I just sat and watched this junk. I know a lot goes into film making and there are professionals involved but this was awful. Easily one of the worst 3 movies I have ever seen. There was no plot. There was no point. Why even make this? It's almost laughable if it were not for the ten bucks I just flushed down the toilet. I could have spent that money on a burger.
shareCan you give us more info. Acting, pacing, editing, cinematography, plot arch, character development, exc? No spoilers, just your overall thoughts on it besides no plot.
shareFor starters I am trying to figure out where the 2.7 million dollar budget went into. This was shot like one of those short horror films you see on YouTube. The only problem is this is not short and there is absolutely no horror whatsoever. The writers are trying to tell some kind of story involving the relationship of a bad parent and her young daughter, but it falls flat because it has no layers to it. The filler story has no correlation to the main issu which is the so called 'monster.' Also the movie just abruptly ends. There is no suspense. No triumph of our protagonist. Nothing. This may have been the worst 2 million ever spent. No spoilers, but I can assure you whatever you have see. In the trailer is THE entire movie. Literally. I would wait for this to come on Netflix or something before spending any type of money to watch. One other thing the creature in this film is really dumb. Like generic dumb. It is afraid of a flashlight, but not car headlights. And the climax...oh boy😖
shareMaybe you are to dumb to appreciate a good movie. just maybe.
shareI am more dumber now than me is before sawing this moovee
shareNo, OP has a point. I do agree that some people on IMDb are awful at reviewing movies and let just say first of all that it's not 'junk'. It's really well shot. But it's not great. The film makers have already made this movie a let down to the target audience by calling it The Monster. Yep it's a monster movie. But it's marketed the wrong way. It's well shot, like I said before but there are some films that don't show the monster (whatever it is perceived to be) and they pull it off way better. This is an unrewarding film that tries really hard to be a monster movie but in my opinion is just a Babadook wannabe. 10 points for trying but for me it didn't work out at all. Added kudos for the backstory....just don't make a real monster the reason to tell it. Opinions welcome guys.
shareNo, OP has a point. I do agree that some people on IMDb are awful at reviewing movies and let just say first of all that it's not 'junk'. It's really well shot. But it's not great. The film makers have already made this movie a let down to the target audience by calling it The Monster. Yep it's a monster movie. But it's marketed the wrong way. It's well shot, like I said before but there are some films that don't show the monster (whatever it is perceived to be) and they pull it off way better. This is an unrewarding film that tries really hard to be a monster movie but in my opinion is just a Babadook wannabe. 10 points for trying but for me it didn't work out at all. Added kudos for the backstory....just don't make a real monster the reason to tell it. Opinions welcome guys.
shareYou are smashing my hopes for this film.
shareWow if it's in your top three worst films you obviously haven't watched a lot of movies because there are REALLY some bad ones out there.
shareThe last shot in the trailer with the monster in the background moving and the daughter in the front looks stolen exactly from Alien when Ripley was on the lifeboat.
shareWhat?! What kind of logic is THAT?
The OP may have watched 10 movies or 1,000,000 movies and still have a top three worst he/she has ever seen. How can you possibly determine that the OP hasn't watched a lot of movies because they have picked a WORST THREE? Could you make a favorite/worst list from the movies you've seen? Of course you could. The number of movies you have watched is irrelevant... Du-uh!
"What?! What kind of logic is THAT?
The OP may have watched 10 movies or 1,000,000 movies and still have a top three worst he/she has ever seen. "
It's very logical. If the OP only watched 10 movies, then of course it's surely to be in the bottom 3 films he/she has viewed, but if the OP has watched 1000000 films, then it is highly unlikely that this would be in the top 3 worst films...possible, but unlikely. A lot of people get upset for wasting their time and money on a film and say things out of disappointment or anger. I'm not defending this film but I've seen too many people on these boards calling certain movies "the worst film ever."
Yea, I gave this film a 4/10 and have watched 2,332 worse films, films that I have rated less than a 4/10. Not to mention another 964 films right along side this film in the 4 rating.
So yea, brakem is absolutely, positively correct on the matter! Case closed on that nonsensical argument. Don't even let me go into how many low budget films I've seen that have terrible actors, monsters so bad that make this one look like the most badass, terrifying creature in the universe, horrible production values such as terrible sound and lighting, bad editing, ect.ect.ect.
I too get annoyed when someone who has obviously seen so few films that call films with good production values, cinematography, sound and passable acting "The Worst Film I've Ever Seen". It just screams ignorance.
[deleted]