The 6th Extinction (2012) User Reviews

Oh, but, SERIOUSLY?

[Gladys_Pym · 1/10 · 24 August 2012]

Where on earth do you start with rubbish like this?

There are two reviews as I write this. Both are positive. That males them seriously biased.

The storyline talks about 'Indie horror mainstay' John Vincent. That means he's made three films in 15 years.

He's directed, edited, produced and written them. Oh, and written the music. And presumably done the sound and chosen the 'actors', because all of these tasks are done at around the same level. Really, REALLY badly.

There are long, and I do mean, long, unedited shots of, for example, a priest getting to work unlocking, walking around, taking books out of a cupboard, sitting down, opening the books, making VERY LARGE notes, and so on. Also an inordinately long and boring on foot chase.

All of the suspense, if we could call it that, is spoilt by a sound track which sounds like bad dubbing, but isn't. It just all sounds post production and no-one noticed that it was done in a basement with bad acoustics.

No stand out performances, the best, Michel Bugard, ruined by some really rubbish 'special' effects.

And, now I come to think of it, WHY? Why would vampires, (admittedly vampires dressed in sheets - nice touch), want to kill everyone? Don't they need blood to survive? Why slaughter lunch when you need lunch to stay alive?

To be fair, this may be answered later in the film. I could only manage 30 minutes. And I somewhat resent that.

Fail

[lasse-458-220057 · 1/10 · 24 August 2012]

Hi, had to join so I could vote this sh*t down... I usually don't give a damn about bad movies, I watch ten minutes and then I say - not for me - and turn it off... but, but... for me to join IMDb just so I can warn you all so you don't waste any time/money on this crap... well you guess how bad it is...

I've seen quite a few movies and I still payed to see this crap, (shame on me) it shouldn't even be called a movie... it's like vomit on film.

OK, by now you should have understood what all, even slightly intelligent, people will think about this crap... so move on, nothing to see here, watch some old movie that you like, again, 'cause this sh*t will only make you angry, like it made me :/

Stuff you flush in your toilet

[LOL101LOL · 1/10 · 24 August 2012]

I think the best part of this film is the start, the bit that is not part of the film, just the intro, the rest, well like the title I gave, stuff you flush down your toilet, get it? starts with a S and ends with a T, I am just not sure if a word to describe this film is allowed on the great IMDb (well was great). I have bagged many of these films on here, and had some of my reviews deleted by IMDb, no bad language was used, hence I won't even try with the S word! The 1 review on here stating great Indie film must be one of those great actors, directors, make up artist that worked on this garbage! The filming is done with a family hand held K mart camera, the dialogue, script is written by a zombie, its just brain dead material.

I must give it one positive spin, it is in the running for the worst rubbish of 2012.

I would give it a zero, but sadly I can only sink as low as 1 out of 10.

Avoid at all time! I warned you!

Just another one of those low budget movies

[sean-palmqvist · 1/10 · 25 August 2012]

The movie is not as good as the cover may lead you to believe. Amateur camera work along with some amateur acting is all that this movie had to deliver. The story line is what it is. I suppose that these types of movies are released to the public so that perhaps the actors and directors may get discovered. The movie could have been a lot more better had the directors given it more time and thought. Well, I guess the bottom line in the a fore stated is that people have to start somewhere. If the camera crew or the actual camera man would do a better job then it wouldn't make the acting seem amateur. I was forced to skim thru the movie in about 5 minutes because it just wasn't really delivering.

Shame on you!

[tomrunelian · 1/10 · 26 August 2012]

Shame on you John Vincent for writing, directing, producing and filming this piece of garbage. Shame on you Kevin Saari for "designing" the "costumes" to the worst film ever made. Shame on you Eric Jaan for make up effects a five year old could've done with play dough. Shame on you Matt Cash for "photographic special effects" so lame I feel embarrassed on your behalf. Shame on you Mahssa Rashidy, Eric Maurer, Michael Bugard, Eric Jaan (twice!!!) and Misty Mills for calling yourself actors and for participating in this astonishingly horrible and utterly failed attempt to make a movie. Not a single person with his/her name attached to this "film" should never ever be allowed on a movie set again - not even to empty the garbage cans. SHAME ON YOU!

Somehow bad acting vampires are taking over the world.

[lvlfnow · 1/10 · 29 August 2012]

I am a lover of horror, slasher or even weird Barbie workout videos, but this has got to be one of the worst all time letdowns I've ever encountered. They must have spent most of their budget on the first 3 minutes of the film and then went out and recruited derelicts off the street to fill the roles of "actors." I saw an add somewhere for this freak show and thought it looked good, even the cover photo looked fairly scary. As soon as the first "actors" opened their pie holes I knew it was going down the crap-per. I mean at least try to sound like you're not reading from the script, if their was one. Quit waisting my time and your money, and stop ruining everybody's expectations. I'm not usually this abrasive, but this one deserved it.

Seriously lacked

[seanliebling · 1/10 · 29 October 2012]

I made a mistake and tried to watch it. The other reviewer mentioned this as a means of being discovered. Really? From shaking camera's to amateur make up and acting along with no plot worth mentioning. Oh, I suppose there was a plot but it took so long to get to it and the writer/directors penchant for trying to make you think he was smarter than he actually is by guessing what the plot might be just truly sucked. I'm sorry, but it was really bad. I actually had to start fast forwarding after 10-15 minutes it was that bad. They couldn't even walk normally half the time. Like people knowing their being filmed and not sure how to walk. Weird.

yikes

[skulld · 1/10 · 28 August 2012]

I'm ALL for indie films, and such, for I totally appreciate, admire and respect the artistic expression and vision...but....This is a bad movie!! In so many ways, I don't know where to begin. I know that I have no clue as to how to make a movie, but I do know a bad movie when I see it.

Actually, "bad" is actually putting it as nicely as I can. There are just way too many bad and absurd aspects to comment on, so maybe I should try to pull out a "good" aspect, or two in an effort to not totally bash this film.

Okay! Here we go:

1. "Shelly" had nice hair!

2. I think that was an Armani suit Michael was wearing!

3. Michigan looks nice in the Fall!

And with those three...this might get you through the film.

The best thing is...I actually watched the whole thing! Why? Well it was either watch this or clean out the fish tank!

Sorry fish!!!

This "movie" gave me cancer

[maybemummy · 1/10 · 23 September 2017]

As others have said indie films can be good. However that is not the case here. I don't even know where to begin this review because it's utter garbage. Don't waste your time. Thankfully i watched it for free on their website or is demand my money back. I feel bad for the people who paid for this.

Costumes were god awful spray painted robes were the worst. Nothing about this movie is salvageable except maybe the fireman he was decent.

The ending along with the whole movie was unnecessary especially with the 4 horsemen raping the girl to death. Disgusting. Will never watch any of their films again.

I'd give it a negative rating if I could.

Putred

[bigsword13 · 1/10 · 26 August 2012]

What a total waste of time. I would not watch this movie even if I was cast in it. It is that bad. Very amateur.

I could only watch 5 minutes, then left! I was hoping for more from this picture. When I watch pictures, I like to walk away from them hungry. With this flick, I wanted to join Jenny Craig. Or, I was definitely considering going on a fast. I needed to cleanse my mind from the absurdity it absorbed. I would place this in an unremarkable category or in the same column as Blair Witch Project or Apollo 18.

Nothing else stands out in my mind to say about this Stinker, except stay away!

One Word, BAD!

[go2dean · 30 September 2018]

Though the photography was pretty decent, the script was incredibly bad and filled with needless vulgarity.

The violent killing of a child on screen is what did it for me. The idea and premise of the story wasn't bad, but the whole film began to unravel with poor acting and weak dialogue.

If you are going to watch this movie I can only suggest that you do so at no expense.

A cool, gritty indie vampire flick

[paulavarjack · 8/10 · 31 July 2012]

VAMPIRELAND is a fun indie horror about vampires taking over the earth in a single night. The most striking aspect of the flick is how old school tough the vampires are - not a hint of romance or feelings whatsoever. They're just mean and tough monsters; not sexy in the slightest. The vampires are basically terminators with amazingly dirty mouths.

These vampires seem to really have the strength of 10 men. As tough as they are, they still seem governed by all the legendary rules - they can't cross running water, are afraid of crosses, and must be invited in, etc. All in all, a nice change of pace from TWILIGHT, which I am sick of at this point.

VAMPIRELAND moves from scene to scene quickly and doesn't bog down too much. The acting in general is OK, with Michael Bugard standing out as the lead vampire - boy does he have a potty mouth! Very funny at times, while still being scary.

The special effects and make up are much better then you'd think they'd be for an indie film - there's a sequence where the lead vampire battles a tank that's awesome. Good gore. Good music too.

Is it the best movie ever? Nope - but it's certainly not the worst either. It's lots of fun and as long as you aren't expecting CITIZEN KANE, you'll enjoy it. This is the kind of vampire film they don't make anymore, which might be this film's greatest strength. It's a bit like NEAR DARK in that regard.

Rented it from Amazon streaming - well worth $1.99 rental (especially if it's a stormy night). BTW, the stream looked great, even at one bar signal.

The worst movie I have ever seen!

[Waseemmm89 · 1/10 · 21 November 2012]

If a movie is rated low I still watch it, as some of the time I like it, I always used to think that the viewers who used to leave reviews were biased, as it might not be their type of movie or they didn't like the cast.

All I can say is this time around, I genuinely agree with the negative reviews. I honestly can't believe I wasted an hour watching this junk.

I wouldn't waste my time watching this people who are thinking about watching it, you will be disappointed. This movie is bad from every angle, there are no positives from thing movie.

I can't believe that I actually made an account so I could review this movie, this should be enough to prove how bad this movie was in terms of how disappointed I am. These type of movies should be banned lol.

What a load of crap

[andismyth · 1/10 · 4 July 2016]

The positive reviews for this film make me wonder if they were watching the same film as me???? But when one of the reviewers is a friend of one of the makers you don't need to be Einstein to work out why the positive review!!!!

After watching this total dross I know realise that the title is more about the state of the so called actors careers after starring in this than the movie.

This has got 1 star as IMDb don't have a minus star rating as yet!

When reading the blurb about the film the idea where satanists take over a town was intriguing, thinking they would show the slow infiltration of the town, glimpses of what the newcomers are up-to, build some suspense or mystery before letting all hell break loose. But no that would have been too much effort.

Instead we are given a weak and clichéd plot, terrible acting no attempt at mythology or new spin on the old tale. When the vamps do show they are dreadful excuses for vamps, crap acting and terrible make up( I think the person who did the make up is a goth with a serious Nosferatu fetish- can't call them make up artist for fear of offending the real artists).

I didn't even finish this film as I started rooting for the vamps to pick off the 4 strangers hopefully n one be all out attack and finally let the film finish.

Wish I could sue for the time I've wasted on this.

The 6th Extinction

[a_baron · 3/10 · 8 March 2016]

This is an off-beat vampire film that doesn't make the grade; its one saving grace is that there are some decent special effects, if you like seeing people shot through the head and stuff like that. Some of it is rather silly though, like when a newly created vampire picks up a tank and throws it. There is also a passable but very thin soundtrack, but once you've said that, you've said it all.

What is the plot? As far as there is one, it's the end of the world, and the vampires are taking over. There appears too to be a group of people who are prepared to betray the rest of Mankind for a promise of immortality, like you can ever trust a vampire? The main character is a woman named Shelly; it's her blind date who is turned into the tank-throwing vampire. She suffers a great deal of pain, but survives, which is more than most of the others do. The big question though is can you survive to the end of the film? Only if you're watching it on YouTube so you can multitask.