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Considering
kosmasp30 April 2012
If you consider the budget, I should rate this higher (and you too). If it really was shot with only 5.000 dollars, than I salute you Mr. Director. Still it doesn't take away, that this tries to be something it cannot be fully. A slasher movie that makes even less sense than your average slasher movie. It's one thing to have no reception with your cell phone and another to have reception with it, but not really using it. You'll understand if you actually really watch this movie. I wouldn't recommend it though.

Of course Slasher fans do not mind and probably will not care (some of them that is), if there is a story (not really) or any sense in it all (even less than the story part and yes that is possible). The effects are not bad and you get to see some skin in it. Still as "exciting" as that is, it doesn't really lift this movie up (no pun intended).
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Offers nothing new
acidburn-1010 February 2013
I recently came across this movie, after reading some positive reviews and given its mere 5,000 budget, well I was intrigued to see this for myself, and when I did, well I was absolutely disappointed, I honestly don't see what all the fuss is about. I was bored stupid and even given it's relatively short running time 114mins, it seemed to drag and seemed to be on for way too long.

This movie also seems to echo "Cold Prey" with its snowy setting and killer's costume, but has none of its charm. The gore scenes were surprisingly good and handled quite well, that's the only good thing about this mess of a movie and the setting was creepy, but everything else just falls apart. The acting for one thing wasn't up to scratch, frankly it was awful especially when they're up against the killer, it was just lifeless and no effort put into it. The cast just seemed to go through the motions and the dialogue between the 4 friends was also dull and boring.

All in all "Blood Runs Cold" offers nothing new to the genre, the killer was yes menacing and ruthless but everything else just didn't work.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
No budget does NOT translate into BAD movie!!
Patient44410 October 2011
I'll give this movie a 6, I know it's quite a favorable review but seriously you have to take its budget in consideration. Now, I don't know if 5000$ was all that they spent on doing it but you can tell that indeed it is a low-budget production. Not necessarily in a bad way tho, OK it is kinda logic free, you get no explanation for the killer, well for pretty much anything that is, you do get your share of nudity in exchange, but somehow "Blood runs cold" manages to stand tall, maybe with just a little hunchback but still, it's not bad at all.

So if you are simply too bored, or you want to take a look in the low budget horror section, this is the movie you should start with. Trust me, you can do a whole lot worse, I think this is a great effort in the end.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Sonny Laguna should make porn
dschmeding29 April 2012
Warning: Spoilers
"Blood runs cold" is the epitome of meaninglessness. Basically you get a low budget slasher, kind of the twice lobotomized brother of the lame "Fritt Vilt" movies. The killer has a pick Axe and lives under a house in a snow-scape where some kids end up being picked off one by one. Best things first... I thought the killer looked quite effectively creepy and considering the budget they managed to make the movie not look too bad at first sight and even managed some decent gore scenes. But this movie lacks where budget is no excuse. Half of the movie has close to no dialog and just dumb people stumbling through empty rooms and doing things that are totally irrelevant for the "plot". The movie just ends suddenly after a bunch of unbelievably dumb scenes of which most is shamelessly stolen from other horror movies and reproduced in a cheap low budget way. Many scenes of closeups seem repetitive, the blood looks orange like in a bad 70ies movie, the acting is bad, the snow looks fake and the plot is as close to non-existent as in a porn movie.

Considering that the directors name is Sonny Laguna he is already halfway to a porn director, so why not go all the way? Anybody who rates this movie above average must have had his brain frozen due to excessive SlushPuppy indulgence.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I love slasher films. Thats what this is.
Greenzombidog22 April 2012
A young girl rents a house in the middle of nowhere so she can work in peace. But because of a freak snow storm she ends up in the wrong house and someone else is already there.

OK, I love slasher films and low budget doesn't bother me. Plot holes don't bother me either they just give me something to laugh at. This girl who wants a peaceful environment to work in goes to a bar and brings three people home with her. Why? so that there's three more people to get killed in the movie thats why. The guys in this movie all go outside to pee despite it being freezing cold, why? so they can see creepy movements outside and then get killed thats why. I don't care if thats stupid, its how slasher films work people. The budget is low but the effects are good. You get some pretty nasty kills in this one. The killer is pretty good as well you don't get a back story for him but he does look very cool. There are boobies in it which is standard for slasher movies. One downside is the rather sudden ending but it doesn't ruin it.

If I say this is like Cold Preys simpleton brother you get the idea. It's not as clever as it's big brother but it has some endearing qualities. I look forward to the directors next work.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
holy wow
deadsnow16 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
holy cow. this will contain a lot of spoilers as i'm typing this as i'm watching it. and, yes, i'm too tired to care how this review comes out. what a waste of time. the only reason i gave this two stars is for the ex- boyfriend's kill scene. it was pretty good for the budget. killer blair witch snot scene also haha. question. when the main character wakes up and finds all her friends missing and blood all over the floor, why does she just clean it up like no big deal and go on with her day? the killers scream sounded like he was trying out for some lame screamo band. it was funny. oooooh boy. this acting is awful. i cannot wait for this thing to end. Oooo. i just remembered when they're all supposed to be driving back to the house and yet the background is staying still and then you see them pull up to the house. you couldn't even shake the car or push it to give it some movement? anything at all? annnnd now it's over. horrible. this seems like something bloody-disgusting will release. avoid. avoid. avoid.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
wtf only $5000
videa5522 March 2012
What can I say the people that made this movie are an up and coming talent to say the least. I'm an avid slasher movie fan but still I went into this one with the lowest of expectations, What can I say, when i saw that the budget for this was a measly $5,000 I thought I would be turning it off after the first 5 minutes. But this movie had me gripped after the first 10.

The story is quite basic, Winona goes back to her home town to get away from her stressful life as an artist, there she meets up with an ex boyfriend and his friends who she invites to spend the night at the creepy house her manager has rented for her out in the woods. From the the blood starts to fly.

For the budget visually it's a gem, how they managed to make it look so great with that little money is a skill in itself. Great cinematography for the genre complimented by some nice filming locations. For fans of the genre there is plenty of gore and some great looking effects, some really stood out as better and more realistic than in bigger budgeted fare. There is a decapitation at one point which is particularly impressive. The acting is another plus all the characters have personality and are portrayed well Although some kind of back story for the slasher would have been welcome.

I only have two minor gripes with this movie, first of all the American accents were quite false with tints of Swedish shining through now and again. Also where is this supposed to be set? The second problem I had was the lack of any surprise element at the end, it was a little abrupt to just finish the movie in the way they did, I even flicked through the credits hoping to find something but alas there was nothing.

Putting these minor problems aside I had a great time with this one, I was genuinely scared at a few times which is a big recommendation coming from this seasoned horror fanatic. Don't listen to the negative reviews that this is getting here I nearly did and would have missed a impressive entry into one of my favorite genres.

To the makers of this movie, I take my hat off to you.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Top-notch horror on a $5000.00 budget. High budget horror movies should feel ashamed!!
Norrel1228 October 2011
What the hell are high budget horror movies doing with the money?

This movie is allegedly created on a $5000.00 budget. It looks like anything but a low budget horror movie. The special effects astound you when considering the budget.

If you're looking for an atmospheric horror movie that gives you all the scares that you're longing for but not getting with the over-the-top gore fest horror movies hitting the theaters these days, you need to do yourself a favor and check this movie out.

The director has vision and talent and I'd definitely like to see what his genius comes up with on a higher budget.

While the movie is good, it isn't perfect. Most blood effects were good but some were just downright terrible. The actors were not the best and were killed off in order of acting ability from worst to best.

Also, the ending may disappointing some but just keep in mind what this movie was able to accomplish on a $5000.00 budget.
10 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Dog-awful
PDragon61623 April 2013
The fact that a movie is low-budget doesn't make it a bad movie, however it doesn't mean that the movie's flaws should be forgiven as if they don't count.

This movie is dreadful. Interminably boring and with exceptionally poor dialog. I couldn't make it all the way through, none of the performances conveys any kind of fear at all. The worst actor is definitely the clown playing "Karl". I can see one of the ways they saved on budget was using people who don't know how to act.

Grainy cheap cameras I can forgive, but for Pete's sake, *don't* shoot "night" scenes during the day. It's (a) obvious that it isn't night and (b) confusing because sometimes a shot comes along and you can't figure out if it was "supposed to be night".

My recommendation is skip it. There is nothing to see here.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Reviewer runs out of patience
movieman_kev2 September 2013
Winona, on vacation in her hometown, runs into her ex and his friends whom she invites to the old house she's staying at. But a killer shows up to crash the impromptu party.

Not much of a real plot to this micro-budget horror film. And I'm definitely not going to hold the lack of cost against the movie (a multi-million corporate made movie can waist as much time out of my life as any bargain-basement film) However, I will hold the fact that it's utterly boring, simplistic and cringe-inducing against the movie. Add to that, that the killer is laughable and you get a film, while barely an hour and a half, feels much much longer.

Eye Candy: both Hanna Oldenburg and Elin Hugoson get briefly topless but it's not worth subjecting yourself to this mess for.
2 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
yes but what the hell is he? or it?
loomis78-815-9890345 August 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Winona (Oldenburg) is a successful musician who needs a break from the fast life. She returns to her home town and her agent rents a quiet house in the snow in the middle of nowhere for her to relax in. She goes to the local bar and runs into her old boyfriend Richard (Saxe) and along with another couple go back to her rented house. When they get there they party, have sex and eventually realize they are not alone. What can best be described as a cannibalistic slasher in a frozen snow suit is walking around with an ax stalking and eventually hacking up the cast. Despite being shot and stabbed (in which air, not blood comes out) our silent killer continues until it's just Winona left. With a classic slasher film set up, this modern slasher film still manages to miss the mark. Okay the killer is creepy, but what exactly is it, or he? In one scene he's eating part of his victim, so is he a cannibal? Is he a supernatural being? Is he alive or some sort of reanimated dead? These are questions the audience has when we first see the killer. The problem is, you still have all these questions when the end credits are rolling. This movie never really explains anything. There is even a bloody scene that starts the movie that makes no sense and ties in nowhere to the story. The rest of the characters are underdeveloped and despite a good set up, this film doesn't have a clue how to generate a slasher scare or suspense.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
This frostbitten icy little chiller sure left me out in the cold. Brr. etc...
Foreverisacastironmess12315 November 2012
Warning: Spoilers
The plot and formula of this movie: people in isolated place+monster, has been used and re-used so very many times that all you see has been done before, and much better I'd like to add. And this, coupled with the fact that they pretty much add nothing at all new, no surprise twists or anything, the movie soon becomes a drawn-out, near total bore. It's almost consistently boring, the plot is extremely poor and dull-yet I still felt that it was very basically entertaining and enjoyable. The surrounding wintry tundra really sets an oppressive, eerie tone-it looks absolutely freezing and just chilled me right through the screen! That setting is the only true star of this flick in my opinion. I also liked a lot of the cinematography on show. They try out a lot of really strange and creepy camera angles that to me delivered and created an okay subtle kind of tension. I don't believe that just because a movie has a really s****y budget, that it and the acting need automatically be classified as horrible. I'm a big fan of another cheaply made independent horror movie called "Rise of the Dead." Regardless of the cost to make, if everything about a film rolls together, gels and works well it can be great-I mean look at "Friday the 13th." But sadly to me this, mostly because of the actors, definitely does not work. The tension of the picture really started to develop well, just so long as there was only one character on the screen at a time. But the second another appeared and they began to converse, things just seemed to fall flat fast. One character I couldn't stand and couldn't wait to be horribly butchered for my personal viewing pleasure was the annoying loudmouth who couldn't seem to open his mouth without uttering the F-word. Gah, die already! Everyone had a weird little foreign twang, like they were from Bratislava or something. Maybe this was what hindered the acting. The stunted accents really made the actors sound amateurish and stupid at times. I think perhaps I may have enjoyed this movie a whole lot more if it had just been released as a Swedish movie with subs. As it is, you don't ever care that much about any of the characters, including the lead. I thought Hanna Oldenburg was good in her thankless and hectic role. Not brilliant of course, but much better than everyone else-not counting the killer. That possible Blair Witch homage with her nose overflowing like crazy was so incredibly gross! I'd like to say that it was great that she as an actress was willing to "go there" and look so disgusting that she was snotting with terror, but I'm pretty sure it was probably just the natural result of the temperature! One of those "organic" acting type things I've heard so much about then... She sure was a dead ringer for Kristen Stewart! ::: For me one of the big pluses about Blood Runs Cold is its masked killer. I liked the way that no explanation was ever offered as to who or what the guy was. They didn't give a reason for the terror, it just existed for its own sake and was its own rationality. I've always really liked that idea. He clearly wasn't alive, and maybe not even human. The design of his suit was very similar to the killer from the original My Bloody Valentine, and the way that he was some kind of dried-up zombie with dust for blood was reminiscent of that clockwork ninja guy from Hellboy. The kills were effectively blunt and brutal, although some of the cgi blood splashes looked really cheesy. I liked the part when the last girl standing(such a classic in movies such as these!) discovers the killer's lair which is this big cave mine underneath the house. That was a cool scene. There is a very quick hint that's easy to miss near the end of the movie that suggests that "Winona" may have gone to the wrong house. So from the killer's sick perspective she and her friends were trespassers. I thought the shabby and cold-looking house made for quite the creepy environment, particularly during the gruelling chase scenes that lead up to the ending. This movie only really ever rises up during the frenzied climax, which is good, but it also highlights just how slow everything else is. The final image of the traumatised Winona wailing right into the camera is simply terrible. I guess the film had to have some kind of conclusion, but that? That ridiculous non-ending that single-handedly demolishes whatever fragile icy kudos this dumb excuse for a picture had managed to build up? Bah!!! Couldn't they have at least sprung for that well-worn old chestnut where the seemingly vanquished killer opens his eyes, or clenches a fist in vengeance? It did make me laugh though, as it was so freakin' lame! The ending has gotta be a big letdown, no matter how you wish to view this film... Just a cheap slasher flick, not really deserving of any special attention whatsoever-although on the other hand, what's wrong with a little good old-fashioned chop-up carnage to kill 1hr 20? Definitely a bad film, but not one I believe would be a total waste of your time if you're into horror slashers. Keep this one on ice...
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
That was NOT good...
maxime-chesneau4 April 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Yes the movie was pretty bad, but I'd give it a 5 stars vote only by respect for the director. Indeed once I had finished the movie this afternoon, I went on the Facebook page of the film and just told that it was bad ( the acting, the lack of suspense, the thin scenario... ) but the DIRECTOR himself answered and we kinda had a talk about this. I told him how I was surprised the main character happens to have a phone (with service, that's new in this kind of film) BUT she never never never has the idea of calling the cops! No, she keeps trying to contact her already dead boyfriend... And this boyfriend actually saw the killer before anything happened but didn't react at all. And an other character realizes someone has been messing with the car they used to get where they are, but no, whatever, he just keeps going on with his (short) life as if everything was normal. Well the director actually told me that 1- Of course it's difficult to make a perfect movie with such low budget and 2- If he had a chance to, he would have modified about 50% of the script before shooting it so... The movies deserves 2 stars but the honesty of Sonny Laguna and the good death effects and his will to do good deserves more like a 7 so... Let's hope his next flick "Mither" is gonna be better produced.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
gory Swedish flick
trashgang23 October 2011
This is director Sonny Laguna first attempt to make a real feature. Naturally having almost no money they decide to make it on a budget of 5000$. Also due being a low budget they had to film it outside in nature were it was 20 a 30 degrees below zero (Celsius). It was shot in 35 days.

I enjoyed this slasher. We haven't seen that many slashers being played in the snow but it really worked out fine. The acting was believable and the director surely knew what a slasher (those eighties ones) is all about. POV shots, gore and nudity. It's all involved here and there are some frightening moments because you never see the face of the killer. But I was a bit left with a sour taste, due two reasons. It is never really explained what the killer or who he/she was. It's a bit of a Jason Voorhees in the Friday the 13th parts with Kane Hodder. He's a bit supernatural. The killer can take an axe in his body without having problems with it. On the other hand, at the end of the movie when all problems are solved it is really over. Suddenly the end credits do appear and I was left with some hunger of a big surprise which wasn't there.

Never seen any the actors before (for most their first role) and the North of Europe becoming the new hope for gory flicks (Death Snow)I was convinced of this flick. Of course the story could have been a bit more better but the effects were really great, all in camera shot with a lot of gore and red stuff. A horror for fans of the good old slashers who can stand some gore.

Gore 4/5 Nudity 2/5 Story 3/5 Effects 4/5 Comedy 0/5
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Neat little slasher opus
Woodyanders3 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Successful musician Winona (a sound and sympathetic performance by the pretty Hanna Oldenburg) returns to her hometown to take a much-needed break from her stressful lifestyle. Winona goes to a decrepit cabin with an old boyfriend and two of her boyfriend's friends. However, there's a vicious killer in the area who spoils everyone's fun. Director/co-writer Sonny Laguna relates the familiar, but enjoyable and effective premise at a steady pace, takes time to develop the characters with some depth, makes the most out of the desolate snow-covered wintry landscape, generates a reasonable amount of tension, and delivers both a pleasing smattering of tasty bare female breasts and a generous helping of nasty graphic splatter. The solid acting by the capable cast rates as another asset: Patrick Saxe as the morose Richard, Andreas Rylander as lovable lout Carl, and Elin Hugoson as the sweet Liz. The remote location projects a strong feeling of isolation and vulnerability. Moreover, this movie warrants extra praise for the crisp widescreen cinematography, the genuine creepy psycho, Samir El Alaoui's shuddery score, the tight 78 minute running time, and the overall grimly serious tone. Worth a watch for fans of slice'n'dice fare.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Sonny Laguna delivers again...
nightwatch477318 August 2013
I just loved the backwoods horror slasher film Madness and when I found out that this one was directed by the same director, I purchased it right away. What I love about Sonny Laguna's second horror outing is the love this man has for horror. This film has a very sleazy gory 70's grindhouse feel but with a touch of modern horror films like Cold Prey sprinkled all over it. The film looks gorgeous on DVD and it is hard to believe it only cost 5 grand to make. Terrific stuff here and we also have a great looking antagonist that can rival the best of them. Please Sonny make a sequel!!!!!!!!!! Can't wait for Mr Laguna's next project Wither. It sort of looks like Sweden's take on Evil Dead.....
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Hollywood take note
phantasmda7 May 2012
If this film had have been done on a budget of $10m I would have gladly given it a solid 6 or 7 out of 10 but for the $5000 it took to make, it deserves a full 10 out of 10 plus. How on earth do you produce a film as good as this for so little cash? There's plenty of scares, some decent gore, an absolutely brilliant looking killer, seriously, they don't come much creepier than this one and the gore effects are top notch. It doesn't look cheap either, the camera work is fairly competent and looks far in excess of its meagre budget. The only quibble I'd have is with acting, which isn't the best if I'm honest but hey, for $5000 this is superb. I'd like to see what this director can do with a real budget. It was far better than some of the big budget dross that Hollywood churns out these days.
4 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A guilty pleasure for me!! Short & sweet A++
staceylee24 August 2020
Ok a 9 seems high but it's a micro budget & done very well for the $$. It's plain & simple & been done before with bigger budgets but this one nails it for less!! The story has holes but most of them do lol. But the setting is creepy & the villain is creepy. Decent enough acting and the special effects aren't as cheesy as you might expect. I've watched it several times & it's a fave go to when I'm bored.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed