No clue what this is even supposed to be about??? Terrible plot
5 Reviews
Movie
mlhuillier24 January 2021
Welcome to Hades...
sandginner2 February 2019
...is a better title in my opinion. You know not Hell where your immortal soul is punished for any of the deadly sins or even the original sin, but where such trivial things as trying to outsmart the Gods are punished by endlessly pushing a boulder up a steep hill only to have it roll back down on you, or forever trying to grasp a low hanging fruit that just inches away every time you reach for it, or where simply looking forward to watching a nice scary movie results in being punished with watching this.
This ... I don't know what to call it. It's not trash, or even human excrement because those originally had substance that had been depleted then have been discarded. This is just nothingness. Not even amateurish, because the word "amateur" implies some interest if not love in doing something, but not achieving a desired quality.
This looks like somebody opened exactly four Wikipedia pages, Psychoanalysis, Horror Tropes, Fetishes, and Phobias, and to make a quick buck, concocted a cacophonous sequence of sounds and image.
So I guess on some level, it does deliver. Welcome to the lowest of the low.
I love you mommy
nogodnomasters12 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
The production consists of six different short features by six different directors. All of the stories have some sort of twist. Some are supernatural and others are not. This is supposed to be a VHS tape that got delivered which never concluded or tied things together. And who even has a VHS player?
There were low budget effects and some were simply bad such as the zombie. The incest one was uncomfortable at times. Most of the twists you see coming.
Guide: F-word, sex, nudity.
There were low budget effects and some were simply bad such as the zombie. The incest one was uncomfortable at times. Most of the twists you see coming.
Guide: F-word, sex, nudity.
Is this supposed to be a joke?
Manuel-Hoerth24 June 2021
This is a joke, right? And they where thinking: "How can we make the worst movie ever?".
Because actually, if they were going for that and were trying to make another one those "It's so bad it's good" movies (like "Birdemic" for example) they actually did a "good" job!
Because as a horror movie it's laughable and even most "Trash" movies are better productions than whatever this is supposed to be. But as a complete train wreck, it's actually pretty "good" and I really don't mean that in any mean way, but I mean it as a genuine complement! And as such it's actually entertaining and definitely more entertaining than movies like Sharknado that try hard (and ultimately fail) to be "so bad it's good". This movie doesn't even need to try, it comes natural and I have to admit it kept me entertained the entire time. It's like a good old fashioned murder mystery and it really keeps you at the edge of your seat. Only instead of trying to figure out who the murderer is, you are constantly trying to figure out if they were really trying to make the first truly worthy sequel to "The Room" (in which case they kinda succeeded) or if they were genuinely trying to make a "real" movie (in which case they kinda failed).
For example: Are they intentionally shooting scenes without any light to make the movie bad, or do they genuinely not know that you need light for a shoot? And do they have good and bright light in the next scene to make it intentionally inconsistent, or because they realized their mistake and are genuinely trying to improve? Are they shooting out of focus to the point were you think they must be putting Vaseline on the lens, to make the film intentionally bad or to make the film appear artsy? And again, do they use various inconsistent (but equally bad) consumer cameras from 20 years ago to make the film intentionally bad or because they think that would make the movie appear "retro"? You just never ever know and so it's an endless mystery that is actually sort of fun.
With Birdemic and Sharknado, you know they were intentionally trying to be "so bad it's good", in which case it doesn't really work. But with this movie, you really can't tell, so they actually succeed at being "so bad it's good". So now I don't really know what to rate it, cause it really is so bad that it becomes so entertaining that I feel it would actually deserve a higher rating, but I feel that by giving it a good rating I would actually hurt the film more than by giving it a bad rating (and it truly is a bad film after all). But as a "so bad it's good" movie, I would actually give it a 10!
Also, I think I figured out why they called it "Welcome to Hell". It's because that's the only movie available on the streaming service down there...
Because actually, if they were going for that and were trying to make another one those "It's so bad it's good" movies (like "Birdemic" for example) they actually did a "good" job!
Because as a horror movie it's laughable and even most "Trash" movies are better productions than whatever this is supposed to be. But as a complete train wreck, it's actually pretty "good" and I really don't mean that in any mean way, but I mean it as a genuine complement! And as such it's actually entertaining and definitely more entertaining than movies like Sharknado that try hard (and ultimately fail) to be "so bad it's good". This movie doesn't even need to try, it comes natural and I have to admit it kept me entertained the entire time. It's like a good old fashioned murder mystery and it really keeps you at the edge of your seat. Only instead of trying to figure out who the murderer is, you are constantly trying to figure out if they were really trying to make the first truly worthy sequel to "The Room" (in which case they kinda succeeded) or if they were genuinely trying to make a "real" movie (in which case they kinda failed).
For example: Are they intentionally shooting scenes without any light to make the movie bad, or do they genuinely not know that you need light for a shoot? And do they have good and bright light in the next scene to make it intentionally inconsistent, or because they realized their mistake and are genuinely trying to improve? Are they shooting out of focus to the point were you think they must be putting Vaseline on the lens, to make the film intentionally bad or to make the film appear artsy? And again, do they use various inconsistent (but equally bad) consumer cameras from 20 years ago to make the film intentionally bad or because they think that would make the movie appear "retro"? You just never ever know and so it's an endless mystery that is actually sort of fun.
With Birdemic and Sharknado, you know they were intentionally trying to be "so bad it's good", in which case it doesn't really work. But with this movie, you really can't tell, so they actually succeed at being "so bad it's good". So now I don't really know what to rate it, cause it really is so bad that it becomes so entertaining that I feel it would actually deserve a higher rating, but I feel that by giving it a good rating I would actually hurt the film more than by giving it a bad rating (and it truly is a bad film after all). But as a "so bad it's good" movie, I would actually give it a 10!
Also, I think I figured out why they called it "Welcome to Hell". It's because that's the only movie available on the streaming service down there...
Oddly Entertaining
baxter_clete13 June 2021
I guarantee the 1's didn't watch more than a few minutes.
The stories are pretty corny, but strangely compelling! I had other things to do, but I couldn't stop watching until it was over.
The first story or two were stupid, but the rest I really enjoyed watching.
... I liked it!!
The stories are pretty corny, but strangely compelling! I had other things to do, but I couldn't stop watching until it was over.
The first story or two were stupid, but the rest I really enjoyed watching.
... I liked it!!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
