IMDb RATING
5.3/10
3.5K
YOUR RATING
A radio talk show host unravels a conspiracy about encounters with mysterious beings known as The Shadow People and their role in the unexplained deaths of several hundred victims in the 198... Read allA radio talk show host unravels a conspiracy about encounters with mysterious beings known as The Shadow People and their role in the unexplained deaths of several hundred victims in the 1980s.A radio talk show host unravels a conspiracy about encounters with mysterious beings known as The Shadow People and their role in the unexplained deaths of several hundred victims in the 1980s.
Featured reviews
A radio talk show host (Dallas Roberts) unravels a conspiracy about encounters with mysterious beings known as the Shadow People and their role in the unexplained deaths of several hundred victims in the 1980s.
I had never heard of shadow people before this film, but a little search turns up two things: they were featured in "John Dies at the End" and on the radio program Coast to Coast AM. Now, I will have to assume that the "John Dies" is a coincidence, but there is obviously a Coast to Coast connection since this film focuses on a late night talk host... nicely done, folks. And thank you for not making him as wacky as Art Bell.
This is a fine effort from Matt Arnold, who has not really made a name for himself in film just yet. Could this be his big break? Perhaps. I missed an opportunity to chat with Arnold, and that is unfortunate... I would love to know about his work on "Jackie Brown".
I had never heard of shadow people before this film, but a little search turns up two things: they were featured in "John Dies at the End" and on the radio program Coast to Coast AM. Now, I will have to assume that the "John Dies" is a coincidence, but there is obviously a Coast to Coast connection since this film focuses on a late night talk host... nicely done, folks. And thank you for not making him as wacky as Art Bell.
This is a fine effort from Matt Arnold, who has not really made a name for himself in film just yet. Could this be his big break? Perhaps. I missed an opportunity to chat with Arnold, and that is unfortunate... I would love to know about his work on "Jackie Brown".
This film chills with ideas and suggestions more than with visuals and gore or straight action.
The director, IMO, does a great job with a modest budget and pulls out a bag full of skillful director's tricks (lighting, camera angles, shadows, color variations, etc) to achieve his ends. When there is an effect, it happens in shadowy spots of the screen image, reinforcing a spooky ambiance in the film.
One of the best low-budget/minimal-FX films I've seen in years.
It worked for me.
My hat is off to the director/writers and actors for a job well done.
The director, IMO, does a great job with a modest budget and pulls out a bag full of skillful director's tricks (lighting, camera angles, shadows, color variations, etc) to achieve his ends. When there is an effect, it happens in shadowy spots of the screen image, reinforcing a spooky ambiance in the film.
One of the best low-budget/minimal-FX films I've seen in years.
It worked for me.
My hat is off to the director/writers and actors for a job well done.
What was enjoyable about this movie for me was that the (HD?) camera work was clean and nicely composed, the direction and acting was entirely competent and the editing was cool too, in what I imagine was a film with a relatively modest budget. A pleasant change from average Hollywood. It was made by people with a real feeling for film. Mariah Bonner as the librarian was a bonus who definitely did not hurt the eyes. Shame she was an early victim.
The story wasn't great, though it exploited common enough fears of things that are half-seen (or were they there at all?), and move in the night (as opposed to go bump in the night). And the placebo effect is undoubtedly real, though whether it's killed anyone is questionable, I'd say, certainly in Western cultures.
I did once see a shadow person in bright daylight (or did I?). I was about three at the time, and lying in bed. The shadow of a figure ran across the wall, flowed into a shallow recess, slid behind a wardrobe, came out the other side, and vanished. It was more scary than Shadow People, and as you can tell, I haven't forgotten it. However, the good news (for anyone who's worried) is that it hasn't reappeared since, and 70+ years later I'm still here.
The story wasn't great, though it exploited common enough fears of things that are half-seen (or were they there at all?), and move in the night (as opposed to go bump in the night). And the placebo effect is undoubtedly real, though whether it's killed anyone is questionable, I'd say, certainly in Western cultures.
I did once see a shadow person in bright daylight (or did I?). I was about three at the time, and lying in bed. The shadow of a figure ran across the wall, flowed into a shallow recess, slid behind a wardrobe, came out the other side, and vanished. It was more scary than Shadow People, and as you can tell, I haven't forgotten it. However, the good news (for anyone who's worried) is that it hasn't reappeared since, and 70+ years later I'm still here.
When at the beginning I saw the 'Reality' footage added in, I thought immediately that I was NOT going to like this (I HATE 'Reality Shows' and most 'Found Footage' films) But, I must say, that it was actually used very judiciously throughout the movie.
I don't usually care for Dallas Roberts that much either, but I must admit that he did a decent job in his role. Every time I see the guy, I get this eerie feeling that John Ritter has been resurrected! DAMN! Also, as you actually get to see the real people here involved in the 'True' case, it does have a sneaky way of drawing you into the film.
With such a simple concept, the way it was done was decent and moderately effective. When I saw the REAL guy I truly felt quite sorry for him, especially when they show the credits at the end (not to give anything away) I really just felt bad for him.
I think the thing that I appreciated most was that the way it was put together and the way it was put across, you never get the feeling that the film makers are exploiting the idea like so many other 'True' stories. Especially with the footage of the real guy, you get a strong sense that they are honestly trying to portray events as they actually 'happened'.
A surprisingly interesting and mildly effective film that somewhat surpassed my earlier expectations...
I don't usually care for Dallas Roberts that much either, but I must admit that he did a decent job in his role. Every time I see the guy, I get this eerie feeling that John Ritter has been resurrected! DAMN! Also, as you actually get to see the real people here involved in the 'True' case, it does have a sneaky way of drawing you into the film.
With such a simple concept, the way it was done was decent and moderately effective. When I saw the REAL guy I truly felt quite sorry for him, especially when they show the credits at the end (not to give anything away) I really just felt bad for him.
I think the thing that I appreciated most was that the way it was put together and the way it was put across, you never get the feeling that the film makers are exploiting the idea like so many other 'True' stories. Especially with the footage of the real guy, you get a strong sense that they are honestly trying to portray events as they actually 'happened'.
A surprisingly interesting and mildly effective film that somewhat surpassed my earlier expectations...
When people who make movies go out of their way to tell the audience that their movie is based on actual events, they set themselves up for criticism from people who want historical accuracy. "Shadow People" is another movie that unnecessarily chooses to go that route. This movie was plenty scary, and could easily have stood on its own merits without having to play the "based on a true story" card.
I am reminded of two other movies that did this: The Fourth Kind, and Phantom. Both went out of their way to tell the audience that their stories came from factual history, and both received a hefty backlash of negative reviews from audience members calling the movie makers out on their claims. Any of these movies would have been better if presented purely as fictional entertainment.
If you can put aside this aspect of "Shadow People", you will be in for a decent flick, both chilling and eerie.
I am reminded of two other movies that did this: The Fourth Kind, and Phantom. Both went out of their way to tell the audience that their stories came from factual history, and both received a hefty backlash of negative reviews from audience members calling the movie makers out on their claims. Any of these movies would have been better if presented purely as fictional entertainment.
If you can put aside this aspect of "Shadow People", you will be in for a decent flick, both chilling and eerie.
Did you know
- TriviaSeen in a few clips is professor and author of "The Terror that Comes in the Night" (1982), David Hufford.
- GoofsThe story takes place in eastern Kentucky, yet the radio station call letters begin with a "K." That's only for stations west of the Mississippi River, like in Louisiana, where the movie was filmed.
- Crazy creditsRight after the ending credits are complete, the words "NOW YOU WILL SEE THEM TOO" flashes.
- ConnectionsReferences Psychose (1960)
- How long is Shadow People?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 29m(89 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content