अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA young woman named Margaret is brutally murdered, victim of her husband's cold-blooded plot to inherit her wealth. An ages-old curse lying dormant for generations will manifest itself befor... सभी पढ़ेंA young woman named Margaret is brutally murdered, victim of her husband's cold-blooded plot to inherit her wealth. An ages-old curse lying dormant for generations will manifest itself before his very eyes and those of Margaret's killers.A young woman named Margaret is brutally murdered, victim of her husband's cold-blooded plot to inherit her wealth. An ages-old curse lying dormant for generations will manifest itself before his very eyes and those of Margaret's killers.
John Paul Fedele
- Franco
- (as John P. Fedele)
Victoria Vance
- Julia
- (as Jamee Vance)
Erin Brown
- The Hooker
- (as Misty Mundae)
Gustavo Ferrari
- Frank
- (as Gus Ferrari)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
To be honest - worst move I've ever seen, I could't stand it, after watching it for 15 minutes I just stopped. Awfully directed, actors were really I mean REALLY bad, the plot had no point. I wonder who gave money to produce such crap? Don't waste your time and money to rent this movie. And the good review must have been written by director himself. I only have one recommendation - people don't bother. I must say - I have seen lots of bad movies but this one is a complete mistake. Special effects - what special effects... Good acting - I'd say no acting at all. I'd rather recommend it as a great sleeping pill. Make up your mind before you see this movie.
I would just like to know what (if any) basis for comparison that people say that films of this yore are 'worst movie ever made' or 'director should be flogged'...you get the drift.
I am just interested as to what is considered a 10 in the same production budget range.
It's no good just making bland comments that we've all used before. I thought Spidey 3 was a major disappointment (on that budget) but I thought Cabin Fever was great (for that budget)...but both made a shed load of money.
But I do know something, that if the budget was low enough for this movie and yet it got distribution...then a profit was made somewhere along the line...and in the film BUSINESS...that's all that matters.
Good luck to anyone who makes a movie and gets a distribution deal.
I am just interested as to what is considered a 10 in the same production budget range.
It's no good just making bland comments that we've all used before. I thought Spidey 3 was a major disappointment (on that budget) but I thought Cabin Fever was great (for that budget)...but both made a shed load of money.
But I do know something, that if the budget was low enough for this movie and yet it got distribution...then a profit was made somewhere along the line...and in the film BUSINESS...that's all that matters.
Good luck to anyone who makes a movie and gets a distribution deal.
Okay, 1stly, this really and truly is one of the worst films I've ever watched. 2ndly, who paid the dude to write that review? This movie is really pathetic, sure it's on a low budget, but the acting is worse than my 5 year old nephews. The directing is weak. The story is weak. And there are many scenes that are entirely irrelevant to the story and seem as if they were a weak attempt to add to the length of the movie. I have never written a review on IMDb, but after watching this, i had to. I had to do it. Really, i cannot believe that someone could make such a pathetic attempt in making a movie. The genre was one which spells failure. When your performance at your job CLEARLY lack any talent or ability, don't attempt at doing the hardest thing. Horror movies are hard to come by. To make yourself a joke in such movies is easy. So why do it when you clearly lack the necessary knowledge and money to do so. Also i read in a review that this was good for its budget. Now, i hate to say this, but i don't watch a movie for its budget. I watch it for its storyline, acting and entertainment value. If those 3 are good, then generally, you've got yourself a hit. Now it doesn't cost more to make up a better movie, and i'm pretty sure in half the money spent on those actors, they could find better ones who Don't look like they're reading a book. Don't waste your life's precious time watching this rubbish. Learn from my mistakes.
I'm sorry, I like to think of myself as one who will give any movie a fighting chance but, I started skipping chapters in the DVD before the first chapter was even close complete. I kept hoping that the overall effect would improve, it didn't. The acting was horrible. The dialog was corny at best (to the point it wasn't even laughable). The wardrobe was able to be passed off as era appropriate. The makeup could have been done better if a fifteen year old had done it! All in all I kept being reminded of a horribly made 1970's x-rated movie, all that was missing is cameo by Ron Jeremy. The overall badness didn't have me mustering the time or energy to give this one half of a fighting chance.
the movie was suspenseful,gory enough to make you want to hide your face in the couch pillow,and interesting enough to make you sorry it was over.the characters were great, the story line kept you going.the lighting and background effects were ominous. they promoted an eerie feeling. the special effects were overwhelmingly real.the ending was awesome.left you with a true "thud".the actors were well chosen, and suited for their parts.i can't wait for it to get out on video.i'm hoping for more movies from justin wingenfeld.he seems to have a real feeling for the macabre.shock-a- rama movies are always a good viewing pick. take a peek and see.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाWriter/director Justin Wingenfeld was inspired by such vintage horror comics as "Eerie" and "Creepy."
- कनेक्शनFeatures नाइट ऑफ़ द लिविंग डेड (1968)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 15 मि(75 min)
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.33 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें