I have to give this movie a 6/10 because this is a very decent film that deserves praise. I don't know why so many people hate it. For one the little evil character, Troll, has a personality. The kids have personality as well and they're not some stupid one-sided characters. There are funny jokes inserted in the dialogue and the people who occupy the apartment are funny too. Unlike some movies from the same era this one actually has pretty good special effects that are pretty scary too. Just wait till you see a guy turn into a bunch of plants! Thats gross, but its also good effects. Check this movie out and remember it has nothing to do with the really crappy movie Troll 2.
148 Reviews
Lame but Cult
claudio_carvalho17 March 2014
The Potter family has just moved to a rented apartment in San Francisco. Harry Potter Sr. (Michael Moriarty) and his wife Anne (Shelley Hack) are bringing the packages to the apartment and their son Harry Jr. (Noah Hathaway) and their little daughter Wendy Anne (Jenny Beck) stays on the sidewalk. Wendy goes to the laundry room, she meets the wicked troll Torok (Phil Fondacaro) that uses his magic ring to possess Wendy and to use her form to transform the dwellers and their apartment into other trolls and his kingdom. Harry Jr. feels that something is wrong with his sister and seeks out help with the good witch Eunice St. Clair (June Lockhart) that lives in the building.
"Troll" is another lame movie of creatures in the 80's but also a cult- movie. Michael Moriarty in the role of Harry Potter Sr. is so ridiculous that becomes funny. The symphony of the creatures singing in troll language is one of the best moments of this movie. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "Troll"
"Troll" is another lame movie of creatures in the 80's but also a cult- movie. Michael Moriarty in the role of Harry Potter Sr. is so ridiculous that becomes funny. The symphony of the creatures singing in troll language is one of the best moments of this movie. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "Troll"
Watch as a creature systematically takes over an apartment complex.
Aaron137511 February 2004
I rather liked this one a bit, though I can see from its score that I am in the minority in my opinion. Though at least most can agree this one is a lot better than the sequel. This movie has a family moving into a new apartment complex. Very quickly the little girl is taken by the title character and he takes her place. Throughout the movie the troll disguised as the little girl moves from one apartment to the next turning each room into a seemingly new dimension or something. The girl's brother has his suspicious and teams with this old woman to figure things out. The old woman seems to know a lot and she looks a lot better with her hair down. Soon the entire apartment becomes part of this world the troll is creating and the boy must finish it off because the old lady just is not in the position to help at the end. Rather fanciful and interesting...nothing to take to seriously, but I thought it was a rather good story and movie.
Oh the irony!
AlsExGal10 September 2016
This is a ridiculous fantasy/horror hybrid from Empire Pictures. Michael Moriarty stars as Harry Potter (!) who moves into an old apartment building with his wife (Shelley Hack) and two kids (Noah Hathaway and Jenny Beck). The young daughter finds a magical ring in the basement that unleashes the evil troll Torok, who begins to wreak magical mayhem among the various tenants. The bizarre supporting cast includes Sonny Bono, June Lockhart, Gary Sandy, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Brad Hall, Anne Lockhart, and Phil Fondacaro in two roles.
This is really silly stuff, and the attempts at menace and suspense fall flat. The movie does hold a strange fascination though, as you don't know what's coming next. There are a lot of special effects, but most of them aren't very special. The scene of Julia Louis-Dreyfus dancing around nearly naked, wrapped in ivy like a wood nymph, is one she must be proud of. I watched in amazement as Michael Moriarty danced badly while listening to Blue Cheer's cover of "Summertime Blues". I also think it's interesting that this film involves a young boy named Harry Potter (Jr.) who learns of a secret world of magic. Did Troll inspire J.K. Rowling? Only the gods know for sure.
And finally some thoughts on Michael Moriarty's ponderous career decisions - He plays the leads in films like this and the equally campy "Island of the Alive", then lands a lead spot on a popular and critically acclaimed show - Law and Order - and then walks away (or was fired depending on who you talk to) after four seasons because of some paranoid delusions concerning Janet Reno? His loss was Sam Waterston's gain.
I'd watch this only to see actors not normally associated with this kind of modern B film.
This is really silly stuff, and the attempts at menace and suspense fall flat. The movie does hold a strange fascination though, as you don't know what's coming next. There are a lot of special effects, but most of them aren't very special. The scene of Julia Louis-Dreyfus dancing around nearly naked, wrapped in ivy like a wood nymph, is one she must be proud of. I watched in amazement as Michael Moriarty danced badly while listening to Blue Cheer's cover of "Summertime Blues". I also think it's interesting that this film involves a young boy named Harry Potter (Jr.) who learns of a secret world of magic. Did Troll inspire J.K. Rowling? Only the gods know for sure.
And finally some thoughts on Michael Moriarty's ponderous career decisions - He plays the leads in films like this and the equally campy "Island of the Alive", then lands a lead spot on a popular and critically acclaimed show - Law and Order - and then walks away (or was fired depending on who you talk to) after four seasons because of some paranoid delusions concerning Janet Reno? His loss was Sam Waterston's gain.
I'd watch this only to see actors not normally associated with this kind of modern B film.
Absolutely the funniest horror film ever !!
D_ROCK198619 June 2005
A couple of friends and I got into a craze of watching cheesy old horror films on the weekends because there is nothing else to do in a small town... But anyway, we rented this one and laughed like never before, it is so insane! We love the "Creature Symphony" part where all of the troll creatures start singing some gibberish song, it is hilarious. We still laugh about it randomly to this day. This movie has maybe half a minute worth of scariness, unless you are afraid of midgets. By the way, the little man in the movie is superb LOL with his little story that he tells. I recommend this film to everyone to see once, because once is all it takes and once is all you really could take. It is a crappy horror film, but a great comedy!!
Many Little Creatures...
XFA16 September 2004
This movie is good.;) Yeah... - different , interesting Sarcastic , dark comedy...And... I like how the little girl always has this really evil smirk on her face.But she faked me out a bit when she was eating....(huh, ew) The parts with Sonny Bono - those are so silly. All the little earth wandering trolls keep coming out of the woodwork... And they look hilariously silly putty - ish. Freaky , funny stuff. Oh - '86...
Bizarre.
TOMNEL21 November 2006
This film is not one that is remembered, yet it's much worse sequel is. Here's why. This movie has good special effects for it's time and has OK acting, but just one of the most bizarre story lines. The plot is that a family moves in to an apartment building, where the family's young daughter is stolen, and a troll takes her form. The troll goes around the building killing people and turning them in to troll pods. The reason that this one is not remembered like it's horrible sequel, is this movie is rather weird and boring, but had production values, where the sequel has no production values and horrible acting and writing. The best thing about the film is it's excellent musical score from the every wonderful Richard Band. However, I didn't like this movie very well at all, but it does have some redeeming qualities in the acting and direction...not so much the writing.
My rating: * 1/2 out of ****. 82 mins.
My rating: * 1/2 out of ****. 82 mins.
Rat Burgers!!!!
frazieaj26 March 2001
This is a great movie to watch with your friends when bored. Troll is one of the worst movies I have ever seen, but for some reason I continue to watch it because it is so bad that it's funny.
Amazingly enough, several celebrities are in this film: Sonny Bono is in it (which gives this film a "seal of quality") and he turns into this disgusting booger-like pod, Julia Louis-Dryfus turns into a nymph, and June Lockhart is the creepy old lady who knows everything.
Favorite parts: When the mushroom starts singing and when the midget gets turned into the Troll's "brother" and becomes this puppet that whimpers like a puppy.
I think they wrote the plot as they filmed it. The boy chases his sister out of their apartment on the first floor, but in the next shot they are running from the second floor and bump into their own parents as their door opens and they run out to get the children(?). Also, these parents have no problems with their kids spending their days with total strangers.
Amazingly enough, several celebrities are in this film: Sonny Bono is in it (which gives this film a "seal of quality") and he turns into this disgusting booger-like pod, Julia Louis-Dryfus turns into a nymph, and June Lockhart is the creepy old lady who knows everything.
Favorite parts: When the mushroom starts singing and when the midget gets turned into the Troll's "brother" and becomes this puppet that whimpers like a puppy.
I think they wrote the plot as they filmed it. The boy chases his sister out of their apartment on the first floor, but in the next shot they are running from the second floor and bump into their own parents as their door opens and they run out to get the children(?). Also, these parents have no problems with their kids spending their days with total strangers.
Good effects, but story has no point.
gridoon12 January 2003
This movie only serves to prove that you can't make a good film based solely on good special effects. The effects are the only selling points of the movie, and they are impressive (we're talking about old-fashioned, "Howling"-type transformations here, none of that modern "digital" stuff). But the story is pointless in the extreme. And the film is rather boring. An example of its bad storytelling: when the boy asks the older lady if she's a witch, there have been absolutely no indications apparent to him to make him reach such an unusual conclusion, yet the script goes right ahead with it because it's necessary for the "revelation" to be made at that moment. And the boy acts pretty casual about the whole "witch" business, too! (*1/2)
The origins of Harry Potter...whether you like it or not
kclipper4 April 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of the best of the 1980's Empire Pictures movies by Charles Band to grace the VHS and cable TV generation of that time. As campy, goofy and downright fantastical as that era has to offer, this combines elements of witches, magicians and mystical forests with the eccentricities of a downtown New York apartment and its out-of-the-ordinary tenants.
Harry Potter Jr. (obviously an inspiration for J.K Rowling's groundbreaking novels) is a young boy that just moved into said apartment building with dad (Michael Moriarty in his usual crazy role). Apparently, Potter's younger sister is possessed by the "Troll", Torok, who is actually a cursed warlock that is trying to create a fantasy garden environment of elves and creatures out of the apartment and its tenants, all with the power of a magical ring. As the disappearances of the occupants grows, Harry befriends Eunice St. Claire, who is actually an ex-princess turned good witch that was once acquainted with the evil Torok. Now, young Harry Potter must team up with St. Claire to save his sister and the world as we know it from Torok and his sinister plan.
This is your typical 80's cheesy movie weirdness from Empire Pictures who's rubbery creature effects mimic the "Ghoulies" films, but is on a completely different level, incorporating many comedic elements along with charming, funny characters, fairy-like worlds and an exciting climax involving the young Harry Potter Jr., the fair-haired maiden and the Princess. This little movie embedded itself into history not only with the "Harry Potter" aspect, but its delightfully energetic performances from June Lockhart (Lost In Space), Julia-Louis Dreyfuss (Seinfeld), Moriarty, and not to mention Sonny Bono's transformation into a giant green sprouting turd. Enjoy it for what it is, a mixture of Tolken-like themes and the type fantasy-adventure cheesiness that put film-making of the 1980's in a class by itself.
Harry Potter Jr. (obviously an inspiration for J.K Rowling's groundbreaking novels) is a young boy that just moved into said apartment building with dad (Michael Moriarty in his usual crazy role). Apparently, Potter's younger sister is possessed by the "Troll", Torok, who is actually a cursed warlock that is trying to create a fantasy garden environment of elves and creatures out of the apartment and its tenants, all with the power of a magical ring. As the disappearances of the occupants grows, Harry befriends Eunice St. Claire, who is actually an ex-princess turned good witch that was once acquainted with the evil Torok. Now, young Harry Potter must team up with St. Claire to save his sister and the world as we know it from Torok and his sinister plan.
This is your typical 80's cheesy movie weirdness from Empire Pictures who's rubbery creature effects mimic the "Ghoulies" films, but is on a completely different level, incorporating many comedic elements along with charming, funny characters, fairy-like worlds and an exciting climax involving the young Harry Potter Jr., the fair-haired maiden and the Princess. This little movie embedded itself into history not only with the "Harry Potter" aspect, but its delightfully energetic performances from June Lockhart (Lost In Space), Julia-Louis Dreyfuss (Seinfeld), Moriarty, and not to mention Sonny Bono's transformation into a giant green sprouting turd. Enjoy it for what it is, a mixture of Tolken-like themes and the type fantasy-adventure cheesiness that put film-making of the 1980's in a class by itself.
Technically the first Harry Potter movie
Smells_Like_Cheese4 February 2011
Warning: Spoilers
So I've been on a "so bad it's good" movie kick lately and I don't know how but I missed the Troll movies. I honestly don't know how in the heck I ever missed them as a movie buff, but better late than never right? So I just bought the double feature set of Troll/Troll 2 and just couldn't wait to pop it in my DVD player. The first 22 minutes of this film I paused it and called my boyfriend saying "I
Uh
There's a Harry Potter, a talking mushroom, a singing troll, a neighbor who is Family Guy's Quagmire's long lost brother, Julia Lewis Dreyfuss, Atreyo from Neverending Story
" he said "Oh, my God, have you seen a movie that actually left you speechless?" and I just paused as he started laughing triumphantly. I was wondering how a movie could be this weird when I'm not even at the half hour mark? I don't even know how to rate a movie like this because I'm not sure if this was meant to be taken seriously because at one point I just turned into a laughing maniac. You know that infamous scene from Evil Dead 2 where Ash just goes crazy and starts laughing with the objects that are laughing at him? That's what I felt like while I was watching Troll.
The Potter family are moving into a new apartment in San Francisco. While unpacking, their young daughter Wendy is attacked by a grotesque little creature, who had long ago been transformed from a powerful wizard into a troll. Using a magic crystal green ring, it captures Wendy and possesses her form. After meeting the other tenants, the family notices Wendy's unusual behavior, but they attribute her behavior to the stress of the move. The only one that notices something is terribly wrong is Wendy's brother, Harry Potter Jr. Frightened by his sister's sudden and violent changes, he seeks solace in the company of a mysterious old lady Eunice, who lives upstairs. When he tells her of the strange goings-on, she reveals to him her real profession: a witch. Harry asks Eunice to teach him magic, but she says that there is not time. She does instruct him as to the ways of a hidden magical world, and tells him of her long history stretching back to a time of when she and a powerful wizard named Torok were in love. At that time the world was divided between fairies, which includes trolls, and humans. The realms were equal and independent of each other. However, Torok and some of the fairies challenged this balance resulting in a great war in which the humans prevailed. Torok was transformed into a troll as punishment. Eunice stands guard, as she has for centuries, now in her apartment, waiting patiently for Torok to challenge the realms again, which is happening now.
This movie is amazing in the sense that it was made, released and I was thinking "if this is the first movie and the second is more famous for how bad it is, I'm scared to continue onto the second film". The acting is horrible and the story is beyond bizarre, yet somehow this movie has this unique charm to it that makes it into the "so bad it's good" category. Also I don't want to continue this joke since it's probably been done to death, but I just loved how the character's name is Harry Potter and he says that he wants to learn magic from a witch. I would say the writers should sue, it's pretty safe to say that JK Rowling is a closet fan who won't admit that she just loves her trolls. I would say this movie is for a specific audience where if you're looking for a fun bad movie, this is definitely one to check out, however for the norms, you might wanna shy away from it, it's definitely a weird movie.
3/10
The Potter family are moving into a new apartment in San Francisco. While unpacking, their young daughter Wendy is attacked by a grotesque little creature, who had long ago been transformed from a powerful wizard into a troll. Using a magic crystal green ring, it captures Wendy and possesses her form. After meeting the other tenants, the family notices Wendy's unusual behavior, but they attribute her behavior to the stress of the move. The only one that notices something is terribly wrong is Wendy's brother, Harry Potter Jr. Frightened by his sister's sudden and violent changes, he seeks solace in the company of a mysterious old lady Eunice, who lives upstairs. When he tells her of the strange goings-on, she reveals to him her real profession: a witch. Harry asks Eunice to teach him magic, but she says that there is not time. She does instruct him as to the ways of a hidden magical world, and tells him of her long history stretching back to a time of when she and a powerful wizard named Torok were in love. At that time the world was divided between fairies, which includes trolls, and humans. The realms were equal and independent of each other. However, Torok and some of the fairies challenged this balance resulting in a great war in which the humans prevailed. Torok was transformed into a troll as punishment. Eunice stands guard, as she has for centuries, now in her apartment, waiting patiently for Torok to challenge the realms again, which is happening now.
This movie is amazing in the sense that it was made, released and I was thinking "if this is the first movie and the second is more famous for how bad it is, I'm scared to continue onto the second film". The acting is horrible and the story is beyond bizarre, yet somehow this movie has this unique charm to it that makes it into the "so bad it's good" category. Also I don't want to continue this joke since it's probably been done to death, but I just loved how the character's name is Harry Potter and he says that he wants to learn magic from a witch. I would say the writers should sue, it's pretty safe to say that JK Rowling is a closet fan who won't admit that she just loves her trolls. I would say this movie is for a specific audience where if you're looking for a fun bad movie, this is definitely one to check out, however for the norms, you might wanna shy away from it, it's definitely a weird movie.
3/10
Harry Potter Junior . . . .
AdrienneNaylor15 February 2004
I'm more biased toward liking this movie because I kinda grew up on it. As pathetic as it is to say now, certain scenes were too scary for me to even watch.
Anyway, it's a really cute and fanciful movie full of imaginative whatnot. I mean, come on! An ancient troll takes over a modern apartment building, transforming it into a faerie tale wilderness, complete with a chorus of singing trolls. Wonderful.
Anyway, it's a really cute and fanciful movie full of imaginative whatnot. I mean, come on! An ancient troll takes over a modern apartment building, transforming it into a faerie tale wilderness, complete with a chorus of singing trolls. Wonderful.
Worthy as a ridiculous 80's creature flick
xordu116 June 2004
This movie is not that great, but not as awful as you might hear. It's mostly a fantasy/horror/comedy that isn't too ambitious yet was weird enough to make a good midnight cult movie. The short eighty minutes weren't unbearable, and there was plenty of things that didn't make too much sense. 1: If everything in the fairy land was completely evil, how come the witch had the talking mushroom? 2: How come the troll didn't want the girl to die. Yes, the ending was pretty anti-climatic and some of the jokes missed, though some hit straight on. But this movie is worthy as its genre: a ridiculous 80's creature flick. Although, there is one very awesome musical number as the trolls are partying, which is just greatly scored and edited, other than that, nothing special unless you like creature/Full Moon flicks. 6/10
Little creatures want their world back.
michaelRokeefe8 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Once upon a time the world was divided by humans and trolls. This bizarre fantasy faire has an evil troll, Torok(Phil Fondacaro), selecting a San Francisco apartment house to become the center of a new troll order. Two youngsters, Harry(Noah Hathaway)and Wendy(Jenny Beck)Potter, are used as pawns by Torok to try and change residents, apartment by apartment, into mysterious trolls and demons. Most of the creatures seem claymation-like. And the troll king resembles the lead creature in LEPRECHAUN(1993).
You may ask yourself why you watched from beginning to end. This one gets old quick and the PG-13 rating must be strictly enticement. Most, if not all, violence seems to be implied. A pretty good list of stars partake: Michael Moriarty, Shelley Hack, June Lockhart, Gary Sandy, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Sonny Bono.
You may ask yourself why you watched from beginning to end. This one gets old quick and the PG-13 rating must be strictly enticement. Most, if not all, violence seems to be implied. A pretty good list of stars partake: Michael Moriarty, Shelley Hack, June Lockhart, Gary Sandy, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Sonny Bono.
So bad you almost HAVE to watch
mamamiasweetpeaches13 January 2004
They play TROLL on TV every once and awhile and like a train wreck, its hard to look away. Its so bad its almost good. Almost. But not quite. What can you really say about an '80s film that boasts both Sonny Bono and Julia "Elaine from Seinfeld" Louis Dreyfuss??? The casting here is so strange that it reels the mind. Noah "NeverEnding Story" Hathaway?? Shelly Hack?? In short, a boy finds a mysterious land o' TROLLs in the basement of his new apartment building. The TROLLS are cheesy to be sure and the whole thing is silly,I guess. But there is something endearing about watching a little boy rescue his cute little sister who suddenly growls and bites people, something weird about watching June Lockhart play with her pet singing mushroom right before she morphs into a total blonde, buxom she-babe. I even love the friendly little dwarf man! TROLL is cheesy but in an inoffensive fun way, unlike it's sequel TROLL 2 which is a terrible cult classic that is painful to watch.
Fun Film... For Children. Maybe.
gavin69421 July 2007
A troll lives in an apartment building and wants to turn the other occupants into troll creatures, too. But he didn't expect Harry Potter (no, not that Harry Potter) to be on his case, ready to deal out a special brand of magic (no, not that brand of magic).
This films stands as a really hard film to grade. I want to give it a good rating, because director John Carl Buechler ("Friday the 13th Part VII") is a master at making costumes and such, and he really had the crew go balls out with the fantasy scenery and creatures. It has the first film appearance of Julia-Louis Dreyfuss ("Seinfeld"), and even Michael Moriarty (Larry Cohen's leading man) shows up to do a crazy dance.
And the writer is a notable man (although not known), having written "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids" and "Dolls", as well as being an editor for Fangoria magazine. But the film, as decent as its credentials are, just doesn't really work as a horror film. And that's the problem here.
If this is a fantasy film for kids (like "Willow"), it's got the wrong feel to it. This isn't going to hold a kid's attention. But for horror, it's not really great, either. Too tame, no real blood or violence or moral subversion. Even horror films geared towards kids ("The Gate") have certain elements -- Hell, heavy metal music -- and this film lacks them.
If you like 1980s films and horror films, check this out. It's sort of like "House II" in a variety of ways (though not nearly as good). And if you like midgets, there's a really cool midget in this movie. And Michael Moriarty. But, yeah, don't expect me to push this on anyone like it was accidentally pushed on me (we thought we were putting "Basket Case III" in the DVD player and by the time we found we were wrong, we were too lazy to change it).
This films stands as a really hard film to grade. I want to give it a good rating, because director John Carl Buechler ("Friday the 13th Part VII") is a master at making costumes and such, and he really had the crew go balls out with the fantasy scenery and creatures. It has the first film appearance of Julia-Louis Dreyfuss ("Seinfeld"), and even Michael Moriarty (Larry Cohen's leading man) shows up to do a crazy dance.
And the writer is a notable man (although not known), having written "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids" and "Dolls", as well as being an editor for Fangoria magazine. But the film, as decent as its credentials are, just doesn't really work as a horror film. And that's the problem here.
If this is a fantasy film for kids (like "Willow"), it's got the wrong feel to it. This isn't going to hold a kid's attention. But for horror, it's not really great, either. Too tame, no real blood or violence or moral subversion. Even horror films geared towards kids ("The Gate") have certain elements -- Hell, heavy metal music -- and this film lacks them.
If you like 1980s films and horror films, check this out. It's sort of like "House II" in a variety of ways (though not nearly as good). And if you like midgets, there's a really cool midget in this movie. And Michael Moriarty. But, yeah, don't expect me to push this on anyone like it was accidentally pushed on me (we thought we were putting "Basket Case III" in the DVD player and by the time we found we were wrong, we were too lazy to change it).
Boooooo....
coldwaterpdh30 November 2008
This is one weird flick for sure. I'm not even sure if I'd call it a horror film, it's more like a sci-fi comedy with some scary-ish creatures.
"Troll" gets going with a horrible performance from Michael Moriarty and his family moving into a new apartment in a random building in an unknown city. His young daughter (who is played by an amazing child actress) is captured and taken over by a troll in the basement. She freaks out on everyone. The troll takes over the apartment building, subjecting many of it's residents to his tom foolery and hi-jinx. He grows gardens in some apartments and creates some strange little monsters. They seem to come out of nowhere and one of them is like a mini creature from the black lagoon.
To say this movie is strange would be an understatement. Not scary at all. I fell asleep for about twenty minutes in the middle of it and I wasn't tired.
Watch for an unusually awful Moriarty performance as he dances around his living room like a nerd to some horrible rendition of 'Summertime Blues.' Yikes, is this guy serious? "Leprechaun" was a hell of a lot more fun.
2 out of 10, kids.
"Troll" gets going with a horrible performance from Michael Moriarty and his family moving into a new apartment in a random building in an unknown city. His young daughter (who is played by an amazing child actress) is captured and taken over by a troll in the basement. She freaks out on everyone. The troll takes over the apartment building, subjecting many of it's residents to his tom foolery and hi-jinx. He grows gardens in some apartments and creates some strange little monsters. They seem to come out of nowhere and one of them is like a mini creature from the black lagoon.
To say this movie is strange would be an understatement. Not scary at all. I fell asleep for about twenty minutes in the middle of it and I wasn't tired.
Watch for an unusually awful Moriarty performance as he dances around his living room like a nerd to some horrible rendition of 'Summertime Blues.' Yikes, is this guy serious? "Leprechaun" was a hell of a lot more fun.
2 out of 10, kids.
Harry Potter Jr !
cng77725 October 2003
I'm a bit confused. I was a kid when this movie 'Troll' came out. But, I distinctly remember hearing the name Harry Potter. I noticed in some of the other comments that people were commenting on the name because it has now become a huge series of books. At first, I thought this was a Stephen King movie, but now I see it isn't. I think the movie is reminiscent of things I've seen in other Steven King movies. I would bet the writers, directors and/or producers were somehow influenced by Steven King.
I don't really see the cult potential. Or any other potential for that matter.
Horst_In_Translation19 April 2021
Warning: Spoilers
This is "Troll", an American movie from 1986, so I was one year old when this got released and despite having its 35th anniversary this year, this film is far from forgotten. Let me start with the basics: There are horror components here for sure, but I would call this mostly a fantasy film. With an ounce of comedy too, the imdb genre descriptions gets it right this time. The director is John Carl Buechler and he is also one of the two writers apparently, even if he is not officially credited in that department. Sadly, Buchler died not too long ago and looking at his entire career now, it can be said that he was really a man of many professions. Dabatable if "many talents" is accurate as well. At least, he tried a lot. That much is safe. His most prolific area of expertise was the special effects department, even in the very final years of his life and career. He was in his early 30s when he worked on this movie here and not a complete rookie, but still relatively inexperienced. Had only worked on a segment from another feature film before apparently. If we are looking at him as the man in charge. Today, it's probably not an exaggeration to say that this one here is one of those releases for which he is most remembered today. His co-writer here was Ed Naha, two years older actually, but still with us and he turned 70 not too long ago. He focused mostly on writing and just like with Buchler, this is also an early career effort for him. Unfortunately, a lot of the stuff he worked on afterwards was not exactly well-received gently speaking and this includes a great deal of animation as well. It is certainly also true for him that this movie is easily among his most famous, also such a long time after it came out.
If we look at the cast, there are certainly some interesting names here. For me personally, it was interesting to see L&O's Michael Moriarty here, who is also pretty old now, but as I like the show I just mentioned (although Waterston more than him), it was a welcome addition. Sadly, his character felt pretty insignificant and had almost nothing to work with. I mean he is second credit. Clearly disappointing. Also in it is Sonny Bono, yep the one from Sonny & Cher. He is not featured constantly throughout the film, but he is there nonetheless. Most remember him as a singer though I guess and honestly his performance was not great or anything, so I can see why. The one closest to being the lead here is probably Noah Hathaway, at least on the male side. He is mostly known for "Die unendliche Geschichte" from two years earlier. Well, what can I say? He was alright here, nothing more, nothing less. His female co-lead is Jenny Beck, the one who plays his character's sister. Nothing to really remember here either. Her career started approximately five years earlier and ended roughly half a decade later as well. Probably also her career-defining credit this movie. The actress who plays her mother here has a name that sounds poretty similar this time. Phil Fondacaro is maybe a contender for most memorable performance and that is not only because he plays two characters, but because he has great recognition value with the human character he plays (long before the likes of Dinklage) and also because he plays the title character. Glad to see he is still alive with how things went for other miniscule actors like Troyer or Villechaize. I hope he is alright. And finally, I totally must mention Julia Louis-Dreyfus. Yep, the one from Seinfeld, Veep and many other pretty popular shows. She was in her early/mid 20s when this came out and it is apparently her first film, so quite an entrance, even if she showed up in a Woody Allen film the same year. But yeah, I am not sure I would agree with the girl here that she is so pretty and she is really my type, but enough of that.
This is a pretty short film. It barely makes it past the 80-minute mark and that already includes a solid set of closing credits. Without those, it is even shorter than 80 minutes. But it's a good thing honestly. The story and everything here already felt stretched despite the short duration and there were a handful scenes that certainly could have been left out. This is also the real problem. The quality simply isn't there. It felt very random at times. Little made sense here and I know it's a fantasy film, but still they have to do better in terms of storytelling in my opinion. The introduction with the troll basically taking over the girl's body needed better explanation, like why is he who he is and where does he come from. Also pretty strange that he could randomly turn into his troll physicals anytime again and what happened then with the girl. Strangely enough, the girl was totally unharmed in the end. Definitely way too much craving for an unrealistic happy ending. Then I also had an issue with the idea that the troll must turn all apartments into well troll world looks, let's call it that. And if he succeeds, then the world belongs to him. Very simply idea, but made virtually no sense. Why this house in particular? They totally needed more and better explanations altogether. Same is true for the idea that he will at all costs defend and save a blonde innocent girl and that is of course the one he turned into, so he basically sacrifices all his plans to protect a human? The only valid explanation there is linked to the film itself, not the story. The troll had to have a vulnerable side, so the film is never too serious. I mean he also did not kill anybody, just transform them when conquering their apartments. They simply wanted younger audiences to be allowed to watch this film too. Away from the troll, there are more ridiculously unauthentic inclusions. I am for example talking about how the young male protagonist correctly guessed that the old lady is a witch. Said old lady was played by the way by mother and daughter Lockhart and the former is still alive now at the age of 95. There the film struggled again too, no acceptable explanation why she suddenly has to look young again.
On a more positive note, I did like the way the title character looked. Solid work with the make-up and effects there I suppose. He was extremely scary in an awkward way to me and I can kinda see why everybody was all of a sudden screaming from fear when they watched his true self. I certainly preferred his looks over the looks of the apartments after he had taken care of them. I mean the mini trolls were nice, but other than that it did look a bit cheap here and there. And it also sounded cheap sometimes. With that, I am mostly referring to when the girl (troll) speaks with the troll's voice. Or altered creepy, much deeper girl's voice I could also say. Not sure what was up with that. A touch of Exorcist perhaps, but the revelation element was certainly not enough of an explanation to make this work. One of not too many good moments from the movie for me was probably a very human one, namely when the girl is ready to have her friend over and daddy (Moriarty) opens the door and sees the man. Imagine what you would feel like if your young daughter (or even old daughter) had a fella like that over (even if there is no romantic stuff indicated here, all kids-friendly) and did not tell you as a parent who exactly would be coming and you would see it at the doorstep. Would you be happy he is a professor? Anyway, the girl thinking he was an elf when they first me was somehow funny too. Aside from that, I was surprised to see an MGM sign (with the lion) at the very start because I thought that this would have been produced by some small underground company, but nope. Then again, the fairly famous cast makes it obvious that this was not a low-budget movie, even if, unfortunately here and there, it sometimes looks like one. Oh and their characters are so weird that you are not angry at the troll.
I read that the sequel to this one here is considered by some the worst horror movie ever made, maybe even the worst movie, some will say, but this first film is also not exactly a revelation. It is all over the place story-wise and almost nothing makes sense. Then there are also individually bad moments and not just a few. You will recognize those when they happen. One example would be when the old witch with dramatic music turns into the young witch, also also when the old witch talks to the boy on some occasion and is very determined. Or also the wind instrument she was using on one occasion I am undecided what to think there about the noise hurting all the creatures of darkness. I guess June Lockhart here really did not have the character of a lifetime, even if there was so much alleged depth to said character with her long fantastic history and how she once even was in love with the title character. Extremely bizarre. Just like the boy (Hathaway) getting closer to the absurd truth and knowing almost exactly what is going on. His alien assumption being the only wrong thing makes him a great investigator I suppose. Come on, her furniure is why he assumes she is a witch? Oh and finally, I must mention that we have not just one, but two Harry Potters in this movie. I kid you not. What a coincidence. Or at least I think it is. I doubt Rowling named her protagonist after this movie here. Ah yes, the cops at the end clearly underestimating the situation and all that happened were decent too. Film ends on a comedic note, light note. Okay, that is pretty much it. For me, it is an easy thumbs-down and I never reall thought I could give it a positive recommendation. Still I must also say that all in all this movie is not a failure in its entirety. On some occasions certainly and a lot could have been better here, but it's not an abomination. I think the average rating here on imdb is relatively accurate, maybe slightly too high overall. If there is any reason to check this one out, then it is just from the guilty pleasure perspective. I am glad it was this short and I say go skip it.
If we look at the cast, there are certainly some interesting names here. For me personally, it was interesting to see L&O's Michael Moriarty here, who is also pretty old now, but as I like the show I just mentioned (although Waterston more than him), it was a welcome addition. Sadly, his character felt pretty insignificant and had almost nothing to work with. I mean he is second credit. Clearly disappointing. Also in it is Sonny Bono, yep the one from Sonny & Cher. He is not featured constantly throughout the film, but he is there nonetheless. Most remember him as a singer though I guess and honestly his performance was not great or anything, so I can see why. The one closest to being the lead here is probably Noah Hathaway, at least on the male side. He is mostly known for "Die unendliche Geschichte" from two years earlier. Well, what can I say? He was alright here, nothing more, nothing less. His female co-lead is Jenny Beck, the one who plays his character's sister. Nothing to really remember here either. Her career started approximately five years earlier and ended roughly half a decade later as well. Probably also her career-defining credit this movie. The actress who plays her mother here has a name that sounds poretty similar this time. Phil Fondacaro is maybe a contender for most memorable performance and that is not only because he plays two characters, but because he has great recognition value with the human character he plays (long before the likes of Dinklage) and also because he plays the title character. Glad to see he is still alive with how things went for other miniscule actors like Troyer or Villechaize. I hope he is alright. And finally, I totally must mention Julia Louis-Dreyfus. Yep, the one from Seinfeld, Veep and many other pretty popular shows. She was in her early/mid 20s when this came out and it is apparently her first film, so quite an entrance, even if she showed up in a Woody Allen film the same year. But yeah, I am not sure I would agree with the girl here that she is so pretty and she is really my type, but enough of that.
This is a pretty short film. It barely makes it past the 80-minute mark and that already includes a solid set of closing credits. Without those, it is even shorter than 80 minutes. But it's a good thing honestly. The story and everything here already felt stretched despite the short duration and there were a handful scenes that certainly could have been left out. This is also the real problem. The quality simply isn't there. It felt very random at times. Little made sense here and I know it's a fantasy film, but still they have to do better in terms of storytelling in my opinion. The introduction with the troll basically taking over the girl's body needed better explanation, like why is he who he is and where does he come from. Also pretty strange that he could randomly turn into his troll physicals anytime again and what happened then with the girl. Strangely enough, the girl was totally unharmed in the end. Definitely way too much craving for an unrealistic happy ending. Then I also had an issue with the idea that the troll must turn all apartments into well troll world looks, let's call it that. And if he succeeds, then the world belongs to him. Very simply idea, but made virtually no sense. Why this house in particular? They totally needed more and better explanations altogether. Same is true for the idea that he will at all costs defend and save a blonde innocent girl and that is of course the one he turned into, so he basically sacrifices all his plans to protect a human? The only valid explanation there is linked to the film itself, not the story. The troll had to have a vulnerable side, so the film is never too serious. I mean he also did not kill anybody, just transform them when conquering their apartments. They simply wanted younger audiences to be allowed to watch this film too. Away from the troll, there are more ridiculously unauthentic inclusions. I am for example talking about how the young male protagonist correctly guessed that the old lady is a witch. Said old lady was played by the way by mother and daughter Lockhart and the former is still alive now at the age of 95. There the film struggled again too, no acceptable explanation why she suddenly has to look young again.
On a more positive note, I did like the way the title character looked. Solid work with the make-up and effects there I suppose. He was extremely scary in an awkward way to me and I can kinda see why everybody was all of a sudden screaming from fear when they watched his true self. I certainly preferred his looks over the looks of the apartments after he had taken care of them. I mean the mini trolls were nice, but other than that it did look a bit cheap here and there. And it also sounded cheap sometimes. With that, I am mostly referring to when the girl (troll) speaks with the troll's voice. Or altered creepy, much deeper girl's voice I could also say. Not sure what was up with that. A touch of Exorcist perhaps, but the revelation element was certainly not enough of an explanation to make this work. One of not too many good moments from the movie for me was probably a very human one, namely when the girl is ready to have her friend over and daddy (Moriarty) opens the door and sees the man. Imagine what you would feel like if your young daughter (or even old daughter) had a fella like that over (even if there is no romantic stuff indicated here, all kids-friendly) and did not tell you as a parent who exactly would be coming and you would see it at the doorstep. Would you be happy he is a professor? Anyway, the girl thinking he was an elf when they first me was somehow funny too. Aside from that, I was surprised to see an MGM sign (with the lion) at the very start because I thought that this would have been produced by some small underground company, but nope. Then again, the fairly famous cast makes it obvious that this was not a low-budget movie, even if, unfortunately here and there, it sometimes looks like one. Oh and their characters are so weird that you are not angry at the troll.
I read that the sequel to this one here is considered by some the worst horror movie ever made, maybe even the worst movie, some will say, but this first film is also not exactly a revelation. It is all over the place story-wise and almost nothing makes sense. Then there are also individually bad moments and not just a few. You will recognize those when they happen. One example would be when the old witch with dramatic music turns into the young witch, also also when the old witch talks to the boy on some occasion and is very determined. Or also the wind instrument she was using on one occasion I am undecided what to think there about the noise hurting all the creatures of darkness. I guess June Lockhart here really did not have the character of a lifetime, even if there was so much alleged depth to said character with her long fantastic history and how she once even was in love with the title character. Extremely bizarre. Just like the boy (Hathaway) getting closer to the absurd truth and knowing almost exactly what is going on. His alien assumption being the only wrong thing makes him a great investigator I suppose. Come on, her furniure is why he assumes she is a witch? Oh and finally, I must mention that we have not just one, but two Harry Potters in this movie. I kid you not. What a coincidence. Or at least I think it is. I doubt Rowling named her protagonist after this movie here. Ah yes, the cops at the end clearly underestimating the situation and all that happened were decent too. Film ends on a comedic note, light note. Okay, that is pretty much it. For me, it is an easy thumbs-down and I never reall thought I could give it a positive recommendation. Still I must also say that all in all this movie is not a failure in its entirety. On some occasions certainly and a lot could have been better here, but it's not an abomination. I think the average rating here on imdb is relatively accurate, maybe slightly too high overall. If there is any reason to check this one out, then it is just from the guilty pleasure perspective. I am glad it was this short and I say go skip it.
Blech! (minor spoilers)
vertigo_1429 November 2006
I guess it's not surprising that the sequel to Troll should find itself ranked on IMDb's worst 100 movies list, considering how awful the first of the series was. It seemed like something trying to establish the same atmosphere of fantasy by mixing folklore with the 80s the same way that Masters of the Universe tried.
In this low-budget fantasy adventure film, the trolls who once co-existed with humans before their kingdom was obliterated, have suddenly turned up in an apartment building. Inhabiting the body of the bratty Wendy Potter when she finds the Emerald Ring, the troll soon turns the residents into various creatures and objects of the troll world (actually, some of the special effects are commendable despite the obviously low budget). Only her brother, Harry Potter (Hathaway) realizes that somethings going on (no thanks to his clueless parents) and gets help from a sorceress (June Lockhart) who was once married to the troll but is now posing as an ordinary moody old lady who lives in the building.
It seems like an interesting kiddie tale, and probably would've played out better as a cartoon. Instead, this one carries on with far too much bad acting (was it necessary to see Michael Moriarity acting like an idiot in the scene where we witness his devotion to classic rock?), a poor script (Sonny Bono's character is a comparable kind of creepy to Carl of 'Aqua Teen Hunger Force'), and a lame ending. Even as ridiculous 80s fare, which another viewer had labeled it, I'm not sure it does suffice. It was far too corny to sit through on several tries.
In this low-budget fantasy adventure film, the trolls who once co-existed with humans before their kingdom was obliterated, have suddenly turned up in an apartment building. Inhabiting the body of the bratty Wendy Potter when she finds the Emerald Ring, the troll soon turns the residents into various creatures and objects of the troll world (actually, some of the special effects are commendable despite the obviously low budget). Only her brother, Harry Potter (Hathaway) realizes that somethings going on (no thanks to his clueless parents) and gets help from a sorceress (June Lockhart) who was once married to the troll but is now posing as an ordinary moody old lady who lives in the building.
It seems like an interesting kiddie tale, and probably would've played out better as a cartoon. Instead, this one carries on with far too much bad acting (was it necessary to see Michael Moriarity acting like an idiot in the scene where we witness his devotion to classic rock?), a poor script (Sonny Bono's character is a comparable kind of creepy to Carl of 'Aqua Teen Hunger Force'), and a lame ending. Even as ridiculous 80s fare, which another viewer had labeled it, I'm not sure it does suffice. It was far too corny to sit through on several tries.
A funny, quirky and genuinely good film
arcticcarrot24 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Troll is not a bad movie. It's not. But for some reason a lot of people think it is. As of tonight (10-24-10), it has a 3.6 on IMDb. That's ridiculous. This movie has so much going for it.
First of all, it's hilarious - and intentionally so. I laughed out loud many times while watching it. The scene with Michael Moriarty dancing around to Blue Cheer's version of "Summertime Blues" is wonderful. Really, it's worth watching the movie just for that scene.
But then you get to watch Sonny Bono turn into a jungle. Seriously.
Besides that, Gary Sandy is in this movie, and he's wonderful. If you're having trouble placing the name, think W.K.R.P - he's the guy that moved from town to town, up and down the dial.
Then you have Julia Louis-Dreyfus as some warped version of Titania. And her fellow SNL pal, Brad Hall, plays her boyfriend.
On top of that, June Lockhart is the sexiest older woman ever, and she has a talking mushroom. And clearly there's some attraction between her and the boy.
And the boy... his name is Harry Potter, Jr. That's right. Michael Moriarty is Harry Potter. Noah Hathaway is Harry Potter, Jr. And Harry Potter, Jr. - get this - wants to be a wizard. Some crazy woman totally ripped this movie off and wrote seven books. But Troll is the original Harry Potter movie. (In fact, we should start a movement - when the new Harry Potter film is released in theatres, stay home and watch Troll on DVD instead.)
I don't want to spoil this movie for you, so i don't think i want to tell you any more about it. No, one more thing: there is a scene with monsters singing. Okay, is that enough to make you want to see it? Seriously, Troll is a really good movie. I'm not kidding.
First of all, it's hilarious - and intentionally so. I laughed out loud many times while watching it. The scene with Michael Moriarty dancing around to Blue Cheer's version of "Summertime Blues" is wonderful. Really, it's worth watching the movie just for that scene.
But then you get to watch Sonny Bono turn into a jungle. Seriously.
Besides that, Gary Sandy is in this movie, and he's wonderful. If you're having trouble placing the name, think W.K.R.P - he's the guy that moved from town to town, up and down the dial.
Then you have Julia Louis-Dreyfus as some warped version of Titania. And her fellow SNL pal, Brad Hall, plays her boyfriend.
On top of that, June Lockhart is the sexiest older woman ever, and she has a talking mushroom. And clearly there's some attraction between her and the boy.
And the boy... his name is Harry Potter, Jr. That's right. Michael Moriarty is Harry Potter. Noah Hathaway is Harry Potter, Jr. And Harry Potter, Jr. - get this - wants to be a wizard. Some crazy woman totally ripped this movie off and wrote seven books. But Troll is the original Harry Potter movie. (In fact, we should start a movement - when the new Harry Potter film is released in theatres, stay home and watch Troll on DVD instead.)
I don't want to spoil this movie for you, so i don't think i want to tell you any more about it. No, one more thing: there is a scene with monsters singing. Okay, is that enough to make you want to see it? Seriously, Troll is a really good movie. I'm not kidding.
So awful I couldn't watch it in one sitting!
frickinlyger9 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I rented this back in 1986 or so when it came out on VHS. I remember I had just gotten home from seeing David Cronenberg's "The Fly" and was blown away by it. I threw this one into the VCR in hopes it would have some minor thrills.
"Troll" was so boring, even at its modest length, that I left and came back to it no fewer than four times before seeing the whole thing. (It was back when I felt I had to watch a movie all the way through, even if it sucked, just to justify the money spent to rent it--"Troll" changed that philosophy for me).
**SPOILER** I'm not sure if this is technically a spoiler but at one point Sonny Bono turns into some kind of plant or something. **SPOILER END**
That's really all I remember from the film, except for the desire for a refund that quickly followed watching it.
"Troll" was so boring, even at its modest length, that I left and came back to it no fewer than four times before seeing the whole thing. (It was back when I felt I had to watch a movie all the way through, even if it sucked, just to justify the money spent to rent it--"Troll" changed that philosophy for me).
**SPOILER** I'm not sure if this is technically a spoiler but at one point Sonny Bono turns into some kind of plant or something. **SPOILER END**
That's really all I remember from the film, except for the desire for a refund that quickly followed watching it.
I have a lot to say about Troll.
jcooloti5 July 2021
Okay. First I want to say it makes me angry that Troll 2 steals the spotlight from this highly original horror/comedy just because it's such a terrible movie. Troll, the original, is pretty great in my personal opinion. It's a funny movie with a pretty creepy troll and a fantastic soundtrack...
But let's get to it... the plot. I'm going to take this time to make a pretty serious point. It is absolutely INCREDIBLE to me that J. K. Rowling, who "invented" Harry Potter, has not been sued for stealing from this film. Does anyone find it absolutely insane that the protagonist of this movie is named "HARRY POTTER JR." Yes, I'm not kidding. And let's talk about the plot. A boy moves into an apartment building with his family and is stalked by a magical troll that's hanging out and possessing people and turning them into trolls in a sort of troll making farm... but here's the kicker. On the top floor lives a witch, who teaches Harry Potter Jr. About the secret world of magic and the troll. Yep, you heard it. A secret magical world. A witch teaching magic to Harry Potter Jr. And a troll antagonist. Now, I realize this isn't the complete Harry Potter story that we all now know... but... c'mon! The mind boggles... how is this legally possible?!? Why don't more people talk about this?!? And all people seem to care about is it's sequel being so incredibly awful...
But the truth is Troll is a good movie. It's hilarious. Sonny Bono is great. The troll is great. The puppets are great. The dad is great. It's got an awesome Blue Cheer "summertime blues" segment in it... what a great funny scene and an amazing tune. We also have a very young Julia Louis-Dreyfus looking... very... young. She's great. The little sister is great. It's just a fun movie with great makeup and puppets... it's good man! It's funny! And that troll creeps me out!
But seriously folks. Harry Potter Jr.... WAKE UP PEOPLE! There's no Harry Potter without Troll. Just sayin...
But let's get to it... the plot. I'm going to take this time to make a pretty serious point. It is absolutely INCREDIBLE to me that J. K. Rowling, who "invented" Harry Potter, has not been sued for stealing from this film. Does anyone find it absolutely insane that the protagonist of this movie is named "HARRY POTTER JR." Yes, I'm not kidding. And let's talk about the plot. A boy moves into an apartment building with his family and is stalked by a magical troll that's hanging out and possessing people and turning them into trolls in a sort of troll making farm... but here's the kicker. On the top floor lives a witch, who teaches Harry Potter Jr. About the secret world of magic and the troll. Yep, you heard it. A secret magical world. A witch teaching magic to Harry Potter Jr. And a troll antagonist. Now, I realize this isn't the complete Harry Potter story that we all now know... but... c'mon! The mind boggles... how is this legally possible?!? Why don't more people talk about this?!? And all people seem to care about is it's sequel being so incredibly awful...
But the truth is Troll is a good movie. It's hilarious. Sonny Bono is great. The troll is great. The puppets are great. The dad is great. It's got an awesome Blue Cheer "summertime blues" segment in it... what a great funny scene and an amazing tune. We also have a very young Julia Louis-Dreyfus looking... very... young. She's great. The little sister is great. It's just a fun movie with great makeup and puppets... it's good man! It's funny! And that troll creeps me out!
But seriously folks. Harry Potter Jr.... WAKE UP PEOPLE! There's no Harry Potter without Troll. Just sayin...
Not great; but a nice movie
Hellraiser-130 December 2001
Empire Pictures was a great company which made very good B-movies such as "Re-animator", "From Beyond" or "Ghoulies" apart from this I´m going to comment and that I watched when I was a child.Then, I felt it was great and for a long time I wished to watch it again but it was never shown at TV and it was impossible to find it in videos any longer so I had to ask for it and someone found miraculously a copy for me and in good conditions. Now that I have seen it again I have to say that it was not such a great movie as I thought when I saw it for the first time but it is a nice fantastic movie with some interesting cinematic references and with quite good special effects and the boy is called Harry Potter, a long time before that character was created, what a coincidence!. It is not so gory as other Empire productions(much less, in fact) but there is a great bloody scene in which a guy is transformed in a kind of tree and a whole forest emerges from him, it is a curious aspect of the movie and the ghoulies appeared here for the first time(You can see them in the forest singing strange songs).So, if you like fantasy movies this is a quite acceptable B fantastic movie.The only pitiful aspect is that the infamous Italian director Joe D'amato made a pretended sequel with the title of "Troll 2" which it seems is bad as hell, and I am sure it has nothing to do with the original although it has been impossible for me to watch it because it has never been edited in Spain, but I will get a copy if I can, even if it is only to burn it.Note: If in the USA you still can find forgotten movies like this in video, you don´t know how lucky you are!, here they are really difficult to find.
Terrible, but at least it sort of entertains
TheLittleSongbird15 February 2011
Troll is not as bad as its sequel, which is horrendous(yet you sort of get some entertainment at how bad it is), but I would be lying if I said it wasn't a terrible movie.
The production values are quite shoddy, the cinematography is slip-shod while the costumes are hokey. The sound effects range from okay-ish to truly bizarre, and the story is weak and quite predictable. That's not all, the direction is sloppy, the script is dreadfully corny but somewhat hilarious in the way that it doesn't know which direction to take, and the acting from all involved is terrible. Oh, and the troll is more silly than scary.
Yet I actually got some entertainment out of it, also it is quite short, has a cool score and goes quickly, so overall it is not a complete waste of time. 3/10 Bethany Cox
The production values are quite shoddy, the cinematography is slip-shod while the costumes are hokey. The sound effects range from okay-ish to truly bizarre, and the story is weak and quite predictable. That's not all, the direction is sloppy, the script is dreadfully corny but somewhat hilarious in the way that it doesn't know which direction to take, and the acting from all involved is terrible. Oh, and the troll is more silly than scary.
Yet I actually got some entertainment out of it, also it is quite short, has a cool score and goes quickly, so overall it is not a complete waste of time. 3/10 Bethany Cox
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
