Recensioni degli utenti

People disappear every year out in the Canadian wilderness -- however, this year is different. This year something is increasing the body count...

Jason London is the reason I wanted to watch this film. And sadly, he was probably the best actor in the movie. (And without the weird personal baggage of his brother Jeremy... though I prefer Jeremy.) Too bad his role is so small.

The father is bit melodramatic and has an acting style that would probably work better on the ABC Family channel than in a cheesy horror film.

I have to give credit to the special effects, because there really are not any. And that makes me happy, because I would rather see a cheesy suit than a cheesy computer effect. And, even better, the suit is on screen a minimum amount of time.

In all honesty I wasn't expecting much, and once again I didn't get much. Certainly I have seen much worse than Snow Beast, but overall I found it lame, with the only really good attributes being the scenery and John Schneider's performance. The effects are really not very good, the creature of the title is cheap looking, restricted in movement and not very menacing or terrifying at all. The script is cheesy and aimless, the story reeks of predictability, the pace is overly-languid and dull, not helped by the too-talky nature of some scenes, and the other actors look wooden, unsurprisingly unable to do anything to their uninteresting and stereotypical characters.

All in all, not the worst film I've seen, but lame with not much point to it. 3/10 Bethany Cox

Given the overall rating that "Snow Beast" had received here on IMDb, it was with some hesitation that I decided to watch this movie. And the sole purpose of purchasing it was simply because after having seen Danielle Chuchran in "SAGA: Curse of the Shadow" then I wanted to watch some of her previous work.

Well, with "Snow Beast", then you know exactly what you are in for. And true enough, the movie delivers exactly that, and does so without even a single surprise along the way. But despite its predictability, then "Snow Beast" was still an enjoyable movie to watch. It is one of those cheesy and campy pseudo-horror movies that we all indulge in once in a while and most of us don't admit to.

The story is about a group of scientists who trek deep into the Canadian mountains to study lynxes in the wild. However, when they arrive there, the lynxes are gone, and the scientists come face to face with a ferocious man-like beast, reminiscent of the mythical Yeti.

Campy, cheesy and dim-witted, yes, the movie delivers on every account. But still, it managed to captivate me and hold me all the way to the very end.

There were some mistakes here and there, sure. Such as the feet of the snow beast were painstakingly molded latex in the shape of feet fitted upon shoes. The toes were not even parted or moving separately. And the avalanche scene, well that has to be seen to be believe. It was just bad. And something puzzled me beyond mortal comprehension; why would a scientist venture out into the frozen mountains alone, knowing very well that a deadly creature was lurking out there, and arming herself with a camera and a tranquilizer gun - which was conveniently left behind in the car. It was stupidity on a level where even the most of stupid people would go "wait, what did she just do?"

The characters in the movie were detailed and nicely portrayed, and the people hired for the various roles were doing good jobs in acting.

If you enjoy campy horror, then "Snow Beast" is most definitely worth a watch.

Since the original film was released back in the 1970s major advances in special effects have bought some truly brilliant films.

Unfortunately the man in a furry coat does not advertise these said advances.

The slow motion sequences do add to the feel of the film - slow.

I am torn as to why this film fails to deliver - maybe it is the wooden acting, a script so predictably awful that is borders on the comic or the attempt to bring horror with monster slippers? Whatever the reason I just regret not using the hour and a half to do something more enjoyable - such as filling in my tax return.

In the Canadian wilderness, furry white "Snow Beast" attacks a young man while snow-boarding. Unaware of the precise danger, animal researcher John Schneider (as Jim Harwood) arrives to investigate. When the next attack occurs, you'll know before it happens. Also predictable is the subplot involving Mr. Schneider and his ungrateful teenage daughter Danielle Chuchran (as Emmy)...

Schneider handles the acting assignment well. However, all is lost when he appears to forget all about his friend Paul D. Hunt (as Rob) and leaves him in a cave. Making this particular scene even worse is the fact that Schneider momentarily wants to save a dead woman over his living friend. In a serious story-telling error, the hatred for Mr. Hunt's very likable character is never explained.

** Snow Beast (10/4/11) Brian Borough ~ John Schneider, Danielle Chuchran, Paul D. Hunt, Jason London

There is a wise lesson to be learned from this movie. Whenever you are in some precarious or dangerous situation, you should never let some hollywood actor take control and make the decisions. He is bound to do exactly the opposite of what is sound.

The idiots that make these movies should try depicting how something like this storyline goes a bit more realistic. I think we should study it then gets killed dah. Lead actor gets clobbered and little daughter all brave I'm going after it, please. So hammy it's ridiculous an insult to our intelligence .

Who the heck could do what they are trying to show us and not even have a firearm for protection. Even better no way of even contactibg civilization to get help. I know it's fiction but everything in is so cliche and pretty pathetic.

Can't wait for the sequel haha when snow beast's offspring come back for revenge. LOL.

Quite some runtime has focus on the daughter and father, on their dysfunctional relationship. Will they fix their relationship? Well guess - you won't get it wrong.

A yeti runs amok, killing senselessly, most likely because the characters aside from our main four blatantly don't matter, and don't contribute much aside from... actually, with most kills occurring offscreen the "body count" characters don't really add anything and receive little screen time.

An unambitious creature feature, "Snow Beast" has nothing for anyone with experience watching creature features.

I think this was one of the most boring movies I ever saw. No good special effects and a boring story. This movie must have been very cheap. This was like this old Chinese or Japanese Godzilla movies. A human in a low priced costume and a low priced film location. That's why the movie appears not be scary rather a little bit funny. I don't know if the movie is able to get someone scared except a little kid who doesn't be allowed to watch this movie. Always they take a weapon they don't load it until the beast stands in front of them. Why it is so necessary to be so unprepared if you know that there is a dangerous creature which waits to kill you? The way the beast kills people is always unspectacular. I don't like the dialogs. They are unpretentious from my opinion.

I had never heard of this movie and was a bit hesitant about watching it, thinking that this would be just another movie loaded down with lame digital special effects. I decided I'd record it on my DVR while I was at work and watch it the next day. I've actually never been this glad to be wrong about a movie. I was happy to see a monster movie that used good, old fashioned real effects instead of relying only on digital effects. Of course, the effects don't really make up for the predictability of the film. It was just a little too easy to figure out which characters would survive until the end and which ones would end up dead. Overall, not a totally awful movie, but not one I'd pay money to see.

SNOW BEAST is the low-budget remake of a '70s creature flick I saw and enjoyed years ago. The difference being that the 1970s version was a proper film, whereas this is a shamelessly silly B-movie that lacks a proper script and the kind of money to make a film that even slightly resembles the earlier version.

Instead, we're bogged down in SyFy Channel territory, with only a handful of cast members and a film that takes place in a single location for the most part. While I enjoyed the icy Canadian backdrop of the story, for the most part this film focuses on a father/daughter relationship which includes one of the most irritatingly obnoxious characters ever...can't we ever have one normal, friendly teenage character in a film for a change?

Spliced into these shenanigans are some tame kills committed by some kind of yeti, although when you see the costume (which looks like something somebody would wear at Halloween) you'll be laughing rather than screaming. The PG-13 rating hurts this one a lot, and you'd hardly be tuning in just to see the cast, either. John Schneider has form battling monsters (having appeared in LAKE PLACID 2, which, while bad, was a lot better than this) but the appearance of Jason London (JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS) makes you wonder what happened to the guy's career for him to be forced to appear in this dreck.

I recently watched this film on the TV the other day. This, without a doubt has got to be the worst film I have ever seen. It must have had a budget of $5,000 and edited with Windows Movie Maker that's how poor it was. The 'yeti' costume was extremely poor and you could easily tell that it was just a guy in the suit wearing a cheap Halloween mask which seemed to shake whenever the 'yeti' roared. Not to sure who gave them the funding for this, but wow... 1/10 film for me. The worst film I have seen in my life and I have seen some bad films. I just hope for the love of god that they do not make another edition of this as it will be extremely cringe worthy and painful to watch. So, so bad!

This is a movie where actors need to pay their rent. Not only is the script lame, the acting is sub par. This movie makes you want to scream at telly because the actors do incredible stupid things. Skip this one.

The snow beast looked fake.

I've come across many snow beasts in my years living in Canada - and none have looked as fake as this snow beast.

A REAL snow beast will not walk like a man, it will hunch over and walk like a chimpor an ape.

A real snow beast will not grown before making an attack.

A real snow beast has a mouth that moves - whereas the snow beast in this movie doesn't move it's mouth.

A real snow beast has darker fur and is not so clean.

The director didn't do enough research into what an actual snow beast looks like and acts like.

I've seen worse and I've seen better The acting is ok but the creature was pretty bad

I'm a lover of B movies and cheese... For what it was the original 70's movie was a fun campy romp. This however was not... Somehow they managed to suck all the fun out of the plot. And focused on just a few dull characters. No gore, no fun set up, no thrills or chills. It commits the ultimate sin of a B movie... It's not fun! I don't know if it was the budget or what happened here. Compared to the original it's a disappointment. I've seen more entertaining Syfy channel movies. And that's really saying something.

Er, yeah, what can you say about this film? At least the title should tell you whether you'll - vaguely - like it or not. Let's put this film in the league where it belongs, shall we? Of course it'll never be up there with 'true' cinema classics like 'Empire Strikes Back' or 'The Godfather.' Movies like this belong in their own league where you can put them on after a hard day's work and switch off your mind. Based on those terms, this film does the job.

A father and - miserable - daughter move to the Canadian mountains for a little while in order to study the wildlife with a couple other researchers. Naturally, people start going missing and I'm sure no one will be shocked when I tell you the titular 'monster' is to blame.

It's a competent enough little horror film. The first thing that pleasantly surprised me was the creature itself. No, it's no classic, but the mask is actually quite scary - it's just a pity that the producers clearly just hired any old bloke to be inside the costume (probably the tallest actor they could find) as he doesn't really move the way a lumbering creature of the wilderness probably would. Morel like just a bloke in a bigfoot costume.

The characters are at least memorable. Or at least the father and daughter are - mainly because the father is actually quite nice and the daughter - starting off completely unlikable - at least has room to grow, character-wise. There are some deaths which actually surprised me in terms of breaking cinema conventions, so that was nicely unexpected, too.

Overall, this is just one a thousand other similar monster B-movies. Is it the worst? No. Is it unwatchable? No. It's perfectly fine for what it is. Will you remember it in a week's time? I saw it a couple of days ago and I've had to look it up on the internet to recall what happened.

The greatest directors are more than artists; they're also wildly creative free thinkers who push our understanding of the possibilities of art to change our perceptions of ourselves. Snow Beast comes along at just the right moment to help us come to grips with gender politics in a winter environment.

Is this the greatest film of all time? Let the public be the judge of that. Without a doubt its 1:28 runtime will leave you staring at the screen at the end making you think, really think about the way we perceive snowmen and the rapidly changing world of LGBT politics. Snow pole? Snow hole? You can't change the weather so you'd better change your consciousness.

This lesser known Orson Welles classic is probably the greatest snowman movie in the history of cinema. Like its predecessor Citizen Kane, we begin at the end where the Snow Beast is watching his grandchildren play in his garden as he reflects on his life of randomly killing humans just for fun, because he never really acquired a taste for the creatures, and they gave him diarrhea.

Welles plays the part of the Beast perfectly and surpasses every other performance in his film repertoire. As a director he breaks all of the rules of Hollywood.

I only pray that Hollywood will heap praise upon the special effects in this classic like the good people of Bromide, Oklahoma, where the snowman outfit won third place in the Halloween costume competition at Dell's Tavern.

I think that's probably enough, possibly too much.

"Snowbeast" is a 2011 TV remake of the 1977 TV film of the same name. This one stars John Schneider.

The titular monster is a yeti, basically a bigfoot that lives high in the snowy mountains. In the original film the snowbeast was hanging around Crested Butte ski resort, Colorado, which is where the film was shot; this remake largely takes place around a posh cabin in the Canadian Rockies. A ski resort is nearby but you'll barely see it. The original movie ripped-off the plot of "Jaws" verbatim and just relocated it to a ski resort while this remake throws out most of the "Jaws" similarities.

The yeti in the original looked quite good for a TV film from 1977, nice and malevolent. I suppose it helped that you hardly got to see the creature. Less is more, as they say.

Which brings us to the main problem with this remake: The yeti is fully seen early on and continues to appear throughout the rest of the film. This wouldn't be a problem if the monster costume was convincing, but that's not the case. The head and face look good, especially the eyes and mouth - very monstrous - but the rest of the costume looks really fake. The body of fur just doesn't look real or lived-in. In fact, it looks like the beast just came from the dry cleaners. Couldn't the producers have spent another grand on the title creature's appearance?

But the cast is good and likable. John Schneider plays a scientist studying lynx in Canada. He brings two colleagues and his daughter from Florida. Meanwhile, the local police department investigates a couple cases of missing persons that, of course, lead to the beast.

For some reason, Schneider is perfect for these types of roles. He's just an all-around quality protagonist. Jason London is also on hand as one of the policeman.

Another big plus are the two women: Danielle Chuchran, who plays Schneider's teen daughter Emmy, and Kari Hawker, who plays Schneider's young brunette colleague, Marci, with whom he seems to have a (mutual) interest. Each is totally gorgeous in different ways.

The snowy Rocky Mountain locations are another plus; very scenic.

CONCLUSION: Both films are about the same quality, although the original version loses points for being a wholesale rip-off of "Jaws." Each were made as traditional monster movies and are therefore pleasantly derivative. In other words, don't look for originality or cutting edge cinema, just enjoy them for what they are. The only major flaw of this remake is the fake-looking fur suit of the creature, which engenders laughs more than frights (although, again, the head & face look good). The plot is much thinner than the original, but the story is somehow less boring, which indicates solid storytelling or maybe they hooked me in with the likable cast. Probably both.

GRADE: C+ or B-

I was tempted to abort this movie but plowed ahead just to see how these OK actors were dealing with a mostly nonsensical script. Best example: Lead scientist Jim (Schneider) tells everyone 'I'll take the snow mobile to the ranger station to get help'(the trip would be hugely dangerous). As he leaves he turns and says, 'meanwhile call the ranger station and tell them I'm coming.' I'm scratching my head... why go when you can call and ask for the rangers to send help?

See Beastley's review...spot on!

The group stares at great video, from their remote cameras, clearly showing a yetti or Abominable Snowman prancing around. Clear as day. It takes five minutes of like, what can that be? A bear standing up? Yada yada.... till Rob finally says...looks like a Yetti to which Jim says.... naw they're in the Himalayas. As if this scientist is clueless of hundreds of sightings in North America. Emmy goes out alone to photograph the beast, knowing it has killed people, taking a tranquilizer gun and promptly leaves the gun on her car seat.

Father and daughter doing high fives minutes after major tragedy has occurred. No explanation of why their beastly videos did not survive. Next, a hugely tall powerful beast that is too weak to break down a door.

Rob stares at a huge pool of blood and does not mention it to Jim who is several feet away. Two men go out to find Emmy and take no weapons of any kind.

I have rarely seen such a defective script. It left me rooting for the beast.