Bitch Ass

Notice how the 8 and over star reviewers have only reviewed 1 movie? It's because they worked on this movie or know someone who did. The lighting is horrible, the acting is weak, it's not original. The only thing original about this is that it's an all black cast. If you're looking for a dumb movie to watch, because you have nothing else to watch, just watch nothing. It would be better than this trash. The only reason I gave it 3 stars is because people actually took time out of their lives to make this movie. I cant knock the hustle, but I'm knocking the outcome. I was cringing from the very beginning. Trying way too hard to be "hip" and "original" when it's far from it. Take my advice and watch Zombeavers instead.

A lot of negative reviews but I thought it was much better than a lot of low budget movies of this type that still spawned sequels- Sleepaway Camp ring a bell anyone? I also recall one of the best classics ever originally being panned by critical when it first came out, the original Evil Dead. While this is far from being in that category it still has its moments and may be a classic in the making, who knows? I'm impressed that it was as good as it was being the extremely low budget it was under, especially having a known celebrity as Tony Todd as part of the cast. I've come across so many horror movies on the streaming services where I couldn't watch any more than a half hours worth before turning them off, especially with the horrible acting involved, which was not the case here. All actors involved did seem to be much better than what you'd expect, that's for sure! But you can make your own decision.

I liked this one quite a bit. It has "Boyz in da Hood/People Under the Stairs" vibes mixed with one of those movies where people are forced to play death games. It's low budget but nice looking, and the director played around with changing aspect ratios and split screen shots to add to the mood. Some funny stuff like score cards flashing on the screen and text popping up that only the audience can see. Some might not like those gimmicks but I do.

The games themselves were all based on beloved childhood games, except with a lot of blades, nooses and electric shocks. The gore was nice and explicit, if not a little cartoony. I like cartoons so whatever.

It really explained the killer's backstory, which I enjoyed, but it had a little bit too much of that backstory than necessary. They could have added in another death game and cut out some of that stuff.

The acting was hit and miss, but what do you expect from these kind of movies?

Can't remember much about the score, which means it wasn't bad but it wasn't great. I loved the track on the end credits though.

Here's what you get with this movie. Just a fun throwback to the times when everything wasn't ghosts popping up making boo faces and loud pitch-shifter noises. If you yearn for those times, you might enjoy this one.

This film manages to carve out a niche for itself with a story that showcases some inventive ideas despite its limited budget. While it's commendable how the film attempts to make the most of its resources, there are several areas where it falls short, leaving it more of a mixed bag than a standout feature.

One of the film's strengths is its approach to storytelling. The premise is intriguing, and it's clear that the filmmakers put thought into crafting a narrative that stands apart from more conventional fare. The story, while not without its merits, does offer a refreshing change of pace and keeps you engaged with its unique plot twists. It's evident that the filmmakers tried to make the best out of what they had, and for that, they deserve some credit.

However, the positives are overshadowed by several notable shortcomings. The performances, unfortunately, leave much to be desired. While the cast tries to bring their characters to life, the acting often feels wooden and unconvincing, detracting from the film's overall impact. This lack of strong performances means that emotional moments fall flat, and it becomes difficult to fully invest in the characters or their fates.

The cinematography is another area where the film struggles. The film suffers from inconsistent visual quality, with some scenes poorly lit or awkwardly framed. This uneven cinematography takes away from the immersion and can make the viewing experience feel jarring at times. Instead of enhancing the atmosphere, it often feels like a missed opportunity to elevate the film's impact.

Moreover, the plot contains a number of implausibilities that can be hard to overlook. The story takes several leaps in logic that stretch credibility, making it difficult to stay fully engaged. These implausibilities, combined with some clumsy storytelling choices, result in a narrative that, while ambitious, ultimately feels strained and unconvincing.

In conclusion, this is a film that showcases some creativity and makes an admirable effort with its limited budget. However, its shortcomings in performance, cinematography, and plausibility hinder its overall effectiveness. It's a mixed bag that might appeal to those who appreciate unique stories despite their execution flaws, but for many, it might be a case of good intentions falling short of a fully realized execution.

I was stuck for something to watch and I found this on one of many many streaming platforms here in the UK.

I checked the reviews on here and I can assure you this is a real review from a real person lol this is NO way as bad as people on here have made out.

I'm not gonna spoil it but if The People Under The Stairs is a 10 and Bones is a 1 this is easily a 6. With the late great Tony Todd playing the role as the "Crypt Keeper" I knew it couldn't be all bad.

The actual story is quite good. The acting is as really not that bad. It's cheesy like any anthology show of that era was.

The villain wasn't all that bad. He had a good backstory.

All in all was pretty good. Wouldn't watch it again, but definitely worth one watch.