Punishment

Chompcrc here. The technical specs state this was shot on a Red One. I've never seen such limited dynamic range in a movie. There's no way this was shot on anything other than an RCA vhs recorder. Having said that, low budget horror hardly hinges on picture quality, and the sound is up to par, so if you can get past the expected flaws concerning story, formula, motivations, etc, I say an indie horror fan should check it out. As for the camera, they are either lying, or shot the movie so morbidly exposed that there was no way to save it in post. My vote is for the former, because the latter would negate the built-in levels that the Red One possesses to deter such exposure issues.

This so called horror movie as to be one of the worst movies of the last decade, absolutely dreadful from start to finish, the only good point is that you only have to, if you can, put up for it for 70 odd minutes, everything about this film is done very badly the acting, the plot as been done a thousand times before and much better, the so called special effects, my 13 year old daughter could do much better, I have noticed that the special effects creator as written a revue, and she is that bad her grammar sucks just like her so called special effects, she is sorry to say but have to be honest stupid, she even put her real name to the 10 star revue, what a plonker . for your own good stay well clear of this turkey

I found this movie for about $2 in the local secondhand DVD store, although the DVD cover is carrying "Punishment" as the title. Being a lifelong horror fanatic I bought the movie without having any prior knowledge about the movie or story.

The story was, well, lets just be fully honest and say unfathomably stupid. A man watch a his daughter is killed by a drunk driver, and then he disappears for years and people starts to be killed in the forest. Right, so because his daughter was killed by a drunk driver, the man decides to go on a killing spree and kill everyone who drinks. Right... Very plausible.

While this movie does have a few elements from the forerunners of the slasher genre, then "Nobody Gets Out Alive" will never become a noteworthy participant in the slasher genre. The killer just had no edge, nor any characteristic trademark like Jason, Freddy or Michael.

The kills were, well, not impressive. Sounds bizarre saying that, but in a slasher movie you want to see blood and gore in spectacular kills. This movie just didn't have that to offer.

One thing that was good in this less-than-mediocre-slasher-movie was the acting. People were doing good jobs with their given roles and characters. But it didn't do much to salvage the movie.

If you enjoy horror and slasher movies, then your time and money is better spent elsewhere.

Look if you're expecting high production values, this ain't the movie you watch. Open minded Horror fans watch these really extremely low budget films in the hope of seeing the stars of the years to come, new talented directors to keep an eye out for, cheap thrills, blood and maybe some good looking Women being chased around by maniacs. This movie has some of that, not a lot, but enough to make the movie a decent night's viewing. It's shot and lit very well. It doesn't make you think the crew don't know what they're doing or where to point the camera (a good example is The Zombie Diaries, awful awful film). The breakout star of this film is Jen Dance, who is really beautiful in this and well cast as the timid sweet city girl out in the enclosed tense setting of a creepy looking forest.

Views seemed to be polarized. I don't care, I liked it.

5/10

First, let's talk about the acting: it sucks. Jen Dance is annoying. Shaun Paul Costello doesn't ever actually act. Chelsey Garner just runs around. David Bonner is over the top at times and a little unbelievable in the role he is given, and that makes Brian Gallagher WAY over the top (a killer in hunting boots...OH NO). Chris Ready gives an average (key word is average) performance. Nikki Bell doesn't belong in ANY movie EVER because she can't act and is also good to laugh at. Seriously, I don't even think she could be in an adult movie where you don't even need to act. And Matt Nadu just stands around looking pretty.

Next, let's talk about the special effects: laughable. Was that tomato sauce or ketchup? I like Lauren Palmer's review below (evidently she did the effects). Her work is about as good as her grammar and command of the English language, which is to say VERY BAD. Next time you give your own movie a 10/10, make up a fake name or something.

Then, let's talk about the editing: Who did this? I especially like the "party scene" where the same footage is just played over and over again. It's day. Then it's night. Then, it's day. Then, it's morning. Then, we skip day. Then, it's night again. I CAN'T KEEP TRACK.

It's 77 minutes long. And 77 minutes too long if you ask me. It's boring. And I laughed through most of it, which you aren't supposed to do in a horror movie. I especially laughed when Brian Gallagher delivers his never ending speech that belongs in some classroom, not in a movie.

The blooper reel is proof none of these people should be making movies, and it's sad that they said this was their "best shot" because then you know they are really bad at this.