GlickGlidewell

In a normal movie, if your cinematography, lighting, acting, editing, script, sound mix and everything are abysmal, you try to fix them. But in a low budget horror movie, you can claim that's part of the TERRIFYING HORROR. This was badly shot in kind of a faux-Blair Witch style, with ugly high contrast lighting, sub-high school drama acting, jumpy headache-enducing editing, awful dialogue (not even good in that verbose Lovecraft way) and...I don't particularly remember the sound, but I'm sure it was bad. If your movie's mise-en-scene is "shittiness", you're not scary. You're just shitty.

Every time I go to a screening of student films, I wonder about the people who's movies are incompetent even after years of schooling. "Do these people really think they can work in the industry?" I wonder.

Apparently, the answer is yes.

They grow up to be Barrett J. Leigh and Thom Maurer.

Highlander II is a terrible movie--possibly the worst I've seen. But whereas most bad movies have just one or two problems--say, a bad script, bad cast, or bad editing--there is not a single aspect of Highlander II which is not heroically awful. To its credit, it's fairly consistantly entertaining, out of shear incomprehensible badness. The producers claim that the insurance company took over the movie and threw in the whole "Planet Ziest" subplot, and excuse I'm sure no one believes. Ah, well. I don't think I could make a movie this awful if I tried, and in a weird way, I admire them for that.