Lost After Dark (2015) User Reviews

Run of the mill slasher film

[chrismackey1972 · 4/10 · 19 August 2015]

It was an okay cheap horror film. Nothing great and nothing new to see. I won't spoil it, but the first death was shocking; I didn't expect that. The kills were okay. Even though Toby wasn't the main character, I was surprised he turned out to be so likable. They don't usually make a character the audience will care about in these types of movies.\ Robert Patrick's character was silly. I don't know if he was hurting for money, or he just wanted to be in a horror film.

The bad guy was stupid. You've seen his sort of "can't die bad guy" in multiple cheap horror films.

I gave this a 4-star rating. If you must watch all the slasher films out there, give this a viewing, but don't expect much. However, there are horror films that are far worse than this.

Lost After Dark: Old school surprise

[Platypuschow · 6/10 · 18 November 2017]

Many would have you believe that the slasher genre is dead, they'll tell you that if it weren't for Scream (1996) that it would have died a lot earlier.

I partially agree, it has been struggling for many years but occasionally something comes along that renews your faith in it. To an extent this is such a film.

With a real retro feel this is a paint by numbers slasher but written by someone who decided to colour blind it's viewers. What I mean by that is the film is outstandingly unpredictable and rarely goes the way you expect.

8 youngsters steal a school bus and drive to a secluded area to party but when it breaks down they find themselves under attack from a psychotic cannibal who proceeds to pick them off one by one.

The lack of originality damages it but the surprise writing, competent cast and delivery makes up for it.

A good enough watch for slasher fans.

The Good:

Couple of genuine surprises

Some decent writing

Real old school feel

Robert Patrick

Truly unpredictable

The Bad:

Wesley's afro can't have been real? Right?

Tad too dark

Reel missing thing was dumb

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

I don't want to get eaten by a cannonball either!

When the *sshole of the group has the right idea and nobody listens to him does that make the viewer an *sshole to for siding with him?

Intentionally retro doesn't make it a classic homage or good movie in general

[quincytheodore · 4/10 · 22 August 2015]

Capitalizing on 80's slasher genre can work as a premise of satiric horror, but it doesn't excuse outdated delivery such as stiff acting and poor pacing. The idea is to put myriad of old horror antics in attempt to create gore as well as slight comedy. Unfortunately, it's not even better than actual 80's cheap movie.

Plot is as simple as they come, a group of students venture to the woods in the most dire condition possible, then meets a psycho killer. It'd be a decent popcorn flick if not for, mostly, the jarring acting. The movie goes on a way to depict stereotypes, making the actors spew nonsense in incredibly overly dramatic way. Some of the scenes resemble blooper of actual classic slasher or cheesy commercial. Audience already knows that it's a throwback, so there's no reason to force every smirk or gasp to be ridiculous.

The entire thing looks plastic, down to the script which not only sounds random but incredibly pretentious. So, when the characters talk about fate or other serious issue, it's far from believable. Not to mention the movie spends quite some time for these characters, especially on first half, to make audience invest of stale personalities. Granted, one or two might be relatable, but as they interact with other characters the shallow performance underwhelms any distinct trait.

At the very least, it does partially deliver the expected gore. There are a few timidly shocking moments, but even those are simple stabbing or head crushing, certainly nothing you haven't seen before. For fans it may be mildly amusing, casual viewer might not be so lenient.

Lost After Dark tries to give a homage, or cheap imitation of classic slasher, however it only trips and falls to the same flaws from three decades ago.

A very uninspired and generic slasher.

[kensai-5 · 3/10 · 26 September 2016]

The director is competent, the actors are mostly doing a fair enough job and the gore effects are probably what you would expect from a low-budget slasher referencing the 80s. But the script is bad enough to outweigh the good, significantly.

It seems that people are nowadays so used to movies being constructed by formula, retelling the same old crap, over and over, that they immediately consider a movie "smart" when it does something a little different from the others. Yes, the movie does have a few minor surprises. But other than that, most of the tiring clichés and overused tropes are still there. None of the "victims" do anything intelligent or reasonable. The killer could be no more generic, the story no less interesting.

There are a few well shot and creepy visuals, but those were, unfortunately, not the focus of the movie and thus were neglected in favor of uninspired slasher action.

Homage to 80s "slasher" flicks does not work.

[djangozelf-12351 · 3/10 · 19 August 2015]

And that's not to say it's all bad,the over all story is done good enough.

It makes you wait way to long for any real horror and when you get to that point it's not that exciting.

The whole 80's feeling and references also gets boring pretty fast and is also not adequate to save the movie.

At the end of the movie I was even wandering if the whole "placing it in the 80's"was really necessary.

I give it some stars cos it's not a real waste but it also don't add nothing either.

The actors looked to old for the roles they were playing and it was a lot of overacting.

The killer did not have much of an identity and most of the other characters were not very likable.

Take it or leave it.

But,for what it's worth.

I'll never watch it again.

Nicely set up, but ultimately too simple and shallow to be very entertaining... Blu-ray: Good A:9 V:8

[lathe-of-heaven · 5/10 · 23 August 2015]

I pretty much agree with the others here (4 so far) The director did a nice job of setting up the characters and the general feeling of the era pretty well, but ultimately and unfortunately there really just wasn't much of a story to go along with it.

The ironic thing is that usually it is SPECIFICALLY the acting itself that is so atrocious in these low-budget Horror films and many times completely ruins what could have been a good story (please see my review of the recent Gawd-Awful 'HONEYMOON' for example) But... in this case, the characters and the acting itself were just fine for the type of film it is, BUT everything else just didn't really add up to much. So, in this case it turned out kind of backwards from the way many other films seem to go...

As mentioned by others, Robert Patrick was good in his role and the girl's Dad was just about right. Too bad... because almost ALWAYS, it is precisely the terrible acting or characters that are so grating in films like this, but these ones here are actually fairly decent compared to most. So, it leaves you feeling that you really would have liked to see them in the context of a much better story, but that is just the way it seemed to turn out, in my lowly and wretched opinion.

Heh... I kind of feel that my REVIEW is rather shallow too, but quite honestly, there just isn't much more to say. I gave it a '5' only because I thought the setting, characters, and actors were pretty decent, otherwise the story overall would have gotten less...

So, basically.... move along home... nothing to see here...

Decent genuine throwback but needs some fine tuning.

[acidburn-10 · 6/10 · 22 August 2015]

I came across this recently and being a massive fan of slashers that I am, this intrigued me given it's throwback feel, okay a lot of these have come out over the last decade or so, and a lot of them don't work, like looking way too glossy and over produced to have that classic era feel, meaning very few pull it off successfully, as everything else like plot, effects and cast all fall short. But in this case, I am quite happy to say does have that vintage feel pulled off to perfection, and does have decent gore effects and a great cast.

But what stops this from being a classic piece is that the movie itself does kinda fall apart in some places and can't help but feel that there's something missing. For now I am gonna talk about the positives, firstly the production design, the sets and the 80's fashion is top notch and the cinematography is simply stunning, the retro look and feel really does transport you to that time and era. The creepy farmhouse was a brilliant setting and does have an unsettling tone to it, as does the killers who while not an iconic slasher villain; he does have a creepy presence.

Also the cast of teens really make this work and always love the stereotype roles in these movies, but in this case they are not the usual bland run of the mill forgettable teens, they were very decent. Kendra Leigh Timmins who plays Adrienne the virginal good girl was really good and likable in her role and made me really feel when events took a total unexpected turn. Robert Patrick as the principal was totally silly and over the top, but fun. Jesse Carnacho as the fat kid Tobe was really likable and showed depth to his role. Elise Gatien, who plays the best friend role Jamie, would be a disposable character in any other type of film, but here she really steps it up and becomes a really good believable forefront character. Justin Kelly who plays the kind hearted jock Sean was really decent and should have lasted longer, Stephen James as the black kid was just okay, didn't really shine amongst the rest. Also Alexander Calvert was fun as the jerk bad boy character. Then finally Mark Wiede did good as the killer Joad, while not as memorable as other slasher villains, he was menacing enough.

Now for the lesser qualities, firstly despite a good set up, I just didn't feel a sense of dread or tension throughout the movie, while it was mostly predictable, apart from the first of the teens to die, which did totally take me by surprise, but apart from that it just became a bit slow paced and lagged in some parts. For a start the situation that these teens were in, they could have easily just left the area at any given time, but instead stayed around, just didn't feel realistic to me, if they were somehow trapped at the farmhouse, then the tension could have been cranked up a bit for me.

All in all yes "Lost After Dark" is a very decent throwback retro slasher that should definitely be looked at, but just needs a bit of fine tuning, and adds in some chills and tension.

Don't be fooled

[rebecca_rinehart · 2/10 · 28 November 2015]

Disclaimer: I am a huge fan of 80s slasher movies so it doesn't take much to impress me: this was BORING. I spent 4 bucks on the Amazon rental and regretted it from the beginning. If you want to see a movie that conjures 80s slasher nostalgia with substance and entertainment, watch The Final Girls (mix of nostalgia, horror, and heart that is perfectly mixed). This one has some "cute points" with the naming of characters (e.g. Adrienne, Tobe, Jamie) but beyond that, there is nothing. You can never tell if it is trying to be a scary parody or horror movie with comedic elements. Heck, it takes forever to get to any kind of blood! And when it does come, you don't even care...you don't even hate the dumb characters enough to care if they live or die. You just wait for the end credits so you can pop in Friday the 13th Part 2 and see a REAL slasher movie.

This movie is simple and has its own place!

[breakmycurse · 7/10 · 24 August 2015]

I gotta say loved it.It one of its kind brought in recent years.Views can easily feel themselves back in 80s.The atmosphere is very well felt like the director is not capable of making this movie with all the bells and whistles he has to play with in 2014.I mean no unnecessary visual effects were used like its supposed to be.So it is a success.

You have to let it all go in your mind before you watch the movie and watch it without any extreme expectations.Then you will find the great enjoyment which the director is giving to you.Straight movie in short.It should be unfair to compare to the other titles because of its uniqueness for recent years.

Last words from me,I also really enjoyed the language and the script.

Homage to 1980s style American slasher horror

[sj_stewart · 5/10 · 9 March 2016]

Set in Michigan in 1984 this movie pays homage to the 1980s style American slasher horror genre and stars Robert Patrick of X-Files and True Blood fame.

In typical US teen fashion some kids steal a school bus in order to take a 'secret' getaway to a hunting cabin in the woods to party, unfortunately they run out of gas in the middle of nowhere (surprise, surprise!). The situation soon takes a nasty turn when they trespass through an old house that they believe to be abandoned, and are soon stalked and murdered by a cannibalistic killer.

Lost After Dark is just an average slasher horror, bringing in nothing fresh or exciting, and despite the seemingly silly inclusion of Robert Patrick's annoying character, it's actually not THAT bad of a movie. However, it does get a bit stupid and predictable towards the end.

Lost After Dark is still worth a watch for those who enjoy 80s slasher style horrors.

For more reviews please visit: www.scifikingdom.co.uk

Too much teeth.

[nogodnomasters · 8/10 · 26 February 2018]

The film takes place in Broomfield, Michigan 1984 (filmed in Canada, okay.). GO LANCERS! Four teen couples take off for a nearby cabin, but run out of gas along the way, making their way to the minor subplot home of the proverbial feral slasher cannibal. The opening of the film attempts to do an old grindhouse film by having film marks ingrained in it, something that didn't work really great in "Planet Terror." However, instead of doing the entire feature this way, they just do the opening scene, while the rest of the film is in crisp digital, except for one critical scene where they pull the "scene missing" film burning nonsense. The movie uses stuff from the 80's such as a Rubik's Cube, mix cassette tape, LPs decorating the wall, T-shirts, magazines, clothes with studs, pot that requires a few joints to get high, and a picture of Reagan. Robert Patrick plays a politically incorrect principal. Perhaps he was another 80's throwback.

The film had the token Black Guy (Stephan James) and virgin (Kendra Leigh Timmins) so we know who dies first and who survives...right? After they discover the slasher, the plan is to wait it out in his house until morning rather than to run away in different directions. Otherwise the film would be too short. It does contain some humor, but only when you consider it as a spoof of 80's slashers.

Guide; F-bomb. Implied oral sex. No nudity.

back to the early eighties

[trashgang · 7/10 · 3 September 2015]

People who are still under their 30's shouldn't watch this because they won't understand it at all. This is made for those who grew up in the eighties or earlier. Yes, this will take you back to the heydays of the slashers.

It takes a while before things go awry but once it does it's pure entertainment. It isn't that gory after all but it will satisfy those who love slashers. There's a bit of humour added with the reel missing when the goriest stuff should be shown. For me it was a mediocre flick, why, because it do misses a few typical slasher stuff, there's no point of view to see, only once but it didn't work out because the victims already saw their killer standing in front of them. Secondly the necessary nudity was missing too. But hey, it still is an ode to those flicks and it even shows with a cameo by Halloween 2 director Rick Rosenthal as the sheriff.

You don't watch it for the performances, you watch it for the slashing and there are a few to catch. Said it before, for the lovers of the good old slashers.

Gore 1,5/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 2,5/5 Story 2,5/5 Comedy 0/5

Weak Slasher Flick!

[gwnightscream · 3/10 · 11 June 2017]

This 2015 horror features 8 teenage friends who decide to ditch their high school dance and have a party of their own. They borrow a school bus which runs out of gas and look for the nearest residence. They find an old house and become stalked by a cannibalistic killer lurking there. What can I say? This is a weak slasher flick that tries to pay tribute/homage to 70's & 80's films of the genre. It starts OK, but falls flat. The characters aren't really likable, some scenes are very dark and the deaths aren't that impressive. Robert Patrick (The Faculty) appears as an ex-army soldier turned vice principal. I'd probably watch this once only if you're a fan of slasher or Grindhouse films.

I don't want to be eaten by a cannonball....

[FlashCallahan · 2/10 · 6 September 2015]

A group of teens sneak out of their high school dance to cruise around and have some unsupervised fun.

When their car runs out of gas on a deserted road, they discover an old farmhouse and the cannibal killer living inside.....

With the 1996 horror gem Scream, Wes Craven reinvented the horror genre for a third time. Before that groundbreaking movie, the nineties horror market were stuffed with straight to video slasher movies that were trying to recapture the stalk and slash gold that graced the eighties blood splattered cinema screens.

But with genius, there were also a slew of copycat style horror films, and it doesn't take a genius to know that they weren't very good, especially ones that knew the urban legend you told last summer. Simply because they were missing the irony.

Just lately, the horror genre is beginning to wane again, and this movie doesn't do the genre any favours.

Trying to homage the eighties style slasher, it misses the point of those films many times during its excruciating running time. The gang of teens are your atypical pack of gender, jock, fat comedian, your token ethnic person, and of course,the girl who's character is fleshed out just that little more than the rest (usually the heroine).

And just as your guessing who will get killed first to try and soften the mundaity of this rubbish, the makers do something very daring, and make you take notice. But then, as expected,they lose their bottle and decide to play it safe......to play it boring.

Robert Patrick turns up looking hideously old, putting in his best impression of the bald bloke from Back To The Future, but he's hardly in it, even though he's the best thing.

So all in all, it's a real waste of an opportunity, in the right hands, it could have, should have kick started a new trend in slasher movies, but no, it just hammers another nail in its coffin.

In fear that now Craven has left us, and Carpenter has gone AWOL, the horror genre will be just found footage movies.

Which is a shame, because through my journey of trudging through such abhorrent rubbish like this, I do come across a few gems.

Not many though.

Weak throwback

[Leofwine_draca · 3/10 · 11 December 2018]

LOST AFTER DARK is a throwback to the slasher film of the 1980s, made on an indie budget, with a bunch of random teenage characters stranded at a remote cabin and finding themselves prey to the machinations of an equally random psychopath with murder in mind. While I appreciate this film's honouring of the genre at its most enjoyable, the resultant film is a mere weak imitation of what's come before. The performances are undistinguished - the reliable Robert Patrick aside - the gore perfunctory, the suspense non-existent.

Lost in the Dark

[kosmasp · 5/10 · 1 March 2016]

A throwback slasher movie that is reminiscent of the 70s but especially the 80s. Grindhouse is sort of back, because of people who loved the movies back then, bringing them back to life (if you'll excuse the pun). With all the little things and flaws that made those movies ... what they are. Like bad lightning or missing reels (an inside joke sort of, though might be confusing for some who never had that experience with a movie before) and things like that.

The special (blood) effects are pretty decent for a low budget movie, the characters as shallow as you'd expect (also very bad choices, but that's to be expected to). You can have fun with this, if you feel nostalgic or if you're generally a fan of slasher movies

80s Slasher Nostalgia – the Cheesy and Fun Kind

[DareDevilKid · 7/10 · 8 September 2015]

Reviewed by: Dare Devil Kid (DDK)

Rating: 3.2/5 stars

"Lost After Dark" is adorable. That may not be the comment the filmmakers of a horror movie are looking for, but it suits the tone of this particular movie anyway. It's shot in the style of cheesy '80s horror movies – the "Friday the 13th" and "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" knockoffs that we love for their sheer audacity and ability to poke fun at themselves.

Adrienne (Kendra Leigh Timmins) and her friends ditch the high school dance to spend time alone at her cabin. She, Jamie (Elise Gatien), Marilyn (Eve Harlow), and Heather (Lanie McAuley) all hope to hook up with Sean (Justin Kelly), Johnnie (Alexander Calvert), Wesley (Stephan James), and Tobe (Jesse Camacho) in some combination or the other, and it would also be Adrienne's first time. But the school bus they steal breaks down and they end up in a murder house running for their lives. Also the vice principal, Mr. Cunningham a.k.a. Mr. C (Robert Patrick) catches them leaving, and chases after them. The cast is just lovely at playing their archetypes: the virgin, the slut, the jock, the A- hole, the nerdy best friend, etc. Pacing gets a tad uneven when the makers dedicate too much time showing Mr. Cunningham pursuing the kids, but the payoff is worth it and Patrick kills it.

Writer/director Ian Kessner along with co-writer Bo Ransdell get the tone exactly right. "Lost After Dark" is a loving homage that is all sincere, no snark. It does break the rules for some clever twists, but it never makes fun of the horror movies it's inspired from. Rather, the film celebrates those movies in a way that shows we don't have to give this style up just yet – it can still be as much fun as it used to be. You might also recognize a few of the gags from "Grindhouse" but they are arguably better done here. The picture is treated with an effect to simulate a dirty film print, but it's minor and only in the beginning and to simulate splices and reel changes.

Along with being as brutal and graphic as any other straight-faced horror movie out there, "Lost After Dark" is also an intriguing attempt to recreate the style of a slasher straight out of the 80s, and for the better part succeeds in its attempt.

Meh

[gothic__vamp · 3/10 · 31 July 2022]

Pros: Robert Patrick is getting work

Cons: unoriginal, so dark you can't see most of it, generic, can't decide if it's meta, trying to be 80s with zero charm, cannot care about the characters, generic stereotypes, music is bad.

Back in time to the golden age of the slasher subgenre!

[jp_91 · 7/10 · 6 August 2021]

A good tribute film to the slasher subgenre without being a masterpiece. The setting is wonderful, the cinematography is great, the acting is decent, the special effects are well done and the director of the film knows what he is doing: an eighties slasher movie for the 2010's. It is not a masterpiece but a very good movie.

Mediocre Slasher Dressed Up As A Homage To The 80's

[HorrorOverEverything · 4/10 · 11 September 2015]

I love 80's slasher movies, so the trailer for this this flick really caught my eye. I loved the idea of making a homage to 80's slashers without being a full blown spoof.

So once we are introduced to all our characters things start to move at a snails pace, the film creates some chemistry between a few of the characters but then completely ditches that in an effort to surprise us with the kill order. I like that they decided first kill off the characters that you would expect to make it to the end, but they kill everyone off pretty rapidly the kill order really doesn't matter.

That's the main thing I disliked about this, things really don't get going until the last 20 minutes and when they finally do it all just happens so fast, characters are killed off left and right and not really in any interesting or cool ways. It's like they focused way too much on trying to make this feel 80's but then remembered at the last minute that this is suppose to be a slasher movie.

I think most people will dislike this movie, there isn't really a whole lot to like. But I love slashers and I love 80's slashers even more so I enjoyed this a bit, still not a very good movie though.

4/10

Good old slasher

[swisslady7 · 9/10 · 15 August 2021]

I don't get the negative reviews at all! This is one of my favorite slashers! Takes you back to the glorious 80's! It's never boring at all. Of course it can't compete with Halloween and Friday the 13th, but doesn't need to either! I highly recommend this movie for everyone who loves the 80's slashers!

Some good, gory kills - plus Robert Patrick

[Stevieboy666 · 6/10 · 4 January 2020]

Slasher movie set in 1984. A group of high school friends steal a school bus and head off for a weekend away but when the vehicle runs out of fuel in the middle of nowhere they seek refuge in a seemingly abandoned old farm house. Needless to say somebody is still living there, and they have homicidal and cannibalistic tendencies! This is clearly meant to be an homage to the slasher movies of the late 1970's/early 1980's. In fact by 1984 the period known as the Golden Age of the slasher boom was pretty much over. Anyway I like the idea but sadly it is unconvincing, to me it looks like a film made in 2015 trying but failing to look 1984. It is simply impossible to replicate the feeling of all those great movies from the 80's, a period that I recall with much fondness. Plus there was no CGI then. Robert Patrick is in the cast, which is great, but doesn't help the 1984 cause. He was in Terminator 2 back in 1991, where he looked much younger than he does in Lost After Dark, which is set 7 years before T2, But that's just a personal thing for me! As a slasher movie it is pretty decent, we get all the stereotypical characters but a curve ball is delivered when one of the characters, who I wrongly assumed would make it to the finale, is one of the first to be killed out of the group. Apart from the obligatory opening kill the first half is pretty much gore free, a tad slow. But the second half makes up for this with plenty of gory deaths. Surprisingly no nudity. I picked this up dirt cheap on DVD and glad I did so, certainly give it another shot.

Not that clever a homage

[TheLittleSongbird · 3/10 · 20 August 2018]

Have nothing against slashers, far from it. Have actually been entertained and creeped out by a number of them. The 80s also saw some classic horror, and it was interesting for 'Lost After Dark' to intend to be a throwback homage to 80s slasher/horror. Not a new premise as such but one that did spark my interest a good deal.

'Lost After Dark' was one of those films sadly that had its moments and pros and started off quite well, but at the end of the day was not that clever, entertaining or creepy and suffered from taking a too serious approach and bringing nothing new to deliberately familiar elements. Not a waste of time certainly, there are far worse films out there that are far more amateurish and made the mistakes of insulting the intelligence or making one consider turning off. 'Lost After Dark' just isn't too good either and doesn't execute its premise very well.

The production values did have some atmosphere, some nice shots here. The film does start off unsettling and shows a lot of promise that sadly falls downhill quickly.

Jesse Carnacho and Elise Gatien do commendably in their roles, and Carnacho in particular did have some likeability.

Sadly the rest of the acting is poor, with a wildly over-acting Robert Patrick being irritating and the killer having no menace or personality to speak of. Did find myself getting behind the characters, did not mind the stereotypes, did mind that these stereotypes were bland and annoying. The film did so little with Stephen James' character, one questions why he's even there.

Furthermore, nothing here is clever, it's very predictable and run-of-the-mill stuff that has familiar tropes yet does nothing fresh or interesting with them. It takes itself far too seriously to be fun, in a film that cried out for some humorous tongue-in-cheek approach here and there. The pacing drags hard constantly and there is very little creepy and next to no suspense or anything creative or nail-biting. The inane quality of the dialogue is enough to make one vomit and it's tepidly directed throughout with no urgency in the drama and there is a sense that not much is at stake or one caring very much at what happens to them. The chemistry lacks sorely.

On the whole, weak. 3/10 Bethany Cox

This 80's Homage Flick Doesn't Work.

[Matt_Layden · 4/10 · 8 June 2016]

I thought that the film The Final Girls, which is an homage to 80's slasher flicks, embraced the genre almost perfectly, but played it too safe resulting in a mixed bag. Lost After Dark fares even worse, having zero comedy, zero fun and drags the viewer through complete boredom before the final credits rolls. The film is a chore to get through and rewards the viewer with absolutely nothing.

At their high school dance a group of friends decide to steal a school bus and go up to a family cabin for some fun. Their bus breaks down in the middle of nowhere and the kids find themselves being picked off one by one from a crazed cannibal killer. Who will survive? What will be left of them? And every other 80's horror tagline you can think of.

This film desperately needed to be played for laughs and the biggest mistake it makes is that it chooses to play everything seriously. It wants us to believe that this film could have actually been from the 80's. Yet it has none of the charm that those slasher films had, as bad as some of those movies were, they had a sense of charm. This film has zero, nada, nothing really going for it. Being intentionally retro does not equal a good film.

It purposely inserts the classic "film grain" to make it feel authentic. It never works. It even lamely incorporates the "missing reel" gag that worked to hilarious results in Grindhouse. Here it's a pathetic attempt to try and feel more genuine. It fails, miserably. Aesthetic failures aside, the script fares even worse.

It seems the only thing the writers know about are the clichéd horror stereotypes. We are given the jock, the token black guy, the nerd, slut, good-girl, etc. We are forced to listen to them spew inane dialogue back and forth in a sad attempt at building character. It never works and makes the film feel longer than it actually is. The entire first half of the film drags at a wickedly slow pace and the so-called pay off of kills doesn't ever reach its potential.

I will give the film some credit though, it surprised me with the initial death. That one moment where they manage to fool the audience and pull the rug out from under our feet is the only interesting moment in the entire film.

Grew up on films like this, but actually in the 80's

[ashjame-92510 · 4/10 · 24 August 2016]

I've got to say, as someone who grew up in the 80's watching almost every horror movie that came out (BIIIG thank you to sharing a room with my sister, who was 7 years older...) when I saw that they were calling this an homage to those movies I was very leery. One hour in I decided to, after years of using IMDb, make an account just to review the movie!! From the cheesy cliché characters to the cliché plot line.. Totally brought me back to those awful movies my sister would force me to watch growing up. The only thing I didn't really like was the overly played 'Nam vet (yes, also an awesome cliché!!!) Mr.C played by the sadly underused Robert Patrick! All in all, actually not to bad of a movie