Change Your Image
chaypher
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Horror (1963)
Death by exposition!
Emily, a now nubile maiden, returns to her Brittany family castle after spending her college-years away in England. In tow are her equally nubile best friend Alice and Alice's charming brother John, who is dating Emily. Upon arrival, they meet Rodrigue Emily's morose brother who is now in charge of the family's estate after their father's tragic death in a fire. Also there are a shady housekeeper and family doctor, who fancies Alice but Alice appears more interested in Rodrigue.
After some atmospheric scenes of Alice wandering around the castle in her nightie, Rodrigue drops a bombshell by confessing that he lied about the Count's death and that he survived although horribly scarred. And then as an after-thought adds that he escaped their care and has run off into the woods. Then he also reveals that, due to a supposed family curse which condemns the family name unless all female descendants die before they are 21(!), the Count is hell-bent on seeing to it that Emily doesn't see her 21st birthday (which happens to be in 5 days)!
The rest of the plot entails, by now the mandatory girls in transparent nighties wandering around the corridors and castle grounds and fainting a lot; Rodrigue brooding in his tower and belting out creepy tunes on his organ; Emily being in some sort of hysterical fugue; John being the hero, determined to capture the Count and trying to figure out what is going on (aren't we all!); the doctor spending more energy trying to win over Alice's affections than work it all out; the shady housekeeper being shady some more; and the Count himself trying to lead his daughter to her death.When the inevitable twist comes, you are hardly surprised at that point and beyond caring too much and the whole thing ends really jovially cheesy, despite all the hardship experienced not 10 minutes before!
Make no mistake, this is a poor effort from a writing point of view; the script is undiluted clichéd trite. The over-complex premise is pointless and brings the film to a juddering halt anytime anything has to be explained by exposition. This film almost entirely fails to entertain at all. Only the good use of the castle and grounds, and the moody lighting bring an atmospheric quality which any Gothic horror has to have. It appears they shot the whole thing on location; in some scenes you can see mist coming from the actors' mouths as they speak. And judging by Emily's nipples, it must have been pretty chilly!!!
Gothic (1986)
Shelley gets loaded with Byron!
Historical accuracy moves over to make room for dramatic license in this extremely bizarre "re-imagining" of the weekend Mary Shelley first brought "Frankenstein" to life (as it were!). Although, to be fair, there isn't too much about the novel at all.
Byron (Gabriel Byrne) invites Mary, her then future husband Percy (Julian Sands) and her cousin Claire to spend the weekend with himself and another friend of his, Dr Pollidore (who also went on to write a Gothic horror) at his estate in Geneva. After much drug-fuelled recourse, dodgy parlour games and sexually liberated liaisons it becomes apparent that the ever omni-sexual Byron has questionable motives and is basically trying to fire-in to all the guests! This brings about an adequate amount of paranoia,jealousy and arguing amongst everyone which inevitably turns into soul-seeking, psychotic breakdowns and eventual emotional ennui. Presumably it is in this state Shelley went on to put pen to paper.
The cast are solid in their roles and Byrne is thoroughly convincing as the foppish predator. Russell delivers this movie with complete frankness and is somewhat mercenary in his reshaping of the facts to suit his own ends. Never one to shirk from the difficult often shocking subjects, he manages to turn an otherwise average script into a sexually charged hallucinogenic nightmare. While not exactly deserving of the "horror" label it has been tagged with, "Gothic" is an interesting foray into the dark abyss of the director's mind.
Hands of a Stranger (1962)
Daft but entertaining
All too familiar old story : guy's hands have made him a successful pianist, guy is in a car-crash, guy wakes up to discover he has lost his hands, guy loses his selfish girlfriend, op doc transplants someone else's hands (a stranger's perhaps?), guy's sister falls for the op doc, guy discovers they were the hands of a murderer, guy loses the ability to play piano, guy resents op doc, guy's sister also resents op doc, guy's sister breaks up with op doc, guy goes a bit mad, guy kills a few folk himself, guy tries to kill op doc in revenge, guy taken out in a meaningless and futile ending, we all feel sorry for guy's sister.
Even though this movie is slow and very dialogue heavy, I find it pretty entertaining. Rather than terrible performances or "over-acting" as someone put it, I find the animated acting styles suit the mood and tone of the movie. There are few action sequences so I feel the cast compensate for this to some degree. The camera work, directing and lighting deserve honourable plaudits here; any sound problems I'm fairly forgiving with.
The premise and plot of the movie may be pretty daft but it is delivered with enough earnestness to make this halfway convincing. Overall - pretty watchable time killer.
The Game (1984)
Fairly trite nonsense
Rich old buggers invite a group of youngsters to a resort, to see if they can survive their weekend's trials of fear. The last one standing at the end walks away with a million dollars.
I watched this movie under the title "The Cold" and pretty much throughout the whole movie was trying to work out why. Don't think at any point I ever did. "The Game" at least makes some kind of sense.
This is fairly trite nonsense; the director shamelessly attempts to cover-up his weak script with nudity, dancing and a band that need to practise more. It wouldn't be that bad if he had something else to offer but - alas, he doesn't. The supporting cast are all terrible actors; indeed a few are irritating morons.
However, the indiscernible plot actually keeps you guessing to get you to the end, but when it eventually (thankfully) comes, leaves nothing answered in any satisfactory way.
The Demons of Ludlow (1983)
Haunted pianos just aren't scary!
A brother and sister return to their hometown after years of being away to research their family. They discover that all descendants of an evil ancient relative are cursed to die at the hands of vengeful spirits which haunt an old piano, passed down through the generations.
Although it begins slowly, there are a few genuinely creepy moments throughout an the town actually has an eerie quality to it. Despite these though the film descends into silliness at all levels; unintentional laughs aplenty here. The ghosts themselves look like costume-party goers who have just had their party cancelled at the last minute!
This rather shoddy film (about a haunted piano of all things!) probably won't appeal to everyone. However, if you can get past it's terrible lighting, ropey special effects, poor acting and shaky script enough to see this through, you just might find a little brainless entertainment value from it.
Man in the Attic (1953)
Any similarity to anyone alive or dead is purely coincidental!
Yes, this movie takes huge historical liberties, as you'd expect from a 50's Hollywood treatment of Jack The Ripper. Actually, I felt the period setting pretty well done and the costumes were all very convincing. It was just the actual facts that were thrown to the four winds and replaced by a script written more like a Charles Dickens novel.
Enter the shady and mysterious lodger, Jack Palance whose unpredictable moods and surliness bring immediate attention to his nosey landlady, who is still happy to take his rent money rather than to ask him to leave. Palance capably handles his part and is suitably weird and creepy, especially when courting the landlady's pretty niece.
Unfortunately, she's also being wooed by a police inspector who is on the The Ripper case. So the seeds of doubt are sown and rivalries become interwoven with biased motivations. This propels everything to an ultimately unhappy though inevitable conclusion.
I found this very watchable and entertaining, if perhaps a bit of it's time. It had a good production quality and good performances all round, although Palance himself really gives the movie the level of depth required to be engaging.
The Demon (1981)
Nonsensical and disjointed slasher
Actually, although it fits that sub-genre and quite clearly is attempting to copy the associated clichés and tropes, technically no such slashing or gore actually takes place. Obvious similarities to other movies aside, clearly some attempt was made to be even a little different in it's structure and approach. Suffocation, the masked killer's preferred M.O., actually comes across very effectively and gives the film at least a hint of originality. His preference for stalking and terrorising young, pretty girls is fortunate from a voyeur perspective and so occasionally we are treated to a bit of nudity, purely exploitatively of course!
To say Cameron Mitchell was under-used in this film would be a huge understatement; his untimely and inexplicable end comes all too abruptly to have felt the remotest emotional investment in his character. Not that we do with any of the array of The Demon's victims, who all act frustratingly random and stupid, although somehow ironically this propels the action further by giving it a bizarre and unpredictable quality.
Shots of apparent action in complete darkness and cut-aways of waves crashing on a beach only hinder the already confusing and disjointed plot; it was seemingly structured and edited by a mad-man! And don't get me started on the insane script!
Overall, what this movie lacks in technical value, appears to gain in atmosphere and individuality (which helps a bit considering it's a shameless Halloween rip-off). It's not a terrible movie, it's just not that well done.
Track of the Moon Beast (1976)
It's easy to dislike this!
Quite a few other reviewers are understandably laying into this seemingly traditional monster movie, After all, it is very easy to dislike something with very little to offer in the way of redeeming qualities. I totally agree that it is hampered by a poor script, bad directing, terrible performances and generally awful production value. I also cannot stress enough how rubbish the musical interlude actually is - I wouldn't torture my worst enemy with it. At this point, you'll be sensing a "however" looming on the horizon - and you would be correct!
This movie has a ropey blend of sci-fi and horror, and given a Native American historical connection which neither makes sense or gives any greater understanding to the very shallow plot. But it's this connection, mostly delivered by the equally likable Johnny Longbone, which gives the whole film any originality at all. As most monster movies are, so this is too, rather silly and any attempt to inject "scientific" explanations appears futile. I believe at some point it is even suggested the monster is somehow related to a T.Rex!
Despite all of it's many failings, I somehow enjoyed this movie. Perhaps that says more about me than it does about the film itself! It kind of reminds me of the sort of stories I used to read when I was a kid and used to attempt to copy them when having to do essays at school. My teachers always seemed to like them! But that was because I was 8 or 9 or 10. Maybe this underlines part of the problem with Track Of The Moonbeast - it looks like it was written by a young kid!
Lo spettro (1963)
Forgetful murder-revenge-plot
An adulterous wife (Barbara Steele) impatiently awaits the demise of her moribund husband to inherit his wealth and mansion. Her dalliance with his personal doctor, virtually in plain sight, eventually tempt them both to bring about his premature death. Unfortunately, things soon start going bump in the night and their now public relationship rather quickly disintegrates as they become consumed by greed, guilt and suspicion. The whole sorry affair is ended abruptly by another murder and the inevitable plot-twist this genre seems to demand.
Although I respect Freda and his pioneering greatness for Italian horror cinema, I found this rather poor quality suspense film pretty slow and predictable. The story is so transparent, I had worked out all the plot details within the first 15 minutes! Visually, the film is very interesting though. There are some very creative shots which help in creating a moody, Gothic atmosphere.
The cast are capable enough, with particular mention to the husband's lawyer. But it is Barbara Steele who is the big name here; her at once vulnerable beauty and femme fatale guile give her such charisma, her on- screen presence lend as much to her performance as any of her acting skills do. However, in this film, I felt she could have did better in that department.
This murder mystery blends in to many of the others of the day and has nothing to offer of considerable value that makes it stand out from the rest. Not that it is a bad film though, rather it is a tame and vaguely entertaining piece which will do nothing more than amuse for 90 odd minutes.
Jesse James Meets Frankenstein's Daughter (1966)
Crazy mash-up movies usually end up offering only an interesting title - and this film is no different!
This shallow concept movie isn't really worth the time and energy required to watch it. I actually felt cheated; the title suggests the film might be hilariously bad. Unfortunately for me, there wasn't much in the way of hilarity about it! There are some truly awful performances - John Lupton as Jesse James may look the part, but the character is written as a hero and his portrayal is as bland as can be. Similarly, Narda Onyx appears to have been cast based solely on her looks and not her acting skills; she appears to struggle with the simplest of scenes.
I am aware that by this point, William Beaudine was a veteran director. However, it is difficult to tell whether he was attempting something earnest here or some cynical lampooning of Hollywood. Either way, his finished work is an abject failure as a medium of any kind of entertainment. It is also difficult to tell who exactly this movie is aimed at. It doesn't appear to offer anything credible for fans of either Westerns or Horrors.
I am surprised this movie actually made it to DVD in the first place. Someone, somewhere clearly loves this movie enough to justify it. That, I am afraid, is not this unhappy viewer.
No profanar el sueño de los muertos (1974)
The Man vs Hippies vs The Undead
I recently attended ALL NIGHT HORROR MADNESS 8 at the Edinburgh Cameo, where I happened to see THE LIVING DEAD AT THE MANCHESTER MORGUE for the first time. I have been a fan of horror movies for 25 years or so, but somehow just never managed to catch this one until now. Among the many other zombie movies I am familiar with, Romero's original Night Of The Living Dead is perhaps my favourite and serves as a benchmark with which I gauge all others!
I thought this movie generally succeeded as a horror movie as such; the zombies are pretty scary and there is a copious amount of gore and flesh-eating. There is a predominant atmosphere throughout of dread and portending doom. The film felt pretty well directed and the camera work was capable and at moments very creative. The script itself had a fairly intriguing back-story and plot, although it is not clear to me whether the dialogue was any better in it's original Italian.
Dialogue was one of it's failings, perhaps let down by poor translation into English or the Italians not grasping how Brits really talk. The dubbed voice-talents at times were unintentionally hilarious! There was a wide range of regional accents adopted by the voice-over crew - ironically, not one of them an actual Manchester accent! Many of the actors' performances felt either too hammy or too wooden. Ray Lovelock's portrayal of George, the erst-while hero was slightly irritatingly too flippant in fact. Christina Ghabo was satisfactory as the main girl Edna but Jeannine Mestre, who played her hysterical junkie sister Katie, was way too over the top! I appreciate the era that this movie came out, so am aware that the Italians were churning out horrors by the dozen at a time at this point. Hence why some of it may be rushed or to a strict budget.
I liked the apparent underlying themes in this film. Issues with the environment are possibly more relevant today than they were back then. The suggestion that the cause for the outbreak of the undead was caused by experimental agricultural pest control radiation is entirely original! The other theme played out was the very familiar "Establishment vs Counter-culture" trope. The some-what overbearing Jack-the-lad type hero and his nemesis, a decidedly extreme right-wing Chief Inspector (superbly carried off by Arthur Kennedy), belong squarely in their own era and are properly out-dated for younger audiences to identify with. In fact, they might miss the point of the adversity from both sides; counter-culture really doesn't exist now as it did in the 60's and 70's or the outrage it seemed to provoke in older, middle-class people.
All over, I found this very enjoyable; marred perhaps by production value but bolstered by original ideas. From 1974, it was released after Night Of The Living Dead but before the more famous zombie flicks of the 80's, so it may seem to some to be not very good. However, I would argue that having only the one predecessor to be influenced by, it manages to be truly unique. In approach and tone it feels to me to be Night Of The Living Dead crossed with Lucio Fulci's City Of The Living Dead. I would definitely recommend this to any zombie film fan or anyone who likes retro horror cinema.
La mansión de la locura (1973)
Madness and madcappery!
A journalist, seeking an exclusive exposé visits a mysterious mental institution where he has heard of unconventional treatments for madness. At first he is made to feel unwelcome but, on meeting the head doctor, is invited on a grand tour. As he is lead around the grounds and gardens, there are few surprises with the inmates they observe. But as his tour takes him further into the asylum, these encounters become increasingly disturbing and lurid and the patients more deranged. His journey ends in the grand hall where it is revealed that the patients have overrun the place and the staff have been killed or imprisoned. The "head doctor" is their leader and styled himself on a Napolean-like dictator; he has set his sights further than just the limits of the madhouse.
This bizarre Mexican surrealism reaches for the strangeness of "El Topo" and for the demented, hellish imagery of "Caligula", "The Devils" and to some extent "The Wicker Man". Unfortunately, it has not got the same quality of writing or directing as these greatly superior films. Instead it is nothing more than a psychedelic re-telling of a Gothic short-story which makes it feel too much of a gimmick. Granted, there are some heavy hitting aspects to some of the action but by that point you have been desensitised somewhat to the relentless portrayals of madness and madcappery! When the twist comes, it is hardly a surprise. Still, this passes the time and is memorable enough, if not just for the "chickens"!
The Bloody Brood (1959)
I'm down with this scene Daddio!
A drug-peddling gangster supplying the local Beatnik scene, gets bored of partying and comes up with a plan to commit a "perfect" murder. He gets his sycophantic sidekick to give a glass-laden burger to a delivery boy, who soon dies of his internal wounds. The inept local police department's enquiries quickly run dry so the victim's determined brother decides to continue investigating privately. He eventually uncovers the plot, and the culprits and tracks them down to meet out justice.
Some of the cast give very pedestrian performances, but Peter Falk alone manages to rescue this otherwise average murder mystery and fully explores the dark depths of his character in every scene. He is thoroughly convincing as a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing Beatnik gangster, looking out of place among his Beatnik disciples but influencing them with his intellectual nihilism. The movie, although poorly written and directed feels quite atmospheric reminiscent of older Film Noir. The Beatnik theme of the movie doesn't go too far - this has a darker feel than other such films; Corman's "A Bucket Of Blood" for instance which is a more parodic portrayal of The Beat generation.
The House of the Dead (1978)
'House Of The Dead' is a better title!
An adulterous businessman gets lost in the rain and a mortician gives him shelter in his funeral parlour, who shows the man some of the corpses being embalmed on the premises. Each one has a tale about how they met their untimely demises: a school teacher who hates children is frightened to death; a predatory photographer who kills his unwitting subjects on-camera is eventually caught and executed; a self-inflated criminologist meets his British rival and in trying to out-do each other, discovers his nemesis is prepared to kill to be the best; and finally a selfish office worker is lured and held captive by an unseen assailant for an extremely long time but soon dies after he is inexplicably suddenly released. The man is told they all were victims of their own errant ways. When he asks about a final empty coffin, the mortician replies it is for him!
The individual stories and the main framing story are written in a very comic-book or pulp-novel way. The second one about the photographer is probably the worst one but is fortunately brief enough not to be a problem. Despite some really awful music, ropey acting, and what appears to be lighting supervised by a blind man, this collection of shorts is fairly well directed enough to be entertaining. I am confused with the movie's original title of 'Alien Zone' - there are no aliens at all in it! Clearly they were actually going for something like 'The Twilight Zone' and were meaning 'Alien' in a more literal sense, as in "unknown" rather than "being from outer-space"! Even still, it's not such a great title; 'House Of The Dead' makes more sense.
Sunburst (1975)
Sunburst or Slashes Dreams? Who cares?
Jenny dumps her jock boyfriend for bullying Robert. They declare their love for each other and decide to go and visit Michael, an old friend who dropped out to live in the woods. They drive out to the mountains and hike up to his empty cabin, so wait for his return. Unfortunately, later that night, thugs invade the cabin and rape Jenny. Michael returns the next day to discover the traumatised couple at his cabin. He gives Jenny some pithy platitudes of 'wisdom' and Robert runs off into the woods with an axe to chase away the thugs. After which Jenny and Robert leave hand in hand into the sunset.
Apart from the opening 10 minutes of the movie, next to nothing happens for at least 45 minutes. They drive, smooch, speak to an old man, smooch,hike, smooch, encounter a bear, smooch - well, you get the idea! It is mostly furnished with some awful Joan Biez-ish folk singer which only enhances the inexorably dragging pace. When the eventual 'action' comes, you are left welcoming the poor acting, shoddy dialogue, and unconvincing fighting moves. Some philosophical meaning may have been attempted by the writer or director but must have failed miserably, as the whole film just feels aimless as if they made it up as they went along.
A Bucket of Blood (1959)
Not much in the way of buckets or blood
Walter Paisley, a simple busboy at at the local café hangout for Beatniks, aspires to join the group of pretentious free spirits. When he covers a dead cat in clay and presents it as 'art', his dreams of being a respected artist start to take shape. His new friends encourage him to create more, and his desire to be accepted drives him to murder in order to complete a whole exhibition of 'sculptures'. Inevitably Walter is eventually exposed for the murderer he is and comes to a sad and bitter end.
The title is very misleading, there is not much in the way of buckets or blood to be found. Unfortunately, what this movie has in abundance is relentless free-form jazz which the film score defaults to at every opportunity! It may serve to increase viewing tension, but it mostly just irritates. Dick Miller gives the only performance worthy of mention, although some of the 'performances' in the café are amusing. As satirical as the portrayals of the various Beatnik types are, most are just tediously annoying. The script is not the best although some of the parodic Beatnik dialogue manages to raise the occasional dry smirk; mostly by the café's resident Beat poet. The story itself is entertaining in a rather clichéd way. It actually reminds me a lot of 'Colour Me Blood Red' which manages to be a bit more honest (at least it's title is more representative of what it is!).
The Devil's Hand (1961)
Voodoo hokum
An overly sleek socialite is haunted by visions of a beautiful scantily clad vixen, which becomes an intriguing mystery when he finds a doll with her likeness. The colluding shop-owner reveals the girl from his dreams actually exists and encourages him to deliver it in person to her, which he does. When he arrives, she admits to being a voodoo witch. Obviously he has been under her voodoo spell all along, but joins her voodoo cult without question anyway. It turns out the shopkeeper is the voodoo priest and the basement of the shop is their temple. Later the hapless cad has growing doubts which lead him to be tested. Rather than comply, he rejects the religion and the witch-girl and in trying to escape, destroys the temple.
This rather nonsensical fair thankfully drives on at a decent pace and is a bearable length. Robert Alda does not give an amazing performance, but plays his character much as his own personality. The witch-girl is a smouldering beauty even if her performance is wooden. Neil Hamilton is unconvincing and gives a rather dry delivery rather than the campy style his role deserved. Somehow this movie manages to be charming enough to not completely suck, but very nearly does!
I Bury the Living (1958)
Not a horror or a classic
A local businessman is obliged to become a cemetery's director and subsequently discovers that by prematurely pinning a map for reserved graves, the new proprietors soon mysteriously wind up dead somehow. At first his claims are not believed but presently he is tested by various interested parties. Eventually, the guilt gets to him and he comes close to a complete nervous breakdown. However, it ends with finding out he was not responsible for the deaths and that his caretaker was behind it all along.
There are some misleading aspects to this film, such as the title implies people are being buried alive. This, sadly, is not the case! Also, even though the overall body-count is significant you only see one man having a heart attack, all the other victims are off-screen. This is counter-productive to the movie's final twist, as it it proves the caretaker could not be blamed for all of the deaths. The ending is therefore confusing and appears nonsensical.
This movie is slow-paced and takes what feels like an age to reveal anything relevant. Seeing the same shot of the map, repeated over and over, only emphasises how monotonous the pacing actually is. Despite all it's problems, this movie still manages a modicum of entertainment. As others have observed, it feels like an extended episode of classic 'Twilight Zone', and would have possibly fared better in this shorter format. Richard Boone's performance, although not award winning, still convinces as his paranoia grows. And we are rewarded with an interesting visual segment, where psychedelic imagery is employed to project Boone's hysterical hallucinations.
'I Bury the Living' is not a classic horror - or a horror or a classic, for that matter! What it is a clunky yet amusing title, written in a very 'Amazing Tales' sort of way that would appeal to fans of these kind of old mysteries.
Drive In Massacre (1976)
70's schlock horror drive-in
The film focuses on the investigation of a series of murders at a small town drive-in by two local detectives. Their portrayals are unconvincing and awkward by the hammy actors who play them. The best acting comes from the two of the suspects, the surly drive-in owner and his slow-witted odd-job man. Some other suspects are also investigated and after a couple of fruitless scenes, finally arrive at the rather cheesy, hammed-up-for- drive-in-audiences ending. This schlock horror drive-in movie is hardly a classic, but neither is it the 'worst movie ever' others have labelled it. Certainly, the film has issues with it's pacing, lighting, sound and a few poor actors. The background music is some really bad electronic random nonsense. This may push some to the edge of their patience. Understandable really. Any halfway decent ideas are not fully explored, yet there are enough interesting moments to keep you from falling asleep. Despite all of it's flaws, this one still manages to provide enough entertainment value to get you to the end.
Murder at Midnight (1931)
Dull Whodunnit
The story opens from an elaborate party-game of charades gone wrong, into a murder, via the switching of blank bullets for live ones. Enter the ever-bumbling detectives. Of course everyone present is a suspect. Thus the suspicion and subsequent murders ensues. A letter and will from the victim goes missing and the police expend an awful lot of energy trying to discover their whereabouts. This is because finding them can save the police from a lot of honest detective work! Eventually it is discovered that one of the main murder weapons was a phone with a concealed blade! Of course, this is exploited in finally revealing the identity of the killer. Although this monotonous murder mystery begins quite promisingly, it fails to fully develop into anything that interesting. There are a couple of relatively original plot twists, but these are far and few between enough to make this feel like it plods on at a snail's pace. The directing and camera-work are capable but the cast give wholly underwhelming performances. All in all, this movie would suit the avid fan of 30's murder mysteries, but for the rest of us, there is little to keep us hooked. At least this one doesn't involve a man in a gorilla suit!
Aurora (1998)
Walking in a desert
I am normally supportive of Independent films, whether award winning or otherwise, but this film made me re-assess my loyalties. I appreciate low budgets can have detrimental affects to a film's production - whatever. This film is tedious! In no way does this film resemble 2001:Space Oddessy - or Red Planet for that matter. The closest experience to watching this film I could draw any similarities to, would be watching grass growing. The acting wasn't terrible (it wasn't good though!) and - yes, the special effects weren't really too good. The camera-work did at times go over the score a little. What really let this film down was the script and storyline. I'm sure it can't be easy to write a film, but whatever you could come up with could not be any worse than the 80 mins of drivel I was subjected to. What made the script-writer think anyone would want to watch this and actually be entertained by it? God only knows!