Small Town Folk

They said this movie would be the absurdity that is Terry Gilliam if he took acid and wrote a horror movie. I'm saddened to say that this movie doesn't quite feel like that, and that's probably a punch in the gut to me considering the review came from Canada. This is the kind of movie that is more like... if Benny Hill took cocaine, filmed a pornography, and let Quentin Tarantino swap parts of the filming arrangements with Uwe Boll. From here, it would be vomited on and possibly shat on with several homeless people in the editing room, where they spliced themselves into it.

To be honest, I don't know what the hell is going on with this movie. It's supposed to be a British version of 'The Crazies' with some 'Hills Have Eyes' and some Rob Zombie sprinkled on, but in the end, I see nothing funny or scary.

If these people want to make a horror movie, I suggest you go back to school and learn something. Because this is pretty stupid.

In the original release of this film, was it in 3D? Because if it wasn't, then the use of CG in this film is an abortion. I LOVE bad horror flicks, but this one so far is just freaking lame. I was obviously tricked by cleaver marketing folks at Blockbuster, because all over the box it was billed how this film was some kind of visionary masterpiece, but it is far from it. The parts that are supposed to be funny, aren't even that.

Trust me, I am not someone who takes these films too seriously, after all, 'Troll 2' is one of my fav films. But this film isn't even bad enough to be "so bad it's good"

BOOOOOO this title!!!!!

This is truly awful film, genuinely torturous viewing. A bona fide 1 out of 10 film and that's only because '0' isn't an option. I won't describe the plot again, plenty have done that already and I don't want to think about this film more than I have to.

The comedy aspects aren't remotely funny, there is no tension, no suspense, no excitement, pants cgi, poor production values, I could go on.

It's not even so bad it's good, it's so bad it's painful.

There is nothing redeeming about this film.

I will allow the film 1 out of 10 because the film-makers,on a low budget, at least had a go at it - they failed.

I was the only person that managed to sit through it until the end - the other viewers left my lounge - it didn't even have enough about it for them to watch and ridicule how bad it was!

I am now two hours closer to the end of my life and these film-makers are responsible for that wasted time.

Possibly the worst film I have ever seen and I generally enjoy watching B-Movie junk. How anyone can give this anything other than 2/10 I can't comprehend - I can only assume that they have suffered a traumatic head injury or a lobotomy.

This is a transgression. Not only is this movie stupid, but the people who made it are too, and *I can prove it*. Read on.

At the time of writing, there are *nine* 10/10 reviews. There's just the fact SIX of them are totally fake, two of them are possibly fake and the ninth, unless fake, is completely wrong. The proof? Well, out of the group of six fakes, there are *three* from UK, submitted between 27 Jun 2008 and 4 Jul 2008, and the other *three* from US, submitted between 7 Apr 2011 and 4 May 2011. ALL SIX reviewers have reviewed *only* this movie. That amounts to just too much convenient "coincidental" timing to be believable, the logical conclusion being that these six reviews are written by people affiliated with this "production". Occam's Razor, people! Of the two possibly fake reviews, one reviewer has only three reviews on IMDb and the other one has six. The ninth reviewer has 30 reviews, but then again, they may not understand the concept of a review. My question to the group of six (or three with two IMDb accounts each) reviewers is: How stupid do you think people are?

OK, I now actually get to do the review proper, but it will be short. The "script" is primary school grade. The "acting" is primary school grade. The term "directing" doesn't even apply here. The "cinematography" is just a crime against all proper cinematographers and the almost omnipresent blue-screen work is atrocious. It's so incredibly horrible that at least once a minute one has to watch away before it becomes unbearable, since the "editing" is so sluggish it offers no variety. As someone who doesn't judge anyone hastily, I did indeed endure this "movie" from start to finish. If you haven't, for your sanity's sake, please avoid this garbage. A rare *true* 1/10 "movie", with no redeeming values whatsoever. Watch Bad Taste instead to see how Classic ultra-low budget horror comedy is made.

I love B movies and respect them for what they are, so it's rare for me to be so disappointed! And being a hardcore fan of horror movies only made me feel worse.

The opening credits are nice and a good promise they break as soon as the movie begins. The acting is terrible, the blue screen is irritating, the dialogue is stupid and the plot would be enjoyable (not smart, but good enough) if it was well handled. This is so poorly filmed that made my eyes hurt. Never felt this before, not even watching "Boo" which was my least favorite movie ever before this crossed my way!

But if you want to laugh and don't have sensitive eyes, go for it!