Ghost Lake

Once in a while, you watch a movie where you can just immediately tell that the directors mother is also his aunt. One such movie is Ghost Lake. As a no-/low-budget filmmaker, I generally sympathize with others in this end of the field. One has to cope with annoying editors and actors who, in various strange ways, convince you that they can actually act and sign on to the point where it's too late to replace them. But much of this can be forgiven if the general intention with the movie is good or just honest. Not so the case with Ghost Lake. It repeatedly rips off one horror movie after the other, all the while setting new lows in acting, shooting and musicianship (yup, the score was awful to boot).

That being said, I did laugh my ass off watching it. Watching this movie was the equivalent of reading a list of cinematic don't's. And I don't mean "don't" as in "Don't use voiceovers" and similar snooty filmschool bs. I mean "don't" as in, "Don't do this, because it looks like you can't tell your ass from your elbow, anyway you slice it". If you're in any way into films (just being an avid moviegeek will do) this movie will provide literally dozens of laughs-per-minute with it's machine-gun like barrage of ineptitude. You're going to want to show this to your friends just to see their bewildered expression that simply says "Wtf were they thinking?!" like nothing else.

If your idea of awesome cinematic experiences is films like Death Tunnel or Kaw, well this movie is too shoddy for even that. No person living could possibly like this dreck, and the mere possibility is downright offensive.

Low budget horror. What else can I say...some are good and some are just plain bad. Now there are different levels of bad...there's the bad that's good (like House of the Dead)and then there's bad that should be shot into the sun (like Home Alone 3,Good Boy). I've always been a big fan of low budget horror and I've been lucky enough that all the films I've checked out have been a real treat. I've only been burnt once and I was afraid that Ghost Lake might be like that one. I wasn't really in the mood to watch anything, but I heard the Ghost Lake started with the lead going topless and I decided to at least watch that part until I figured out something else to watch. Well, I ended up watching the whole movie and liked it very much.It's a good little film with a good plot,some good effects and good music. But the only real problem is that some of the actors seemed off at times which really annoyed me at times.Some of the plot seemed to get lost during the explanation scene and while you trying to figure out what the hell they're talking about they're already moved on. If they would cleared up alittle more on the history of the lake(which is a real place) then I would have saved me some stress.Now the movie does have a lot of story to it, there's no real ACTION to speak of so those who expected a non stop action ride better go watch Dawn of the Dead (04) again. Because this film is more about the story, the history and the ghost are really there to serve the plot then being the plot. But if you stick it out and forgive afew laughable moment, the off acting moments(I swear all of the old people in this movie were dreadful), then you'll like this one. A big plus for for me is having the lead,Tatum Adair, naked is always a big plus for me. Could it have been better? Yes. But I think they did good with what they had.

Cinematography - 8 - very good for a low budget production. Special Effects - 9 - excellent for a low budget production. Acting - 0 - 6 -with 6 for the lead actress; supporting roles include some actors that are embarrassingly bad. Even with the few lines they had, the couple that survived a plunge in the lake were so bad I cringed every time they opened their mouth, especially the man. The doctor's voice was so loud, it was more startling than any of the zombie scenes. Audio - 3 - a number of indoor scenes had a distracting hollow/reverb sound. Plot - 4 - would be higher if not so confusingly told. Dialog - 1 - at many points it is totally amateurish and would have been as well written if it had been outsourced to a 5th grade class.

The saving grace for me was the lead actress, Tatum Adair. I found her somewhat compelling and she kept me watching the whole movie instead of bailing out. Sad that the weak points of this movie could have been easily fixed, because otherwise much of the production was very good.

I just saw the movie and I thought it to be an awful replica of return of the dead. Only this time people are drowning and spitting water.hahahaha kinda funny. It was somehow comedic and made no sense what so ever. I did however enjoyed the sound effect that was the only scary thing in the film. The actors where just as bad as the movie. Too much overacting and it had a trashy 80's look to it. The producer should have just made it a sex movie where zombies could get it off with the living. That would have been much more fun than that movie. If you choose to see it anyway, I would not recommend you to buy the film.

For those of you who saw the movie and understood the concept of the 13th hour on the 13th day please let me know. The melted chuckie dolls has me puzzled as well.

Maybe a bit naive to think but I thought that amateur movies like this weren't made anymore in this era- and most certainly didn't received a global release.

The movie really surprised me how incredible amateur looking this movie was. Not only with its acting and visual style but also with its technical aspect, such as the editing, camera-positioning. Especially the editing is extremely lacking at times. It makes some sequences come across as disjointed and confusing. Also the weak camera-positioning most certainly doesn't help all of the sequences. At times the movie really looks and feels as if it was being made by a couple of high school students who decided to pick up a camera and start shooting an horror movie.

The movie just isn't ever tense, scary or mysterious, were also lies a big problem of the movie obviously. For a genre movie it just does basically everything wrong to reach a good enough and effective end result.

The musical score is also quite horrendous. It's a very simple typical kind of movie score, that is too prominently present at times when nothing is happening in the movie and not present at all- or not good enough at the tense or scary moments of the movie. The music has some huge misses in the movie, it could had truly enhanced some of the scare moments and tension of the movie at times.

Of course the story also doesn't help much. The movie doesn't have the most incredible pace and story-flow. The movie also tries to be more clever than it really is, by putting in many plot twists and making things seem different than they truly are. Without doubt they also did this to make the movie original. The result however isn't much good, since it makes the movie unnecessarily difficult to follow, especially toward the end, when twists and false twists follow each other rapidly. Through the many twists the movie also starts to make less and less sense. The movie is filled with some gaping holes and the more you actually start thinking about the story, the less sense it starts to make. Not only are there many improbabilities but also many things that just plain good old fashioned plot holes, mistakes and other things that don't make much sense.

Judging by looking at this movie Mr. Woelfel (is that even a real name?) watched a bit too many Japanese horror and John Carpenter movies. In its style it mostly tries to impersonate Japanses movies and in its story, storytelling and characters it mostly tries to impersonate John Carpenter horror movies. Nothing wrong with impersonate different styles and applying them to your own style film-making but the style just doesn't work out, mainly due to its poor budget, weak editing and story-flow. It's perhaps even a bit sad to see at times how hard they tried, without a good result.

I had no idea who Jay Woelfel was before this but looking at his filmography he seems like a regular B-horror movie maker, who just isn't the most talented or visionary person around, no matter how hard he ever tries. He is one of those typical persons who thinks he can write, direct, produce, edit and compose all of his own movies. And does he think he is Brian De Palma, with using all those redundant and completely pointless split-screen shots that don't add anything at all? Yep, I think I'm going to watch more Woelfel movies alright.

Yes, it's true that the movie is so bad at times that it becomes good. It's unintentionally funny at times, due to how clumsy it is made and how bad the acting and dialog are. Who ever told those persons in this movie that they could act in movies? Granted that the script with its many weak and often pointless dialog also doesn't help them much but honestly, it's obvious as well that the actors just don't have the talent for the job.

On a positive note, the make-up effects are quite good looking. Same goes for the simplistic but effective special-effects.

With the same story material but more money and real professionals involved this movie possibly could had been a perfectly good genre movie to watch. But not now.

2/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/