Bystanders

While it's obvious this movie doesn't have a high budget, i enjoyed the fact that the movie doesn't show the torture porn that so many directors chose to show with women in horror movies. I love this idea of a revenge movie, and the leads did a fantastic job (as did the other cast members, because they really made it convincible to hate them). I enjoy the storyline and the clothing choices seems nice. Also Grays actor was super fine. The references were cool as well, wasn't expecting a Dexter reference. But this movie showed what every person who went through something similar wanted to do to their assaulter.

The basic idea of this horror crime is good. But the execution is far from good. There's not enough music to help build the horror. A simple audio can go a long way. Besides, there's a problem with how some scenes were being dragged out for too long. My guess is without those unnecessary long scenes, this movie would've been less than an hour. I don't think that the acting is the main problem. The directing was the one ruining the movie. It's true that some of the actors couldn't act very well, but most of them are due to bad directions. I don't recommend this one, even if you're a fan of revenge themed movies.

Feminine rage and vindication from the minds of women will always be superior. Every moment of Bystanders has that. It doesn't miss a beat. Emotions? High. Revenge? So sweet. And the breaks in between are filled with a good amount of humor that stems from a nifty twist on behalf of our protagonists.

The feeling that I got growing up when discovering horror movies is the same feeling that I got while watching this. I still hold those horror movies close, and I'm going to hold Bystanders close.

So much appreciation goes out to director, Mary Beth McAndrews, for envisioning an organically dark and justified film from Jaime Alvey's (who also stars as Clare) story that holds so much truth as well as power.

Heck yeah, ladies!

Okay, so it's a good premise with a bad production value. But what makes the movie is Garrett Murphy's Gray. That dude killed his role. And I'm not just making a stupid dad pun here.

The acting is okay. The practical effects are passable, even though it's just blood. But what made the whole thing for me was watching Gray nonchallantly maul through all the stupid frat boys one by one as if he were taking drink preferences at his dinner party.

I'm definitely gonna check Garrett Murphy out in more roles, and here's hoping his roles are a lot like Gray. Cuz I think I could watch The Tales of Gray for at least four seasons.

I don't like to be negative - so I'll start with a positive: This is not the worst film I've ever seen. (That honour goes to "Smokey and the Bandit 3".)

This is, however, probably the second worst film I've ever seen.

The basic premise doesn't have the greatest of potential, but it's not the shabbiest either. With a lot more work it could've been an average run-of-the-mill horror.

The acting is terrible. I can't put all of the blame on the actors, though. With a better script, a better director, and better editing perhaps their performances wouldn't come across as poorly as they do.

The editing, though, is the worst I've ever seen. Actors are seen smirking and gesticulating to people off-camera, and sometimes speaking but with no audio. It's genuinely worse editing than you would expect to see on an average highschooler's homework project, and doesn't come close to what anyone would consider an acceptable standard.

I strongly advise avoiding watching this - unless you're actively looking for the worst film ever, for a laugh, in which case give it a look - we've got a real contender here.