Reviews

There was a lot of publicity generated for this movie while James was working filming and editing it.

The hype made this movie sound great, but now that I have seen the "finished" product, it seemed rushed and unpolished.

There is a big difference between "low budget" and "Ed Wood" .

Here is what I disliked the most: 1: The miniature work was the worse that I have *ever* seen in *any* movie. All the miniature scenes could have been shot using "off screen" techniques and improved the overall quality a lot. 2: A lot of scenes seemed to be rushed - lacking certain elements more polished low budget movies have. 3: Shoehorning in so many cameos of other game and movie "internet critics" became distracting.

Over all this movie is an OK time waster, but do not expect anything too special - reminds me of a classic Troma movie in a way.

I am honestly surprised at how low a rating this movie has received here. I've seen far worse movies, that have much higher ratings. Don't get me wrong, this is not a good movie, or even a "so bad it's good" movie ( such as "Autumn" (2009) ).

The thing that strikes me as the biggest single issue, is lack of creativity. Every possible chance the director had to suck the life out of this movie, he went for.

Here is a list of some of the issues I had with this little train wreck:

The editing. Many scenes were cut short, most notably the dinner scene. Many more seemed like there was some footage missing. The editing department was not very kind to scene transitions.

The script had to be written by a 12 year old. No adult could have come up with a storyline like this, unless he was very intoxicated.

The twist ending .... What?! Why?! How The?!

The acting. The folks who were in this were trying there best to act, but it is apparent they are not actors.

Sound was OK for the most part, except for certain scenes like the hayloft were noise obscured dialog.

All the central "good" characters were always in the same room.

Character's behavior "out of character" ( to put it mildly ).

Character interactions were very wrong.

Dracula - the whole character was wrong.

Dark blue day-for-night shots.

Plot points brought up, and dropped.

What little set design there were, looked more at home at a high school play, than this movie.

Special effects were so cheap, the movie would have been slightly better without them.

Of all these bad things I have said about this movie, there is 1 good thing I can say. It had some pretty good footage of the Sedlec Ossuary .

I am whats known as a "movie survivalist" - some one who intentionally finds the worse movies possible to watch.

This movie ( Correct name "Little Fox 2" or "Kis Vuk 2" ) caught my attention, with it's very low score.

I would like to know why I wasted my time on a vastly underrated animation ?

First off is, why did this get such a bad score ? It's a kids movie, with a basic "Disney" like story line --- Young "kid" finds himself on an adventure to save his family - teams up with some unlikely friends along the way - saves the day.

The animation is decent, quite a bit better than what I have seen in many other kids 3D animations.

I was actually impressed at how fluid it looked, and how much "life" the world had.

The English dub work is passable, though it wasn't that great. The original Hungarian language is MUCH better ( yes I watched both language versions ).

The story line moves along well enough. Like a typical kids movie.

Overall, not a bad movie for those 12 and under to watch.

What do you get when you have a movie that is trying hard to be good, but constantly suffers from bad acting, pointless scenes, awkward pacing, and bad direction?

This movie, of course.

From start to finish, I was making an honest attempt to become invested in the story line, but one thing after the other kept getting in the way. Probably the worst of all the issues, were the short cut scenes that didn't add anything to the storyline, or help develop the characters.

Good idea - bad direction .

Here we have yet another movie that uses the Street Fighter name, yet has no idea who the individual characters are.

Every one, with the exception of Barlog and Vega, were completely out of their " Street Fighter " character .

This movie would have done much better if they dropped the Street Fighter name, and come up with something original.

On it's own, it's an alright martial arts / revenge flick / action genre, nothing spectacular, but still an average B action movie ( better than most of Steven Seagal's movies ).

The good points: Camera work was pretty good. Fight choreography was OK. Set design was good.

The not so good points: The actors were trying, but their deliveries were awkward at times. There are a few plot holes that are never explained. The music at the club scene - WHY did they choose something that BAD? Decisions made by Chun-Li, no real life human would ever do. A lot of padding was used that slows the movie down to a snails pace. Overuse of wire " acrobatics " during combat ( along with pseudo Matrix sound effects thrown in ).

If your in the mood for a generic action movie, and have nothing better to watch, this movie would be perfect for you.

This is a review for the movie "House Of Chthon", not the TV series.

I never knew of the TV series up until today, and only found out about it when I tried to review the movie "House Of Chthon" which came bundled in with the 3 Blade movies.

There is no indication any were in the DVD menu, or DVD box that this was a TV tie-in movie.

From watching the movie, it becomes apparent that it was shot on a very low budget.

The first thing I noticed when watching this movie was the quality. The video is grainy and a bit out-of-focus, which is a jarring contract to the other 3 movies, which are good quality.

The next item are the set designs. The other 3 movies have some elaborate and well designed sets. This movie doesn't.

Speaking of set designs and movie quality, the editing seemed to be all over the place. It was OK for the most part ( I have seen far worse ), but at times there are awkward cuts, and splices.

And since I am talking about awkward, the fight choreography was not very good at all. The other 3 movies were much better.

Now to the crux of the issues with this movie: Were is Wesley Snipes ? He brought an energy and personality to the movies, that Kirk Jones can't even come close to duplicating. Kirk's acting just seemed wooden at times, as if "he was just there for the pay check".

If you are a fan of the other 3 Blade movies, this movie is not in cannon with the others. It simply ignores established continuity from the other movies, and changes some of it ( and assumes the viewer won't remember the other movies ).

This movie should not have the Blade name attached to it. It would be an OK stand alone movie, but to try to pass this off as a Blade movie, is very shameful.

I have no idea how to review this anime hybrid. It's all over the place.

Let's start with the good. This anime has good visual art, and is mostly well animated. The audio is good.

.... and it's the only movie I have ever watched were some one back flips while riding a horse.

The plot line is simple, and straight forward, but the way they execute the movie is very confusing.

While our hero ( or is he? ) makes his way threw hell, things jumps out as making no sense, and out of place. Things like character actions, to character design change radically from one layer of hell, to the next.

It doesn't help there is a lot of random plot convenience thrown in.

Who? What? Why did that happen? The presentation of this anime is jarring, and distracting.

It's an OK anime, if you ignore the details, and focus on the action, but for me it's one "What is going on" after the next.

I like finding all kinds of older, more obscure horror movies to watch. This one was what I was looking for. Good ol' late 70's, early 80's fun.

The major problem I found was this movie was slow going, throwing all of the action into the last parts. I was actually questioning this to be a "monster / horror" movie like I was expecting, or a movie that was suppose to make me nostalgic for the old carnivals.

At first I was expecting another run-of-the-mill B movie, after watching a shower scene ripped right from "Psycho", but after watching it a while, it turned out to be fairly unique ( but a bit slow ) in it's approach.

The acting ( for the time ) was good, the set designs ( for the time ) were very good, and the costumes ( for the time ) were decent.

Only real technical problem I had with the movie, was the sound. The volume kept changing, background sound effects would suddenly cut, and than loop, and voice audio would sometimes be a bit erratic.

Over all, this film is a decent classic late 70's early 80's horror movie.

It's not very often I run across a movie that deals with parts of Japanese culture, especially yokai ( translated as " spirit " or " demon " ) .

After watching this, I am of the strong opinion this should have been an anime, not a real life movie.

The limited budget was very apparent in the CG effects used. It just looks cartoony. The costumes of the real life actors were not very well done either.

Set design was all over the place. Ranging from good, to cheap, to cartoon ( when rendered in CG ).

The acting I can not comment on, since I have the dubbed American version. The dub acting, on the other hand, was bad. The emotions were not effectively relayed.

The dub syncing is literally the worse I have ever seen in ANY dubbed movie, from ANY time period. " Martial arts " movies I have watched from the 70's have better voice syncing than this movie made only a few years ago! You can clearly see characters there, not moving their mouths, as dub dialog is spoken.

Also hearing about 50% of the movie, filled with the same " fearful screams " of the main character, gets real annoying, real quick!

Camera control is alright, though continuity issues pop up.

A good example is the main character and the grandfather character are walking along a street talking. In mid conversation it jump cuts to them sitting a bridge, still talking like nothing happened.

Speaking of continuity, there are quite a few scenes that seem like they were cut short, or major chunks were removed.

A good example of this is " grandfather's " six English word long song ( Ode to Azuki Bean ) . That shot just randomly appears, for no reason in between 2 other scenes.

I have been interested in yokai lore for quite some time, and have studied the subject on my own. It may seem like nit picking, but the way yokai are portrayed in this film is VERY inaccurate. Most of them are cast as " just silly creatures ", though quite a few I recognized in the group shots, are in fact quite violent by nature.

The worst part of this movie is the ending. No were in this movie they set up for the resolution to happen the way it does. It just happens, as a huge, unexplained anti-climaxed plot hole.

This movie is one of the more interesting films I have watched in a while.

It screams cliché, and predictable from the start, yet is doesn't present it's self as a bad remake, or slow paced.

I'd say about 65% of the run time reminds me a lot of a swords and shuriken version of the "Hitman" movie.

As far as the action parts, the fights seem too dark, hiding a lot of it.

The biggest letdown was the end battle, it looks dramatic, but the fighting is counterintuitive of what was established over the course of the movie. It's more likely they were rushing to get the movie done, so the bad guys were dumbed down.

Also to add to the not so great end battle was a blatant "Wilhelm Scream".

The final showdown, which was predictable from the start, did feature a brief look at the "Saiki Kanuma Ryu Kenjutsu" style of sword play, which is very rare for any "sword" movie to show at all.

Over all this movie is fun to watch, and fast paced, though it is clichéd, very predictable, and a bit cartoonish at times.

( Review of "Blood Stains" the movie )

This is the second "mystery" movie this week I have watched that made the same mistake ... letting the audience know who the killer is right from the start.

If they would have kept the killer in a mask, or in the shadows, it would made this film a lot better to sit threw.

As it is, this movie is incredibly boring. It reminds me of a not so good remake of "Matlock", or some other 80's crime mystery TV show.

The characters themselves act more like they are in a soap opera, than a movie.

There is no mystery, no suspense, no real drama, and no dramatic ending. I bought this movie, new, for $1.99, and it feels like I was overcharged.

If I learned one thing from this movie, it is never judge a film by it's cover art, or critic blurbs.

The depicted killer looks like he would be cool to watch hacking and slashing his way threw his victims.

One problem. The killer on the cover is not in the movie. Another problem is the blurb reading ""Hostel meets the Silence of the Lambs in this Horrific Murder Mystery"".

I hate to break it to the reviewer, Stuart Alson, but this movie is no were close to the aforementioned films, is definitely not much of a horror film, and is not a murder mystery.

For me personally, this movie was very boring. It kept dragging on and on.

There was no mystery, they show exactly who the killer is from kill #1, and he is not the kind of person I would associate with a hack - and - slash film.

The kills were not creative at all. Very little was actually shown, and the blood & gore was minimalistic.

The acting was not so good. Some characters acted odd at times, while others gave a wooden performance.

Sound was OK for the most part, but the mics at times picked up the wind, and background noise ( air conditioners, traffic, e.t.c. ).

The lighting as I mentioned before, was not very well done, sometimes making it so dark it was hard to make out what was happening.

The special effects were limited to very basic stuff.

Over all this movie is not worth the time. I payed $3 for it new, but I feel like I was overcharged.

You know your in for a not so good movie when the opining cinematic for the companies, "Barnholtz" and "Wiseacre" are horrendous.

I really think this film should have been named "American Cliché" instead.

Almost everything that has been done in this movie, has been done better by other movies. Not much originality, or even creativity in how they use the stuff.

The camera work was good, the set designs were excellent the acting was decent, and the story line pacing was good.

What little special effects that were done, were not done very well. For example quickly turning the movie black and white and back to color to simulate lightning just doesn't work at all. Another example is the distortions caused by not so good green screening.

This film went a little crazy with the spirit POV shots, making me wonder at times, if I'm somehow watching one of the "Evil Dead" movies.

I noted a brief scene in the movie was played twice, once than a few seconds later. I'm assuming this is due to them forgetting to get some footage. I also noted that in one of the schoolhouse scenes, "mathematics" on the chalk board, was spelled "mathimatics" .

Now for the reason I didn't give this movie a 6, like I was originally going to.

If you read my other reviews, you can see I have watched a lot of bad movies. This movie is not a bad movie, except for the ending, which is a huge slap in the face.

It completely ruins it.

Unsalvageable! It makes no sense in continuity with the rest of the movie. The narration that is stapled onto the end doesn't help ether.

When I picked up this bargain bin movie ( $1.99 USD new ) I was expecting a cheap knockoff of "Final Destination".

I was a bit surprised that there were almost no references to the other movie at all. This film can be rightly called a fairly original concept.

As far as the movie it's self, the videography was decent, and the lighting was OK.

I had an issue with the editing. A lot of scenes seem way too short. As soon as the plot point is revealed, the movie jolts to a new scene.

The acting was all over the place, ranging from deadpan, to completely out of character, or not appropriate for the situation.

One glaring example is the boyfriend character, who seems completely disinterested in his girlfriend ( main character ), though his dialog suggests he is suppose to be very concerned, and "dropped everything" to try to find her.

The story line it's self is pretty good, though due to poor directing and / or script, parts of it can be slow. There was some actual suspense built up toward the end, though most of the movie really didn't get me too "invested".

As far as the main antagonist, the Grim Reaper, when they reveal him at the end, he looks ridiculous! It looks like some one with a cheap rubber mask, and rubber foam glued to their costume.

If they didn't have the budget for a half way decent costume, they should have left the Reaper in his robes. The undead from "Evil Dead 3" are a lot better looking.

The sound effects the Reaper made got on my nerves also. No matter what surface he was walking on, it would make the generic "walking on metal grating" noises you hear in quite a few older video games.

On a final note, the mausoleum were the opining credits and the scenes near the end were shot at, look exactly like the one from "Bram Stoker's Dracula's Guest" .

This is the funniest horror movie I have ever watched.

It starts off as a light comedy, but becomes darker humor while the movie goes on, as more and more is revealed!

For once, a bargain bin movie in my collection has a real plot line, with tangible suspense !

The acting is mostly good, the "southerns" creating a believable ( and sometimes funny ) setting.

The mayor of the town ( featured on the box cover ) plays a wide range of emotions, from happy, to shocked, to frustrated.

Though the jokes are mostly corny one liners, the settings and situations can make it funnier, or darker, depending on the mood.

The horror part was done nicely also. I have seen most of he kills done in other movies before, BUT the way they are done does not shout out "bad cliché", instead they tend to add to the dark mood, and cast the "southerns" in a more villain role as time passes.

At the end I was thinking to myself, "Wow this was a decent comedy, and great horror film" !

I found a box art error on my DVD case ... on the back, the mayor's eye patch is on the wrong side

River World is an interesting movie to say the least. I never read the books, so I'm judging this movie on it's own merits.

The story line of this film is fairly unique, though reminiscent of Matrix in a way.

The plot line is confusing at times, but moves along at a decent pace. I hate all the random "plot conveniences" that happen, it just seems like it cheapens it.

Time it's self can pass oddly, the movie not telling us if days, weeks, months, or years pass in between scenes.

The acting is so - so, performances ranging from good, to deadpan. The characters them selves seem to have some continuity flaws, as certain actions do not fit with the established character.

This film also seems like it trying to compete with "Battle Royale" for the most pointless flashbacks.

Special effects are cheap. Staging and set design are minimalistic, bordering on barren.

The one thing that stuck out the most was the movie's lack of logic. There is 'suspension of disbelief' , and than there is throwing logic out the window.

As the movie progresses, this gets worse and worse. I perfectly well understand they are on an alien planet, and have folks from most time periods present, but that is far from explaining the black holes of thinking.

Our main characters run into the conquistadors, who, 2 years ago, finished building the prominently featured river boat, for Mark Twain. The encampment of the conquistadors seems like it's a in the middle ages, nothing much advanced, not even guns.

The river boat, on the other hand, has all kinds of modern items, including a small bore cannon.

What does Pizarro have? A ballista he incorrectly calls a catapult. Wouldn't he and his men have more modern stuff if they engineered and built the river boat ?

I'm sorry, but that river boat is one large continuity error. There is no way it could have been built the way it was shown, in the amount of time specified ( 3 years ). I was not intentionally looking for logic errors, this stuff just jumped out at me almost instantly.

With out more modern manufacturing facilities, the boat, and what comes later, could have not been made at all.

Some of the stuff the boat had that really bugged me is: 1 modern light bulb, the cannon, rolled steel, stamped steel, welded steel, pressurized pipe ( welded and screwed ) with modern valves, hydraulic hoses, modern nuts and bolts, ** a bench grinder **, plastics, modern dead bolt locks, and a pair of dial calipers.

Two other errors that jumped out at me on the boat were a modern thermostat, and the wrenches on the peg board, had the manufacturer's names stamped on them.

As the movie progresses, we are introduced to more out of place stuff, such as cartridge bullets, mass produced glass, chrome plating, braided steel wire, and RPGs.

If you can over look the sometimes insane character interactions / reactions, repetitive and useless flash backs of the same subject, and massive logic errors, this movie is fairly enjoyable to watch, though the movie store overcharged me for it.

I picked up Mortuary in a bargain bin because I like zombie movies, and I seen Tobe Hooper directed it ( Poltergeist - Texas Chain Saw Massacre ).

I thought this may be a half way decent movie, how can you go wrong with zombies ? And than the snore fest started. This movie seemed to go from one slow moving scene, to the next, building up false suspense many times, and at the same time failing to create a good atmosphere.

The first dead body of the movie I almost laughed at, looking more like an albino Klingon than a human.

What follows this, you may ask ? How about the movie attempting to throw in a comically inept mortician routine? Not funny, or amusing.

After about 75% of the movie is over with, stuff actually starts to happen! Maybe they save the good parts for last.

Nope. The main villain is cast as some evil mutant, but some how is clumsily revealed as a misunderstood mutant, who for no reason, turns "good" . The other zombie monsters are alright, though due to continuity errors, seem to have the magical power to teleport.

Over all, I rate this move as a time killer. There is a thin plot, but often times I forget it exists. The acting is all right, though some characters ( like the sheriff )seem miscast. The set design is decent, though I can tell it's very cheep. And the one thing that bugs me the most would be, some of the decisions the characters make are really stupid, the kind of stuff no one in real life would ever do.

I can't believe this was made in 1992 ... I just can't !

The effects, set designs, acting, and everything else points to a late 70's early 80's movie. I had given this movie a lot of slack because I thought it was an older movie, but this is ridiculous.

From the start, you can tell this movie is ultra low budget. Horrible green screens, over use of paper meche, and painted styrofoam.

The movie did jump around a bit at first, making it feel like a few scenes were cut, but after a while it smoothed out.

As far as story line, this is a wacky kids kind of movie. Turn your brain off, and enjoy.

I kind of liked it, though the horrible special effects took a lot of fun out of it.

I bought this movie, new, for $2 from a local movie store.

I never had high hopes for a Lions Gate movie, costing me so little $ and it didn't let me down!

This is a slow paced stocker type movie, almost from the start.

From the get-go, I had a problem with the main character's looks. She was ugly! Normally this wouldn't affect me , but there was implied sex, implied rape, and several shots of her ( naked ) breasts !

This movie drags, not really showing much content. It took them 20 minutes to establish the main character liked mountain biking, and may or may not have raped by the antagonist ( shown in brief flash backs, but never explained ) ... from there, until 12 minutes before the movie ends, it's them running around in the woods, with bicycles.

It also doesn't help the main character is "blind" in a couple scenes, and tends to make very stupid choices.

A few situations pop up, but nothing really interesting.

For me, the most memorable part was the first time I watched " death by bicycle wheel" in a movie.

As far as the ending, it was a major let down. No major confrontation or fight between the main character and the villain.

Over all, it's a $2 movie released by Lions Gate. Nothing special, just a time killer.

You also know it's a not so good movie movie when the director is billed as ( no joke ) ... "" Robert Krause 'Blood Trails' Rebeccaa Palmer Ben Price Tom Frederic "" ... this is right from the box credit cover . There are no commas .

As a side note, I know it's a bit nit-picky, but they are suppose to be in "The Whistler Mountain Range" ( Nevada ), and the main character is looking for "Whistler Mountain" ( Kentucky ), but trying to reference American locations, when the accents are European and the license plates on the vehicle are also European, does not work very well.

Once I started to watch this movie, it immediately became apparent that the director assumed the audience read the book first. I would think any one who never read the lesser known classic, would be totally lost.

The film, for the most part, did good job sticking to the books story line, though they dropped some stuff, and added others.

The weirdest part was casting an adult actor to play the role of a child ... "I am 7 and 6 months old", said the 20+ year old .

The interactions never seem right with a "childish" adult.

For the most part, the looking glass world looks about what I imagined it to be from the book, though things were changed around a bit.

The oddest part was, one of the Tweedles looking like the guy from A Clockwork Orange.

Over all, it's an all right movie ( if the watcher first read the book ), geared more for younger folks.

Definitely worth a watch.

I was wondering when some one would come out with a Saw knock off.

Here it is, I guess. In the most basic ways, it attempts to mine the more popular movie, adding it's own twists to the story .

I was very interested in the villain at first, but as the story played out, you realize he was just an ###, with no real motivation for all the people he kills in his "games", except for the last one ... and of course they throw in a "surprise" plot twist out of left field at the end.

The set design was good, camera work was OK, and acting was ether over done, stereotypical, or wooden.

Between ugly acting, boring - seen it before - deaths, and characters I really can't get behind, this movie leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I don't see why folks think this movie is so great. I've seen Apocalypse Now, and I don;t see the humor of this movie at all.

It's an in-your-face movie that relies on not funny visuals, not funny dialog, and not funny concepts.

I was almost falling asleep by the end, seeing nothing amusing the whole time.

"Hardware Wars" was a great spoof, this movie falls flat on it's face.

What "sealed the deal" for me was the ending. What narcotic was the director on? It was not whimsical, not humorous, and not "ironically funny" .

The movie it's self, for me, is forgettable, with nothing special to remember about it.

If you want to see it, there are plenty of online copies you can watch ... never, EVER pay money for this turd !

This movie had a whopping budget of only $8,000, and it shows.

The thing is, the director knew what he was doing, and made a very enjoyable movie.

Acting is corny, the set design came from a yard sale, and there is no real plot outside of spoofing Star Wars ... BUT it is an enjoyable movie to watch, and has a lot of humor.

It is hard not to chuckle at a guy wearing a welding hood, who's catch line is "Darth Nader, naughty person".

It is also interesting the movie is self aware, such as it's catch phrase "You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll kiss $3 good by"

Excellent example of a good movie, made with no budget!

Of all the horror movies I have watched over the years, this one is a bit of an oddball.

It's amusing to watch, but not for the right reasons.

From a technical stand point, the characters are confusing, the plot is all over the place, and almost everything else is a train wreck.

But like a train wreck, you can't look away. The *FUN* part of the movie is literally all the inconsistencies that exist.

Character interactions are inconsistent, motivations are inconsistent, plot holes, zombie inconsistencies, day - night mess ups, snow - no snow mess ups, plot points being dropped ... it gets to the point of becoming a "Comedy - of - Errors"

Here is a game I played with my friends. We all sat around and watched the movie. A point was scored every time some one was able to point out an issue with the movie.

It was actually quite fun to play.

There are tons of movies based off of stories and poems, but there is one that gets under my skin every time I think of it. "Bram Stoker's Dracula's Guest"

This movie is based off of the short story "Dracula's Guest" and was by Bram Stoker in 1914 ( duh ) http://www.literature.org/authors/stoker-bram/draculas-guest . Produced in 2008, it looks like it was produced in 1988.

Scenes exist just to confuse the watcher, very poor editing, , plot holes the size of a school bus, character inconsistencies, bad shot control, a lot of missing footage .... it just makes the whole movie experience uncomfortable to sit through.

This is the worst movie I have ever watched ! And I have watched such gems as "Autumn", "Mom And Dad Saves The World", "Terminators", and "Cyborg".

It could have been an all right movie, if a competent directer had done it. How can a "Hero rescues his true love from an evil villain" plot be SO badly done!

To the movie's credit, the set design, most of the time, is very well done!