Deathbed

Bed doesn't eat anything, not enough hot chocolate.

Odd but wonderfully original movie. Genuinely frightening, creepy and ridiculous in equal measures. The setting of a high rise red brick apartment is a perfect backdrop for the haunting action. The thought of a secret sealed room in a place like this is good enough but when the lead naive couple start cleaning up the old bed they find in this room the scene is set for some classic chills. The cast is fantastic. Tanya Dempsey really gets to chew some scenery after being undervalued in other Full Moon films. Joe Estevez proves why brother Martin Sheen is so much bigger in Hollywood - his rolling eyes during the making the bed scene are really hilarious. Charles Band co-produced with Stuart Gordon and this really is an exceptional Full Moon/Darkwave release. Danny Draven also directed Hell Asylum with Dempsey.

What we have here is an original twist on the classic "haunted item" story. Tanya Dempsey and Brave Matthews are a young couple who move to an old apartment in Hollywood. Soon, they'll discover (although we the audience knew it since the first scene) that there is an old 30s bed where a horrible murder happened. Strange things will occur as they start using the bed.

I found the idea of a haunted bed very original, even when this kind of story have been told since the beginning of civilization. The story was well developed and the effect the bed has over the couple was very interesting. Nightmares, hallucinations and poltergeists disturb the mind of Tanya Dempsey's character and she gives a very good performance. She will have a bright future if she keeps up the good work.

Sadly, the rest of the cast is not that convincing. Joe Estevez makes an appearance as the owner of the building but his performance is forgettable. Brave Matthews just was not up to the role. Dempsey owns the screen and carries the film even with its problems. She makes the film enjoyable although she can't save it completely.

The film gets boring at times, mostly due to the poor development of characters although that makes it clear that the writer intended the bed to be the main character.

It's very good to note that there are no over-the-top effects or gore and that the scares are very subtle, something very different from typical Full Moon B-movies.

Something bad about the film were the flashback sequences, which were poorly done. The problem here is that the DV camera shooting is very bad for the B&W shots, in contrast to the rest of the movie, where the lighting works in awesome ways, the flashbacks are noticeable for its poor lighting. I think that it is a major, but understandable. flaw.

The cast & crew of this film have a bright future to come, even though this film may not be the Classic horror that Stuart Gordon (who produced it) usually creates, it is a promise of the talent that we'll see in the future.

Very Good 6/10

I mistakenly thought this was the 70's art film about the bed that eats people, which sounded interesting. It isn't. Interesting, I mean, let alone about a man-eating bed.

I assume Stuart Gordon put his name on this in the same spirit that Lloyd Kaufman puts "Troma" on just about anything that's been shot with a video camera, in the interest of building up a franchise library. Little more can be said about this opus other than the running time is less than 90 minutes. It is, of course, about a bed that is haunted by the spirit of a man, or something, that once killed a woman with a wig and long false eyelashes. Along the way we get **a five minute opening credit sequence (is the one for "Lawrence Of Arabia" even as long?) **a murderer with Marylin Manson contacts who kills using the same technique as the troll in "Cat's Eye" **demonstrations of a sexual practice Michael Hutchence may have employed **a preview of what Emilio Estevez will soon look and act like **soft core porn even Cinemax would pass on **manbutt and one topless scene **a wacky (or is it "whack"-ee?) ending involving unintentionally hilarious hammer hits and leftover strawberry pie (well, it looked that way to me) **and a rudimentary surprise ending apros pos of nothing much. It's like the screenwriter even fell asleep on the "Deathbed" before finishing the last draft.

It's not scary, it's not sexy, it's shot on hi-def video and doesn't look bad but doesn't look good either, the acting is just good enough to not be bad enough to be fun and so is everything else. No one would probably have even seen or heard of it unless it was on a disc with another movie, the modern day "double feature." I wasn't paying attention for parts of it so I may have missed something. But for some reason I doubt it. Rating: PASS

I usually go into the video stores and can pick up a crap horror movie easily. I picked up Death Bed because of Stuart Gordon and Danny Draven. Let me tell you, this is a fine horror film, shot on quality video, it is classic in my book. Draven really sets up some tension and mood. Check it out! **** out of *****