While this movie boasts quite a string of genuinely scary moments, it is essentially a collage of already successfully tested horror plots. Agoraphobic heroine, Serial killer, Ghost of serial killer, etc. It even has the obligatory paranormal investigator. Nothing stands out as truly original. Honestly, I've seen worse acting in supporting roles but not very often. The lead role was executed quite well. In fact, I would not be surprised to see this young lady do well in future movies. Again, it is quite scary at times and I suppose that's the point, eh? Also, the music was pretty good. Anyway, if you are a horror movie buff, then watch it just because.
50 Reviews
So Amateurish and Flawed that Becomes Funny
claudio_carvalho3 November 2006
After a Halloween on a Friday, Laura Kove (Jillian Byrnes) becomes agoraphobic. One year later she finds that her apartment is haunted. She searches in Internet and finds Elizabeth Dean (Jennifer Servary), a con ghost hunter, actually a stripper with a peepshow on line, offering her services and Laura and her best friend Nikki Brandt (Marianne Hayden) hire her to get rid off the fiend. Elizabeth investigates the past of Laura and discloses the truth of the mystery.
"Ghost Watcher" is so amateurish and flawed that becomes funny. It is the typical movie that you join your friends to make fun and laugh so ridiculous it is. I do not know how producers invested in this film with such terrible screenplay and cast. The story is horrible, the three lead characters are awful and their actions make no sense. Elizabeth, for example, is a slut that risks her life to help Laura, inclusive dying in the end, solves the murders of a serial killer in a couple of hours, in a absolute lack of coherence. Nikki killed and buried Malculm Dixon, but she accepts to go to the abandoned house in the night to show the corpse to Elizabeth after seeing the weird events in Laura's kitchen. And Laura is pure contradiction, hiring a stripper to hunt ghosts. If any actress of this flick reads my review, do not be upset with me, but the acting are simply awful in this movie. I do not intend to see "Ghost Watcher 2", therefore I hope to have the chance to see any of you in the future with better performances in another movie. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Após a Morte" ("After the Death")
"Ghost Watcher" is so amateurish and flawed that becomes funny. It is the typical movie that you join your friends to make fun and laugh so ridiculous it is. I do not know how producers invested in this film with such terrible screenplay and cast. The story is horrible, the three lead characters are awful and their actions make no sense. Elizabeth, for example, is a slut that risks her life to help Laura, inclusive dying in the end, solves the murders of a serial killer in a couple of hours, in a absolute lack of coherence. Nikki killed and buried Malculm Dixon, but she accepts to go to the abandoned house in the night to show the corpse to Elizabeth after seeing the weird events in Laura's kitchen. And Laura is pure contradiction, hiring a stripper to hunt ghosts. If any actress of this flick reads my review, do not be upset with me, but the acting are simply awful in this movie. I do not intend to see "Ghost Watcher 2", therefore I hope to have the chance to see any of you in the future with better performances in another movie. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Após a Morte" ("After the Death")
God should add an extra 90 minutes to my life for having sat through this movie.
KungFuVooDoo6 November 2006
I gave this a three out of ten. The three is only posted due to the fact that I now have an unflagging faith that myself and four of my stupid half-wit drunk friends can make a movie and release it directly to video. And then follow up with a sequel. There is apparently no prerequisite exam to becoming a director. Okay, enough ripping. Down to business. First and foremost, the damn thing was filmed in Grainavision or something. It looked like they sanded the lens before they shot. In addition, it didn't appear that the production crew cared to waste any money on Steady-Cam. Also, periodic wacky camera angles, reminiscent of the old Batman series litter this cinematic train wreck. As to whether they are intentional or not is a point of conjecture. But wait....it DOES get worse. I can live with two dimensional characters. Good actors are expensive. I'm down with the sound. But they could have at least had the common decency to memorize their lines and not spit them at the camera. I've heard better deliveries from the recorded 411 information. Will I watch the sequel? Oh yea, I will. I carry the Ever Burning Torch of the Satellite of Love. There is of course some redeeming qualities. First of, the story line could have gone somewhere. It really could have. If it had been polished a bit, it could have carried the movie. I like the premise very much. Also, even if they ARE amateur actors, eye candy abounds.
This movie is so bad only ghosts should be watching it.
MadWatch31 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was pretty good for a college film project. But really sucks that I spent $5 to rent this. Seriously. I rented this at blockbuster because it had professional looking packaging and even though I figured it was a "B" grade horror movie, I at least thought it was done professionally. Nope. The cheap camera quality, the high school drama play acting, horrible directing, numerous plot problems and simple special effects showed that this movie was done by amateurs.
Now, the movie was not *totally* bad; it kept my interest enough to watch the whole thing. But it was hard to miss the bad plot, numerous blatant plot holes and sub-par acting.
Some of the nitpicks (spoilers abound):
1) The main character video tapes someone in her bedroom holding a knife to her throat while she is sleeping (the intruder is the one holding her camera). I understand that she is scared to go outside, but why doesn't she call the police??!!!!
2) The main character is seeking help with her "ghost" problem. So, she decides to enlist the help of someone who maintains a web site that is part paranormal equipment dealer and part peepshow. All I had to say was, "What the....?" Then, she is downright catty and confrontational when this person comes out to help.
3) The web/paranormal person is basically told that she is not wanted and to leave. So, she sticks around because she wants to help. Why? This is a total stranger that was under the impression she is there to sell equipment to a customer, then is greeted by a confrontational customer. Why does she stay and offer to help?
4) The friend said that she is the one that murdered the stalker. Afterward she is shown as being easily scared and intimidated. How did she ever get the motivation to commit first degree murder?
5) They come across the "ghost" of the dead stalker and have a pretty major encounter with the supernatural. Then afterward, la-la-la-la, they resume their normal life and go to a party, like seeing supernatural specters are an everyday occurrence.
6) As with a lot of supernatural movies, the "powers" of the paranormal entities seems to keep changing. Multiple times the ghost would do some ability, but would not repeat that ability at a later time. Or would not do something that was shown to be well within its ability to do so.
As with a lot of movies these days, this one just smacks of misandric (anti-male) messages. No need to flesh out a villain, just make a male character that harms women and voilà! instant villain. I am so sick of these movies. No need to create a background or personality for the "bad guy", just create a male character that harms women. If the villain happened to be female, we would be given all sorts of background information on how she came to be that way and what horrible events happened in her life and how the audience should feel sorry fer her.
I give this movie a 2 out of 10. The bad acting, poor quality filming, amateurish feel and misandric story makes a bad movie, but it was *just* interesting enough for me to watch the whole thing, therefore I didn't rate it a 1.
Now, the movie was not *totally* bad; it kept my interest enough to watch the whole thing. But it was hard to miss the bad plot, numerous blatant plot holes and sub-par acting.
Some of the nitpicks (spoilers abound):
1) The main character video tapes someone in her bedroom holding a knife to her throat while she is sleeping (the intruder is the one holding her camera). I understand that she is scared to go outside, but why doesn't she call the police??!!!!
2) The main character is seeking help with her "ghost" problem. So, she decides to enlist the help of someone who maintains a web site that is part paranormal equipment dealer and part peepshow. All I had to say was, "What the....?" Then, she is downright catty and confrontational when this person comes out to help.
3) The web/paranormal person is basically told that she is not wanted and to leave. So, she sticks around because she wants to help. Why? This is a total stranger that was under the impression she is there to sell equipment to a customer, then is greeted by a confrontational customer. Why does she stay and offer to help?
4) The friend said that she is the one that murdered the stalker. Afterward she is shown as being easily scared and intimidated. How did she ever get the motivation to commit first degree murder?
5) They come across the "ghost" of the dead stalker and have a pretty major encounter with the supernatural. Then afterward, la-la-la-la, they resume their normal life and go to a party, like seeing supernatural specters are an everyday occurrence.
6) As with a lot of supernatural movies, the "powers" of the paranormal entities seems to keep changing. Multiple times the ghost would do some ability, but would not repeat that ability at a later time. Or would not do something that was shown to be well within its ability to do so.
As with a lot of movies these days, this one just smacks of misandric (anti-male) messages. No need to flesh out a villain, just make a male character that harms women and voilà! instant villain. I am so sick of these movies. No need to create a background or personality for the "bad guy", just create a male character that harms women. If the villain happened to be female, we would be given all sorts of background information on how she came to be that way and what horrible events happened in her life and how the audience should feel sorry fer her.
I give this movie a 2 out of 10. The bad acting, poor quality filming, amateurish feel and misandric story makes a bad movie, but it was *just* interesting enough for me to watch the whole thing, therefore I didn't rate it a 1.
So awful it's unintentionally funny
ReflectedGlory27 October 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Let me get one point across: I only gave it a 2 but I liked this movie. I liked it because it was so terrible it was funny; I felt bad for the people who made this movie. The acting was very, very bad but the chicks were pretty good looking. It looked like it was shot on a home video camera. The plot was completely unbelievable (the hero remembered turns and potholes while blindfolded in the back of a van, allowing the other hero to find the house she was taken to by the bad guy). I recommend it to other B-horror movie buffs but not to the casual movie-renter (hence the 2). Oh, one more thing: it had a few good creepy scenes but most of the time it wasn't scary at all.
There is low budget and then there is utter crap!!
Robert_duder3 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I am blown away that this film has a following, that someone, anyone could actually think this was watchable. Finally at 45 minutes into the film I am doing something I never, ever do no matter how bad the film. I am turning it off, walking away, and returning it to my video rental store. I am all for low budget, I am all for campy horrors, and I love the horror genre, this doesn't match ANYTHING!! It's not low budget, it's beyond amateur, we're talking a C minus in a high school film class. This was done like a joke or something and the fact that it got released on DVD is mind blowing and for the IMDb reviewer that said this was better than the remake of The Fog and should have been released in theaters needs their head examined!! Writer director David Cross who is a first timer when it comes to credentials, isn't necessarily to blame. The concept and plot is okay, even the filming (although done low budget) has it's pluses which saves this from me giving it a big fat ZERO!! I would even go so far as to say that the film has it's creepy moments even with cheap special effects. It's the cast that just completely destroys this film. These people are not actors, case closed, they may think they are but they are people that CANNOT ACT!! Jennifer Servary who plays the lead character Elizabeth Dean. She's a young girl who had a traumatizing event in her past that caused her to have a severe case of Agoraphobia which keeps her locked inside her apartment for the past year. Suddenly she begins to have strange events in her apartment that lead her to believe she is being haunted. After searching around the internet she comes to a site which for some god knows reason is obviously a fetish sex site but yet she decided to hire the creator of the web site to try to exorcise her ghosts or some fool thing. Jillian Byrnes who plays the Ghost hunter Laura Kove has the most redeemable acting qualities in the film but that's saying little to nothing. These people simply have no business trying to make a film. They are amateurs in the worst sense of the word. They simply have no talent. The film, despite it's literal 3 seconds of redeemable creepiness is a worthless, unredeemable pile of crap!! The fact that a sequel exists scares me more than the film. At this point I can't imagine ever finishing the first film let alone attempting a sequel.
Everyone has a different opinion and that's what makes reviews and discussions about films so great. There are a lot of good reviews for this film but for me it was horrible trash and that's okay. To each their own. It's a little surprising to me, and then to have people say that this was watchable or even great and to talk down to previous entries in the horror genre is a little perplexing. Films like Nightmare On Elm Street, Halloween, Friday the 13th, even The Fog...sure they'll never win any acting or film making awards but they stand the test of time and have followings of hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions. Ghost Watcher will never stand the test of any time. Skip this one COMPLETELY and see something much, much better like the stupendous SAW series. 1/10
Everyone has a different opinion and that's what makes reviews and discussions about films so great. There are a lot of good reviews for this film but for me it was horrible trash and that's okay. To each their own. It's a little surprising to me, and then to have people say that this was watchable or even great and to talk down to previous entries in the horror genre is a little perplexing. Films like Nightmare On Elm Street, Halloween, Friday the 13th, even The Fog...sure they'll never win any acting or film making awards but they stand the test of time and have followings of hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions. Ghost Watcher will never stand the test of any time. Skip this one COMPLETELY and see something much, much better like the stupendous SAW series. 1/10
Just SO bad!
bridgeandjim25 September 2005
We watch a new horror movie every week so we have a VERY open mind when it comes to low-budget films. Let us tell you that this one was one of the worst we've ever seen! The acting was simply horrific, the ending was completely uneventful, and it was just not scary at all. We love watching "B horror movies," they are usually very entertaining but this was just boring, and an embarrassment to all involved. You sit there and wait for something to happen but nothing really does. The makeup was horrible (big surprise), the "ghosts" or "zombie- things" looked like they came straight from a grammar school haunted house-yeah, real frightening-we were waiting for the zombies to scream, "BOO!" Besides that, the filming was close to the worst we've ever seen, if not the worst. We usually let that go if the acting and the rest of the movie is decent since we know they can only do what their budget allows but this just compounded the horror of the movie. Ghost Watcher 2 is now out, we'll rent it since we want to see if the 2nd part to this "film" could possibly get any worse!
Refreshing fun.
okaythanksthen26 November 2004
I always enjoy a break from the Holloywood style of movie making. Okay, so at times the dialog was painful, the acting was wooden, and I could visualize the stage directions in front of me. I enjoyed watching this movie and I thought the three lead actresses were endearing. It was so cool to see a movie where all of the leads were women who were brave and took action, and not just there to serve as love interests.
I want to give special recognition to the film makers for casting normal women in this film. All three of them were very attractive, but in their own unique ways, not the Hollywood cookie-cutter painfully-thin way. It was a lot of fun to watch them. They looked like me and my friends, and were easy to relate to and invest in.
Great little flick! Thanks for the entertainment.
I want to give special recognition to the film makers for casting normal women in this film. All three of them were very attractive, but in their own unique ways, not the Hollywood cookie-cutter painfully-thin way. It was a lot of fun to watch them. They looked like me and my friends, and were easy to relate to and invest in.
Great little flick! Thanks for the entertainment.
Wasted rental
Guffinator200322 November 2006
Wednesday is movie night for my wife and I, and here lately we've been diving into lesser known ghost movies. This movie caught our attention this last week and we rented it. Oh my, this movie was absolutely horrible. It must have had a budget of about $45. Some parts of it made absolutely NO sense. The "investigator" takes a description of "we drove for 10 minutes, turned left, turned right, crossed some railroad tracks" and was able to drive to the exact spot where this lady was accosted? The acting was sub-par, to the point where I have a theory that the actors were personal friends of the director, so he basically rounded up whoever he could to star in the flick. I see there is a sequel to this using the same actress for the main character. I'll be sure to skip over that one at Blockbuster.
Made by Ghost Enthusiasts, For Ghost Enthusiasts . . . or at least that's how it feels.
thebassistsgirlfriend11 December 2004
Genuinely smart horror movie that could have, as has already been said, benefited by a larger budget. Still, it's nice to see there are people out there who still care enough about the craft to try to breathe some originality into it, and who realize "scary" doesn't always mean throwing buckets of exploding glass at the screen and screaming at the viewer "ARE YOU SCARED YET?!?!?ONE". Myself, I happened to enjoy this; Ghost Watcher is the sort of movie that can come back to haunt you after the lights go out. It feels like a novel, one that you could curl up with under the covers with a blanket, that unfortunately just didn't get all the attention/money/effects it needed to *really* shine. Still, for anyone looking for a good way to spend an evening over watching the parade of "Things Crash Through Windows and Then Stuff Blows Up" movies on the telly, I'd recommend this. And, as apparently the crew and the writer apparently check this now and again; keep at it, guys -- you've got talent. Look forward to seeing the next venture!
This movie was utter garbage, Don't waste your time or money on it
Skinsofourfathers15 February 2007
I knew this movie was going to be crap when I saw that it had been filmed using the same handy-cam that I use for family events. The acting was really bad and at times made no sense. The only scene that I thought was remotely worth watching was when you briefly see the "Killer" in a flash of cheesy lightning. I would only recommend this film if your only other entertainment option was watching paint dry, and even then you would had to tick me off really bad. I personally can't figure out how there could be a sequel to this movie. There was nothing worth watching the first time what on earth could have inspired the second go-round?
Why is everyone trashing this movie?
Buster_B23 November 2004
I tried to rent this flick a bunch of times, but a copy was never available at the video store. So, I just broke down and bought it. Got tired of waiting. Anyhow, I thought it was pretty good. I mean, it was low budget and all, but so what? It was creepy, fun and different. I liked that not-so-Hollywood look. These days everyone's so spoiled with how they make big, expensive movies look. "Halloween" doesn't look as good as most movies out nowadays, and everyone loves that. So, what's the difference? I think I know. Everyone blasting this movie is bummed because they were taken in by the slick cover art and the "Lions Gate" name. And now, because the movie itself isn't as slick as Scream, or The Ring, everyone wants to blame the filmmakers. Well, for those who don't know, I'm pretty sure they don't oversee that stuff. If you wanna blame somebody for taking your money, blame the guy who made the art work. Seriously...I bet if someone handed you a blank disc in a brown paper bag and told you to watch it, you'd be pleasantly surprised with what you got. It's all about the presentation. I bet you're the same folks who bought all those Dracula, Wolfman and Mummy movies because the packaging was cool.
Anyway, it seems to me this is just a cool little flick by some unknown who's trying to make movies. That's it. I suggest everyone who initially hated it open their minds, accept it for what it is and watch it again. I bet you'll feel differently.
Anyway, it seems to me this is just a cool little flick by some unknown who's trying to make movies. That's it. I suggest everyone who initially hated it open their minds, accept it for what it is and watch it again. I bet you'll feel differently.
A very cool idea and a great effort!(spoilers!!)
afilms-14 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
It was actually refreshing to see a movie shot on digital video!! However Paying attention to the lighting more to maybe set better mood would have been good. The graininess of the picture took away from the over all quality of it. A little more lighting and iris play would have eliminated that problem for sure. My only other suggestion is that seeing less is sometimes more. A little less of the dead Dixon body walking around would of added more suspense as well selective creatively lit shots of the dead guy would have hidden the not so good zombie make-up. (The make-up artist was very good, but Good convincing zombie make-up is very hard to do with limited resources.) I am very impressed with the fact this movie got distributed in to Blockbuster stores!!! What a feat for low budget movie makers!! Good effort.
This student film gets an F
navarino5 December 2004
Without any doubt, this was the absolute worst movie I have ever rented. I absolutely am shocked that Blockbuster would offer shelf space to such an amateurish, student-quality film. Forget the R rating; this film gets an F.
To be as fair as possible, the general plot idea about an agoraphobic trapped in her haunted apartment presents a novel dilemma, so interesting we decided to rent the movie. But that is where any promise of a good or even average movie ends. While there are a few (very few) moments that, if properly developed, would have been truly frightening, nothing ever develops. The story meanders with superfluous characters and disjointed scenes. Overall, I could not shake the feeling that the cast and crew believed this movie could be another Blair Witch Project. It isn't by any stretch.
Perhaps it was the rush to get the movie finished, or perhaps the script was not fully developed prior to shooting, or perhaps the producers should have spent more time finding a lead actor with some actual acting talent, whatever the reason, the end product is truly horrific--for all the wrong reasons.
To be as fair as possible, the general plot idea about an agoraphobic trapped in her haunted apartment presents a novel dilemma, so interesting we decided to rent the movie. But that is where any promise of a good or even average movie ends. While there are a few (very few) moments that, if properly developed, would have been truly frightening, nothing ever develops. The story meanders with superfluous characters and disjointed scenes. Overall, I could not shake the feeling that the cast and crew believed this movie could be another Blair Witch Project. It isn't by any stretch.
Perhaps it was the rush to get the movie finished, or perhaps the script was not fully developed prior to shooting, or perhaps the producers should have spent more time finding a lead actor with some actual acting talent, whatever the reason, the end product is truly horrific--for all the wrong reasons.
the absolute WORST!
jgraziano218 July 2008
Crummy music,horrible acting and bad directing align themselves in a way that I could never have imagined to be possible. Scenes where a simple shot of two persons speaking to each other were clumsily "over- directed" by quick cutting back and forth between the two to the point where I was getting dizzy. What's even more pathetic is that even the makeup sucked in this movie. The ghost makeup made the actor appear as a demented version of a dude from Blue Man Group. The Elizabeth Dean character had so much blush applied in some scenes that you could swear the she had just been involved in a bitch- slapping session.Anyone who thinks this is even SOMEWHAT remotely watchable needs their head examined. This effort is so lame and unprofessional I was actually chuckling from the very beginning. I enjoy low budget pics but this stoops to an all-time low in cinema. Pure excrement. Only to be viewed with a trusty can of Lysol, yes, it stinks that bad.
Most Boring Film Ever
jprappe3692 May 2006
Its a pity you cant give this film a zero or -1 cause that si what it deserves, i think that this is definitely the worst film i have ever seen ever in history, the whole storyline is absolutely B*llocks and the attempt to make a horror film is completely forgotten as the film progresses. the acting is by far the worst amateur acting i have ever seen, every line is forced out and each member of the cast is really, really bad at showing emotion. half way through the film i sat there dertermined to watch the film to the end, not because i was struggling to stay awake or anything like that, but simply to see if the film would at all improve just slightly. the fact this film is meant to be a horror is a joke as the attempt to make it at all scary is thrown out the window with in the first five minutes. not only am i disappointed with the film, in fact I'm disgusted that any video store would even stock this film and be willing to rent it out to innocent film lovers, all stores that choose to rent this film out should have this film in a large case with a 20ft warning sign that says " Please understand that by watching this film you are not only wasting your hard earned money but even worse you are putting yourself through what will be years of torture and torment at the realisation that at the end of this film you would have lost about 2 hours of your life that you will never get back, please approach film with great caution, also we don't do refunds.p.s. WATCH AT YOUR OWN RISK." HONESTLY though this is one hell of a boring film, i actually felt physically weak by the end of just watching it. please don't watch this film as it is extremely bad.thank you for taking my advice.
A Ghost of an Idea
ghoulieguru11 November 2004
This probably looked really good on paper. An agoraphobic girl finds out that she's living in a haunted house. I guess that's one way of solving the age-old question for haunted house movies, "Why don't they just leave?" The problem is that the protagonist is completely unengaging. I don't know any agoraphobics. Well, I guess I wouldn't, would I? But it does make it pretty difficult to relate to your main character when she's kinda crazy to begin with. That, on top of the poor video quality and the fact that it quickly turns into a run of the mill haunted house story make it a misfire. It just goes to show you, and interesting tagline doesn't necessarily make an interesting movie.
Absolute Dreck
jaywest-216 May 2005
Why anyone would be at all willing to defend this piece of tripe is beyond me. Is that a rude statement, designed to evoke a defensive response in people with poor taste in films - or no taste at all? No. It is, quite simply, the statement of a fact: I do not understand why anyone would enjoy this film.
I've no idea what the film was shot on, but the video quality is equivalent to that of 1.5 hours worth of America's Funniest Home Videos. The music was god-awful, repetitive and annoying. Who would actually LISTEN to this stuff? And, the acting. Here is where this pile truly shines. Every line seems forced and awkward, read or poorly memorized instead of being acted. Any casting director who worked on this film would be forced into suicide after viewing it, so I can agree with another poster who took the opinion that these actors are the director's friends, or friends of friends.
What about the story? Well... what about it? There's really nothing to talk about here. Only the first 20 minutes or so of the film have anything at all to do with ghosts or "ghost watching." After that it's all exposition involving characters we know nothing about due to extremely poor characterization. Then again, I guess good characterization isn't really possible when the film is acted by people who would merely call that a "big word," and not attempt to understand its meaning.
Do not waste your time with this piece of dreck. The music, story, filming, acting, lighting, sound... it's all absolutely terrible. $4 for a rental was, quite simply, the worst $4 I have ever spent.
I've no idea what the film was shot on, but the video quality is equivalent to that of 1.5 hours worth of America's Funniest Home Videos. The music was god-awful, repetitive and annoying. Who would actually LISTEN to this stuff? And, the acting. Here is where this pile truly shines. Every line seems forced and awkward, read or poorly memorized instead of being acted. Any casting director who worked on this film would be forced into suicide after viewing it, so I can agree with another poster who took the opinion that these actors are the director's friends, or friends of friends.
What about the story? Well... what about it? There's really nothing to talk about here. Only the first 20 minutes or so of the film have anything at all to do with ghosts or "ghost watching." After that it's all exposition involving characters we know nothing about due to extremely poor characterization. Then again, I guess good characterization isn't really possible when the film is acted by people who would merely call that a "big word," and not attempt to understand its meaning.
Do not waste your time with this piece of dreck. The music, story, filming, acting, lighting, sound... it's all absolutely terrible. $4 for a rental was, quite simply, the worst $4 I have ever spent.
- J
One of the worst films I've ever seen.
zambonis22 November 2004
I rented this movie based on the glowing review on this site. Was the review written by the director's himself? Or perhaps his mother. I can't imagine anyone else giving such a favourable review to this film.
This is not only one of the worst horror movies I've ever seen, it's also one of the worst movies of any kind that I've ever seen (and I've seen some pretty bad films).
Unfortunately it looks like the success of The Blair Witch Project has encouraged other amateur filmmakers to make low-budget horror movies, and they aren't letting an idiotic script and talentless actors prevent them from forging ahead.
Watching this movie was such a complete waste of time that the local video store allowed me to rent another film for free by way of an apology.
This is not only one of the worst horror movies I've ever seen, it's also one of the worst movies of any kind that I've ever seen (and I've seen some pretty bad films).
Unfortunately it looks like the success of The Blair Witch Project has encouraged other amateur filmmakers to make low-budget horror movies, and they aren't letting an idiotic script and talentless actors prevent them from forging ahead.
Watching this movie was such a complete waste of time that the local video store allowed me to rent another film for free by way of an apology.
Garbage
JasonsLists4 February 2008
Bad editing, no style, no acting... just terrible.
Was this made by a high school student? A bad high school student? This isn't bad in a good or ironic way, just bad as in you really don't need to waste your time with this.
I find it odd that any IMDb users gave this a rating of more than one star.
I watched this with two friends of mine and we all agreed on how crappy this movie is. We watched a bit of the special features, the gag reel. Also very bad! Not funny or amusing in any way. They were just takes of scenes they didn't use.
The story seemed like a good one, actually I read about this movie and really looked forward to watching it but what a mistake that was.
Was this made by a high school student? A bad high school student? This isn't bad in a good or ironic way, just bad as in you really don't need to waste your time with this.
I find it odd that any IMDb users gave this a rating of more than one star.
I watched this with two friends of mine and we all agreed on how crappy this movie is. We watched a bit of the special features, the gag reel. Also very bad! Not funny or amusing in any way. They were just takes of scenes they didn't use.
The story seemed like a good one, actually I read about this movie and really looked forward to watching it but what a mistake that was.
Gotta give 'em props for this haunting straight-to-DVD chiller.
ThrownMuse9 May 2005
Laura is an agoraphobic who works from her laptop and has her friend Nikki run all of her errands for her. Her psychological disease doesn't seem to affect her life much, except for the fact that she answers the door with a large kitchen knife. But soon she notices that things in her apartment are being arranged, and after one terrifying incident she is convinced her apartment is haunted. Desperate and unable to leave her home, she seeks the help of Elizabeth, a hokey online ghosthunter.
There's a lot to dislike about "GhostWatcher," but this is really one of the better no-budge horror movies distributed by Lion's Gate that I have had the pleasure of watching. Now that I think of it, I found this haunted house flick is more entertaining than any of the recent theatrically released ones (The Grudge, Darkness, Amityville). The plot is original (if you discount Copycat), and although it isn't exploited to its full potential, there are some damn fine twists that keep the story interesting. The story structure is not that different from The Ring. Unfortunately, there are also some stupid plot elements that should have been removed or tweaked. Some of the scares are effectively frightening (there is one scene that should get to anyone who allows themselves to be scared), while others are silly, mostly due to poor make-up effects. The lighting in this film is surprisingly impressive and often comes across as influenced by Argento. The acting is another hit-or-miss factor, but it is refreshing that the leads are all capable women, and women that look very normal. In fact, the movie looks like a big group of friends got together with limited resources to make a horror film. But make no mistake, this is a good ghost story, not a belligerent Troma flick. These folks are talented and know what they're doing. While the score is well done, my biggest complaint is the music used in the film, which consists of generic aggro-rock that disrupts the overall tone of the movie. I would recommend this to anyone who has an open mind about very low-budge horror. My Rating: 6.5/10.
There's a lot to dislike about "GhostWatcher," but this is really one of the better no-budge horror movies distributed by Lion's Gate that I have had the pleasure of watching. Now that I think of it, I found this haunted house flick is more entertaining than any of the recent theatrically released ones (The Grudge, Darkness, Amityville). The plot is original (if you discount Copycat), and although it isn't exploited to its full potential, there are some damn fine twists that keep the story interesting. The story structure is not that different from The Ring. Unfortunately, there are also some stupid plot elements that should have been removed or tweaked. Some of the scares are effectively frightening (there is one scene that should get to anyone who allows themselves to be scared), while others are silly, mostly due to poor make-up effects. The lighting in this film is surprisingly impressive and often comes across as influenced by Argento. The acting is another hit-or-miss factor, but it is refreshing that the leads are all capable women, and women that look very normal. In fact, the movie looks like a big group of friends got together with limited resources to make a horror film. But make no mistake, this is a good ghost story, not a belligerent Troma flick. These folks are talented and know what they're doing. While the score is well done, my biggest complaint is the music used in the film, which consists of generic aggro-rock that disrupts the overall tone of the movie. I would recommend this to anyone who has an open mind about very low-budge horror. My Rating: 6.5/10.
waste of time
funnygal22_818 January 2005
I am dumber after having watched this movie. The plot, actors, story, and music all sucked. I know this is a low budget movie, but couldn't they go to some local college and get some people who can actually act. The plot was stupid,slow and really didn't make a lot of sense. The entire time I watched the movie, I made fun of the acting, and was never once scared. The thing that made the most mad was that the cover of the movie jacket had nothing at all to do with the movie. Totally fooled me into spending $4 on this film. The longer I watched, the more convinced I became that this was someone's final project for film making 101. And, I would give them an F!At one point, I thought someone was playing a joke on me, and put the wrong movie in the case. Don't waste your time on this, unless you are a masochist.
Great movie!
fltn323 June 2003
GhostWatcher is a great horror film. It's very scary, with alot of good "jumps" and goosebump moments. It's an "edge of your seat" movie. The story is intelligent and well thought-out. All three actresses deliver terrific performances. This is the first film for aspiring writer/director David A. Cross, and he's done a fantastic job. The movie has only been in limited release (a few horror fests, some individual showings at area movie theatres)...I'd love to see it released on DVD & video, so more people can experience it. If you love scary movies, you'll love GhostWatcher.
Slow sleeper turns scary.
michaelRokeefe14 June 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Had my doubts at first, but then slowly but surely GHOST WATCHER got worth a watch. Appears to be shot on a low budget, but story kept edging to something good. Her parents didn't survive a tragic Halloween leaving Laura Kove(Jillian Byrnes)agoraphobic and afraid of just about everything. She refuses to leave her apartment and even starts working from home. Her sister Nikki(Marianne Hayden)makes periodic trips to the apartment with supplies. All the locks on the door is not going to help when Laura believes her apartment is hosting a ghost. Laura finds a ghost hunter online and employs her to rid the visitor from the apartment. The frightened Laura doesn't realize that her ghost hunter, Elizabeth Dean(Jennifer Servary), is actually a fraud and is only going through the motions to rip her off. Events will get so scary that even Miss Dean will become frightened and a believer of a haunting stalker. Special effects aren't totally bad; and some sequences and images do cause some fright. Supporting cast includes: Kevin Quinn, Ray Schueler and Kevin Floyd
Absolute garbage!
the_duke-112 December 2004
Wow, what an awful film. This was recommended by a Blockbuster employee who was probably the director. To call the script amateurish is a compliment. It has so many holes, you can dive a truck through it. The actors (obviously friends of the director) clearly have never seen the light of an acting class. In fact, the only scary thing about this movie is the acting.
I work in the entertainment industry and was checking IMDb to see who the casting director is so I could call him/her and chastise them for this abomination. But wait...there isn't a credited casting director. I've seen student films that provoke more thought than this boring tripe. Lion's Gate is known for distributing rubbish but this takes the cake. Even the "gag" reel suffers. It isn't even a gag reel. It's outtakes of untalented actors getting upset with themselves because they can't act. Thanks for sharing how unprofessional and without merit the cast and crew are! The music sounds like the blips and bleeps my Atari game system used to spit out in the 80's. The metal songs are "yarly" and dated. I will say that the film is consistent...consistent at being awful in every aspect. Thankfully, Blockbuster gave me my money back (you may not be so lucky). This film makes Battlefield Earth look like Citizen Kane. Complete utter garbage.
I work in the entertainment industry and was checking IMDb to see who the casting director is so I could call him/her and chastise them for this abomination. But wait...there isn't a credited casting director. I've seen student films that provoke more thought than this boring tripe. Lion's Gate is known for distributing rubbish but this takes the cake. Even the "gag" reel suffers. It isn't even a gag reel. It's outtakes of untalented actors getting upset with themselves because they can't act. Thanks for sharing how unprofessional and without merit the cast and crew are! The music sounds like the blips and bleeps my Atari game system used to spit out in the 80's. The metal songs are "yarly" and dated. I will say that the film is consistent...consistent at being awful in every aspect. Thankfully, Blockbuster gave me my money back (you may not be so lucky). This film makes Battlefield Earth look like Citizen Kane. Complete utter garbage.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
