Dead of the Nite (2013) User Reviews

Had potential, but ultimately failed

[Mister-Creeper · 4/10 · 21 January 2014]

I must say I had been looking forward to watching this for quite some time, and it wasn't just because of Tony Todd (CANDYMAN) having a somewhat sufficient role in it. No. I was intrigued by the plot. A found footage film about the paranormal with a slasher element added in for good measure. Take that and surround it all with an ongoing detective investigation and you have DEAD OF THE NITE.

I really wanted to like this film, and I tried, but it just couldn't deliver. The acting was nothing spectacular, but better than one would expect coming from a film with a $20k budget. The kills were a major let down, very unimpressive and practically bloodless. I really had a big problem with the filming/editing. As we are watching the found footage from multiple cameras, it is edited to look like a normal film instead of what actual found footage would look like. It was also quite predictable. Several things were apparent before they happened. I knew the "twist" ending long before it was revealed.

Needless to say (but I'll say it anyway), I was very disappointed. DEAD OF THE NITE had the potential to be a really decent film, but ultimately it failed. Not even the presence of the great Tony Todd could save it. What a shame.

A very grave encounter

[Harbottle-64 · 2/10 · 7 July 2014]

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. What started as a promising, if unoriginal, British slant on the now common theme of "Ghost Hunters meet evil spirits in a Haunted House" (think Grave Encounters), quickly gave way to a rather humdrum plot that was very disappointing.

Despite the presence of Tony "Candyman" Todd, the acting seemed at best to be that of a provincial amateur dramatic group (think The Farndale Avenue Housing Estate Townswomen's Guild Dramatic Society), but not as interesting. "Characters" quickly revert to stereotype. Todd tries to make up for this by hammily overacting, although he does manage to steal every scene he's in (not difficult).

The "police station" scenes are wholly unconvincing and the "policemen" laughable. With numerous bog-standard crime fare on telly and in films, surely it wouldn't be too difficult to make these scenes reasonably realistic? Er, no.

The "twist" in the plot is hardly surprising, although the reason for it is strangely bizarre. The denouement comes as a blessing for various reasons. I can't remember welcoming the closing titles in a film more readily. Not good. Avoid.

Dead of the Nite (2013)

[morrigan1982 · 2/10 · 15 February 2014]

An important reason for me, to get the movie and watch it was Tony Todd. He is always so magnificent and when he is in a movie even in a small part, you always talk about his role. I really love some actors like him, Robert England etc and I really want to see them again, having an appearance in a movie that is more than a few minutes.

So back to this movie: a film crew goes to a haunted house for their internet show. The caretaker (Tony Todd) warns them about the house and that the doors during the night will be locked. The film team doesn't listen and they want to stay in the house during the night. Alone… in the dark... In the night … no one can hear them…

Lucky for us, the footage was retrieve and so we can watch what happened to them. I am really tired of the 'found footage' type of movies. When it was done for the first time you had fun watching something completely different. Now so many movies are done like this. Some are good like Rec (2007), but most of them

Full of Jumps

[gameanythin · 11 July 2013]

I watched Dead of the Nite at the Gold Coast Film Festival in Australia and enjoyed the film from the Hitchcock style opening credits all the way to the great twist at the end.

The film is an unusual combination of traditional filmmaking and the found footage style. It works very well as it pulls you from one storyline to the other without taking you too far out of caring for the characters.

The best thing about the film is Tony Todd. Although he's only in it for about 15 minutes he steals every scene he's in and his voice truly is legendary!

The young cast are OK, though at times it seems a little am-dram, and the night vision can grate on you a little, but the cutting to the traditional daytime stuff helps break it up. Also thankfully it's not all shaky cams that make you sick. The pacing is thoughtful and builds tension, and though the director uses a few cliché tactics to create the jumps, they still work very effectively.

Overall I gave it a 10/10 (which is based on the fact they made it for only $20,000) but it is more as 7/10 though still worth a watch when it comes out on DVD.

Budget is no excuse: Weak!

[Patient444 · 3/10 · 26 January 2014]

Dead of the nite! Well the audience sure was. Boring. Weak. Unoriginal.

I get it, people wanna make horror, they wanna show what they can do with a micro-budget, so founds will gather and they can make something even bigger. Well, we all love the underdogs, but as said, they rarely manage to do something great. And this is not the case here: "Dead of the nite" is one boring movie, that looks more like an episode from a very cheap and cheesy "twilight zone" series to be honest. By the end of it, you will be quite disappointed, and angry cause you didn't look for anything better than this. Therefore,I'm here to give one precious advice: look elsewhere!

A movie with quite a similar plot is "Evidence", and although some of its comments are just mean, hey, keep in mind the fact that is a B horror movie with a grade of over 5 on IMDb. Am telling you, horrors rarely get good grades here. So go in that direction, you'll thank me later.

Cheers!

Shocking

[snowman_2050 · 1/10 · 3 February 2014]

I really wanted to like this and get into it but this is truly one of the worst films I have seen. I got maybe 45mins - 1 hour in before giving up and deciding to write that hour of my life off as a mistake.

The acting is weak, some of the camera work is weird considering we are meant to be watching camcorder footage, the chief detective guy is laughable and always angry for some bizarre reason and the story just doesn't go anywhere.

Stay away from this at all costs, it really is not worth your time at all, but feel free to partake in some other fun activities like the following instead:

• watch paint dry - watch a puddle evaporate - count your feet

Not a good movie

[jcalicdan3 · 1/10 · 1 March 2014]

This movie was a waste of time. Acting horrible, fighting scenes were fake and looked fake, actors were over dramatic and the scenes were just out of place. It was a waste of time and I will definitely not be recommending this to anyone even my worst enemy. This movie was portrayed to be scary and wasn't. The camera setting wasn't interesting it set right to make it interesting and for the lighting it was obvious that the killers would have seen it but it was just awful. The people who were in the movie were just over actors who have gotten recognized. Some of the scenes were so fake. For example the female that feel down the stairs. She fell in a certain way where she definitely should not have died but she did. I mean how did she die with falling like that?? Also with the other deaths, it just made no sense and I'm done scenes you can see the feet of the people that were recording it. Just horrible!!

You will be bored to death...

[paul_haakonsen · 1/10 · 14 November 2016]

Sometimes it is a good idea to take heed and observe the low rating of a movie on IMDb as a clear indicator of not to watch this movie. However, I figured that I would still give "Dead of the Nite" a chance, especially since Tony Todd was in it.

I shouldn't have taken the warning serious...

This was one of the more boring, uneventful and pitiful horror movies that I have had the misfortune to bear witness to in a long, long time. And it didn't help the movie one inch that it was presented in a sort of 'found footage' way, you know with the questionable and shaky camera that is all over the place.

Furthermore, it didn't really help the movie either that it had no proper and solid storyline to sell the movie. "Dead of the Nite" was a shallow husk of a movie trying to pass off as being a horror movie.

The acting in this abysmal movie was questionable. Sure, some people were doing fair enough jobs, but they had next to nothing to work with. While others were just appalling to witness on the screen. And even Tony Todd seemed to have lost his mojo in this movie. He was there physically, but mentally he seemed a million miles away.

I didn't even make it to the halfway point of the movie before I had to give up out of pure frustration, sheer boredom and complete disbelief that movie like this still find a way into production and more scarily so onto the market.

There was nothing interesting about "Dead of the Nite", aside from the title. But even there they managed to mess it up; "Nite", seriously? They couldn't even be bothered to spell the word properly? If you enjoy a good horror movie, then "Dead of the Nite" is definitely not the movie for you. However, if you enjoy a movie with no purpose and no entertainment value, then by all means do check out "Dead of the Nite".

I am forced to rate this movie a mere one out of ten stars. Stay well clear of this one, folks.

Nothing special and a retread.

[jmbovan-47-160173 · 4/10 · 14 December 2020]

So...ghost hunters in a haunted place. And then they start dying. Night vision cameras, annoying personalities, and the same tired scenario with a cop twist. Ho hum.

Tony Todd owns the screen

[rob-236 · 10/10 · 29 March 2014]

Just watched dead of the nite and really enjoyed it.

Some great homages to some more well known movies, the story was original and had me guessing right up to the end. A decent cast includes Tony Todd who owns the screen as he does in every film he is in.

Cicely Tennant is a good leading lady, really plays up her role as the "desperate to be famous" drama queen and it was nice to see a fleeting cameo from scream queen Suzi Lorraine.

The film was made with a very small budget and gets a far too low mark from some on here so i'm giving it a ten as it deserves better recognition. Well done to all involved, I look forward to future projects.

Fair Review, ignore the negative reviews

[bl-telfair · 6/10 · 15 February 2014]

I'm glad I didn't check the ratings on here before deciding to watch this. 2.7/10 and a few terrible reviews. Geez. The only movies I really ever watch are horror. Seen hundreds and hundreds. I know a piece of trash when I see it. This isn't trash and is far from a 2.7. 20k budget? Would have had no idea by watching it. The plot in itself is awesome. Ghost hunt that doesn't involve a ghost but instead a killer on the inside. Pretty cool idea. A legit company and a decent budget could make a hell of a movie off that premise.

Bottom line- It is certainly no GRAVE ENCOUNTERS or SESSION 9. It isn't even in the same stratosphere. However......if you dig that sort of movie then you MIGHT really enjoy this. I'd give it a 5, but I'll toss it a 6 just to somewhat offset the crazy low rating.

All things considered...not too bad

[red-lion-1 · 8/10 · 7 March 2015]

I didn't expect too much from this movie due to the low budget but was pleasantly surprised. I felt some of the acting was very good (Stuart Boother in particular was believable, fun and his fight scene was great). Others were not so good...the policemen were wooden and overacted their hearts out! The story was a good concept and the twist was believable, if somewhat predictable. This movie has the great Tony Todd and he was great as to be expected and lent a gravitas to the scenes he was in. Is this the best horror ever? Well, no! But taking into account the budget I thought it was well-made, fun, generally well acted (Tony Todd and Stuart Boother in particular) and well worth a watch. Not a gore- fest but it didn't need to be!

Found footage with a difference.

[parry_na · 6/10 · 13 July 2018]

Candyman's Tony Todd growls his way through the role of Ruber, caretaker to the infamous Jericho Manor. Todd gleefully hams his way through his scenes, but manages never to send up the subject matter.

Two policemen observe footage left behind by a group of internet documentary makers. They have been locked in the Manor overnight and the policemen, Detectives Anderson and Jenkins (Joseph Milson and Gary Mavers) are determined to find out what happened to them. Paul (the essential unsubtle idiot of the group), Jason, Anne-Marie, Sheila (the clairvoyant) and Amanda the hostess with ideas above her station. The cast are enthusiastic but not always convincing, which is a common trait with low budget projects like this. The characters have their flaws of course, but are never as needlessly unlikable as several other groups portrayed in 'teen' horror films.

It might be easy to dismiss this as 'Blair Witch in a haunted building' - and there is a scene in which Amanda (Cicely Tennant), having been brought down to size by her experiences, records a goodbye message to her parents much like Heather did in the 1999 film - but here the protagonist is not quite spectral. Furthermore, this is not quite a found footage film. It is a film about two Detectives looking at found footage - with that in mind, the addition of jump scares and an incidental score is somewhat explained. And the reactions of Jenkins are very effective.

The twist at the end also really impressed me. The reveal of the killer is very well handled, as is his habit of gently kissing his victims before they die. Good fun.

Giving It An Extra Star For Tony Todd

[ladymidath · 8/10 · 26 October 2022]

Not a bad movie but you can it was done on a very tight budget. There are some genuine scares but the acting is a bit uneven. The main cast is good, of course Tony Todd stands out by a mile. To be honest, I didn't see the ending coming and it was a nice little twist. The movie did start out strong though, it managed to build up tension and the seance scene was very effective. What hurt the movie was that you could see it was done cheaply. With a bigger budget, this could have been a really great horror film. Still, it is a lot better than many of the cheapie movies being cranked out lately. I would recommend this for fans of Tony Todd.

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU LOOK FOR

[nogodnomasters · 6/10 · 20 April 2019]

A crew of ghost hunters are found dead at the haunted Jericho Manor. Ruber (Tony Todd) the caretaker is brought in for questioning. Tony Todd has a great voice for telling a horror tale. Unfortunately when he was done, so was the bulk of his role in the film. We now get to look at the found tapes which included an over abundant of amateur night time green tinted footage. And to top it all off the scare factor wasn't that great.

Three stars based on the strength of Todd's performance. Okay as a found footage rental.

Parental Guide: F-bomb. No sex or nudity.