Lost After Dark

Set in Michigan in 1984 this movie pays homage to the 1980s style American slasher horror genre and stars Robert Patrick of X-Files and True Blood fame.

In typical US teen fashion some kids steal a school bus in order to take a 'secret' getaway to a hunting cabin in the woods to party, unfortunately they run out of gas in the middle of nowhere (surprise, surprise!). The situation soon takes a nasty turn when they trespass through an old house that they believe to be abandoned, and are soon stalked and murdered by a cannibalistic killer.

Lost After Dark is just an average slasher horror, bringing in nothing fresh or exciting, and despite the seemingly silly inclusion of Robert Patrick's annoying character, it's actually not THAT bad of a movie. However, it does get a bit stupid and predictable towards the end.

Lost After Dark is still worth a watch for those who enjoy 80s slasher style horrors.

For more reviews please visit: www.scifikingdom.co.uk

A throwback slasher movie that is reminiscent of the 70s but especially the 80s. Grindhouse is sort of back, because of people who loved the movies back then, bringing them back to life (if you'll excuse the pun). With all the little things and flaws that made those movies ... what they are. Like bad lightning or missing reels (an inside joke sort of, though might be confusing for some who never had that experience with a movie before) and things like that.

The special (blood) effects are pretty decent for a low budget movie, the characters as shallow as you'd expect (also very bad choices, but that's to be expected to). You can have fun with this, if you feel nostalgic or if you're generally a fan of slasher movies

I pretty much agree with the others here (4 so far) The director did a nice job of setting up the characters and the general feeling of the era pretty well, but ultimately and unfortunately there really just wasn't much of a story to go along with it.

The ironic thing is that usually it is SPECIFICALLY the acting itself that is so atrocious in these low-budget Horror films and many times completely ruins what could have been a good story (please see my review of the recent Gawd-Awful 'HONEYMOON' for example) But... in this case, the characters and the acting itself were just fine for the type of film it is, BUT everything else just didn't really add up to much. So, in this case it turned out kind of backwards from the way many other films seem to go...

As mentioned by others, Robert Patrick was good in his role and the girl's Dad was just about right. Too bad... because almost ALWAYS, it is precisely the terrible acting or characters that are so grating in films like this, but these ones here are actually fairly decent compared to most. So, it leaves you feeling that you really would have liked to see them in the context of a much better story, but that is just the way it seemed to turn out, in my lowly and wretched opinion.

Heh... I kind of feel that my REVIEW is rather shallow too, but quite honestly, there just isn't much more to say. I gave it a '5' only because I thought the setting, characters, and actors were pretty decent, otherwise the story overall would have gotten less...

So, basically.... move along home... nothing to see here...

It was an okay cheap horror film. Nothing great and nothing new to see. I won't spoil it, but the first death was shocking; I didn't expect that. The kills were okay. Even though Toby wasn't the main character, I was surprised he turned out to be so likable. They don't usually make a character the audience will care about in these types of movies.\ Robert Patrick's character was silly. I don't know if he was hurting for money, or he just wanted to be in a horror film.

The bad guy was stupid. You've seen his sort of "can't die bad guy" in multiple cheap horror films.

I gave this a 4-star rating. If you must watch all the slasher films out there, give this a viewing, but don't expect much. However, there are horror films that are far worse than this.

The director is competent, the actors are mostly doing a fair enough job and the gore effects are probably what you would expect from a low-budget slasher referencing the 80s. But the script is bad enough to outweigh the good, significantly.

It seems that people are nowadays so used to movies being constructed by formula, retelling the same old crap, over and over, that they immediately consider a movie "smart" when it does something a little different from the others. Yes, the movie does have a few minor surprises. But other than that, most of the tiring clichés and overused tropes are still there. None of the "victims" do anything intelligent or reasonable. The killer could be no more generic, the story no less interesting.

There are a few well shot and creepy visuals, but those were, unfortunately, not the focus of the movie and thus were neglected in favor of uninspired slasher action.