After Sundown

When I read posts saying they thought this film wasn't very good but then they found out how low the budget was and now have new respect for the film...I cringe. (I also cringe when I see 10 stars for this movie as they are obviously affiliated in some way) A film is either good or bad no matter how big or small the budget. Can you tell a good story? Can you keep the pace of the film moving? With all the limitations there is on a low budget film can you make it entertaining? As far as After Sundown goes, the Original Edit didn't take itself so seriously, had better music, lighting, sound, smoother edits and above all else humor. I know all this because I directed the film and with the help of our talented D.P. put together the Original Edit that premiered in front of 400 or so at Billy Bob's in Fort Worth, Texas. The version available in stores was altered by the Executive Producers in a failed attempt at making this a serious horror film. With all that being said, it was still a great learning experience and having Lion's Gate on the resume can't be all bad.

For a low-budget horror film, it lives up to the slockiness of most. Many of the scenes are quite predictable and have been done to "DEATH"!!! Do we always have to see a town full of SLOW ZOMBIES chase after the last group of people in the town...and wind up catching members...if not all...of the party???

The one thing that makes this film worthy enough to watch, in my opinion, are the scenes that deal with the diary and the background information that it gives to the happenings that plague the town. It would have been a much better film if they focused purely on the Western village in the past. Maybe if they would make a prequel, a much larger audience would enjoy that film.

This is a great movie for the extremely small budget they had. There were a couple of plot holes but I find plot hole in almost every movie I watch, even the big budget ones. Other than the few holes the plot was great. And vampires making zombies was VERY original thinking. And it is hard to be original with something that has been around as long as vampires and zombies The acting is great, except for Mike Brown (Benjamin) He was just not believable in his role. To many pauses when he talked. tone of voice did not really match the expressions on his face. The zombie make up was very good. When the vampire was shooting people They should have bleed. But maybe they could not fit that into the budget.

With a bigger budget this would have been a major block buster film.

And all the complaints I see others making could be fixed with a bigger budget. At least the real complaints and not the BS ones

As Executive Producer/Writer/Director and Editor of After Sundown I can respond best to the many useful comments. First, this is the better version of After Sundown and actually no other version should legally exist. What does exist is an unauthorized illegal version of the movie that the co-director put together with the the D.P. without my knowledge and began to distribute. The co-director did not follow the directions given to him and he was trying to create his own version of the movie and wouldn't listen to the person who invited him in on this project. Thus having a huge conflict in pacing, acting and all around plot. The co-directors version was the one sent to distributors and was promptly turned down due to lack of horror elements, bad music and a convoluted ending. Second, the original script covered many but not all of the holes in the plot but because of issues on set (i.e. actors moving, locations being lost and budget restraints and a co-director not listening) many, many scenes had to be cut. I know the movie isn't great but we all have to start somewhere and my version did at least get distribution. As far as fake blood, make-up and zombies... that's up to the viewer to decide. At least it was real and not CGI effects. And lastly, budget does mean everything - if you've ever made a movie then you know that and compromises have to be made in any business and this is a business. If you don't think it is then try to rent a movie or go to the theater without paying. I do appreciate all the comments... it does help... especially since I'm currently working on my third movie... and if you are wondering, yes I made The Fanglys..."they just keep getting better!"

OK. I was like this part sucks and this part doesn't match. What's the deal with the sound?? Then I took it upon myself to contact After Sundown film partners.

When I was told that this picture was done on a 20,ooo dollar budget (when the actors get paid) and no FX, Just photo shop and some blue gels over a 1k light filmed on a obsolete Xl-2 digital camera. I was very impressed. Being in Hollywood "the land of remakes" for 15 years and seeing many of my Co-hearts in crime trying time after time to get a scene play done in H-TOWN. This truly rocked. Yeah, Yeah some people could have done a better Job behind their e-mail. Blah, blah. These cats did it. Looking farther into this, the writer of the "Fangley's" (which is far worst that After Sundown) who also wrote this movie. I would say that it is an improvement...Call it lessons learned. He said the "Fangley's" was done for under 13,ooo bucks and has sold over 23,000 units nation wide at approx 7-10 bucks a pop. I would call that a success!

One way or the other they have distribution from Lions Gate (which carries a whole bunch of B movies and a big NAME). Well, this one fit. If they had more time and money they could do better. They seem to have found something and it worked. Hopefully the next Movie will improve also. Just remember it's about credibility in this business (what have you done?) although the continuity lacked. That's what you get when you run out of time and money. Just finish it and get it out!!

Keep up the fight in Texas. Stay Independent!!