jjturley

This was obviously a low-budget movie. I say this because there are frequent continuity issues (peculiar silences and editing) that look like the film needed final touching up before releasing.

I have no problem with this, since I tend to focus on the story and the acting. I liked the story, since it had an interesting premise: in a small city, a real vampire, "Vanessa." is working at a blood bank, and a wanna-be vampire, "Bento," works in a comic book store. Both of them drain bodies of blood, but of course the wanna-be vampire has to use needles. Curiously, they both leave their victims in trash bags at the same part of the city dump, so the police are coming over every over evening and discover new corpses! As luck would have it, the real vampire lives next door to the main detective working on this case; they soon get chummy. And both the real vampire and the wanna-be vampire go to the hardware store at the exact same time to buy more trash bags for their victims.

Things are coming together and we are soon going to find out who gets out of this alive!

I give this movie five stars. I enjoyed it.

I saw this movie just last night. It was filmed with no-name actors primarily in one location. Clearly, it was done on a shoe-string budget.

I think that, based on what they had available, they did a wonderful job. It was suspenseful and scary at points. I especially enjoyed how they portrayed the sinister bad guy who had some serious personality problems. We don't get the full story on the guy, but enough to appreciate what a total creep he is.

In many ways, this story was tighter (76 minutes) and better made than many million-dollar productions out there.

I truly hope to see these actors in future films!

This review contains spoilers.

I saw the low ratings for this movie but decided to watch it all the same. Why? Three reasons: I live in Los Angeles and always love recognizing movie locations, it is a found-footage movie which I generally like, and finally, it was only 90 minutes long.

I think, by going in with low expectations, this movie was not bad at all. There are English three women ("Sophie," "Jessica," and "Lisa") visiting California. Sophie is a travel vlogger. All three look about 25 - 30 but act like teens and the dialog is pretty silly. In my mid-30s, I regularly went on wonderful road trips with two male friends and freely admit that our conversations were just as silly, or worse!

The girls meet two guys near the iconic "Hollywood" sign and bring them back to their rental place to hook up. I would consider this risky, but again, plenty of people do it.

The Lisa character notices that her phone is missing. Where did she leave it? Maybe someone took it? Also, someone is leaving them strange, hand-written notes. Well, the theft suspicion is confirmed when they later start receiving incredibly obscure texts (meaningless combinations of numbers and peculiar riddles) from Lisa's phone.

They attempt to drive up to San Francisco but end up in a non-descript motel in the middle of the desert. It becomes apparent they are being stalked when they find a fresh note at the motel. An obnoxious man they meet there becomes the primary suspect... and they are murdered that same evening by a man wearing a spooky mask (a la Texas Chainsaw Massacre.)

The movie then ends with this message: "#JusticeForSophie ... The FBI believes the killer could be one of Sophie's two million subscribers."

I did not like this ending since there was no reveal. Who was the killer? What was his motive? He wore a mask and we don't know. But there again, even if he had removed the mask, it wouldn't satisfy us since the only men the women met were seemingly harmless (with the exception of the obnoxious guy at the motel.)

While watching this movie, I did notice two clues, if I might call them that. The first was when the women were leaving LAX (the airport.) Some guy walking the other way bumped into Lisa very hard, causing her to react angrily. It had the appearance of him taking something from her. Possibly her phone? It makes sense, and I think this might have been placed in the script as a clue, but was never fleshed out. The other thing was when the TV news was broadcasting a piece about the "Cryptic Killer" who was still at large after murdering many women. The numbers and riddles coming from Lisa's phone were cryptic enough... so the Cryptic Killer was behind this? But here again, it was never fleshed out. We have no idea who the killer was, or what his reasonings were.

I don't think this movie was terrible, but I would not watch it again. Also, I don't think I would recommend it. It's watchable, and it shows a lot of locations in and around Los Angeles.

I love "found footage" horror movies, but often find myself disappointed. Let's face it -- they have been overdone and many are not very good.

So, I went into this movie with an open mind and generally low expectations. It was low budget and I had never heard of the actors before. So, what happened? This movie knocked my socks off!!

The acting was great, the camera was NOT shaky, and the story was tight. I must say, I thought it was extremely well done and it kept me watching all the way to the end.

My only concern about leaving such a high review is this: I do not want to set your expectations so high that you are doomed to be disappointed. (I know this has happened to me, at any rate.) Yes, there are a lot of bad quality horror movies out there... But Curse of Aurore is not one of them.

This Australian movie is low budget and I was not expecting much. With that said, it far surpassed my expectations. Considering how many "kids trapped in a haunted house" movies there are, this one still pulled some punches. The production values are high and the acting was also convincing.

On the downside, there were a couple things left unexplained at the end. It seems clear to me that this was intentional, maybe left for the viewer to decide. Also, because of their Aussie accents, I sometimes had to repeat certain sentences.

I would most definitely recommend this movie to anyone who likes this kind of horror movie. I gave it a 9/10 for their effort.

I saw an advertisement for this movie and decided to take a shot and watch it. At first, I felt disappointment since it seemed to be a juvenile production. But as I continued to watch, I thought "So, what?" This movie was low budget and the actors are all young, but why not give it a chance?

I am giving this move five stars. I think it had some problems, but at the same time, I could stay until the end of it. A few things about it intrigued me and kept me watching.

Would I watch it again? A definite NO is the answer. Yes, there are holes in the plot, but many higher budget movies do far worse. It was okay, when all is said and done.

This movie starts out okay, more or less. Sadly, from there it goes downhill. I faithfully watched it all the way to the end and I wonder why I did that. I am not going to bother with spoilers here... Suffice to say, it was hard to follow the motivations of the protagonists and antagonists. I suspect the writers threw around several ideas when they put the script together. Some did not follow through, and should have been taken out? Another reviewer suggested that they had run out of their budget during filming. Sure, that might have also been possible. Either way, I would not waste my time with this if I were you.

Warning -- Spoilers!

I went into this movie with high expectations since it had a good rating. Also, I like the Scottish Highlands. I am left sorely disappointed.

The acting is mostly okay, I guess, and the countryside is beautiful. I am sorry this is the only good I can really say.

There were far too many situation where people did things that made absolutely NO SENSE. Here we have two young American women hiking through desolate hills without cell phones. I grant that one of them had a hidden agenda... but the other so easily complied? Then when they know that a man is spying on them from a nearby hill, the woman pulls up her shirt and waves! The next day, they go to a pub and meet two strangers. They leave their beers unattended to get the drinks "roofed."

Later on, one woman points a gun at one of the bad guys while standing two feet in front of him - he can practically touch it! The man suggests that the woman check the corpse on the ground to see if there's a pulse... When she bends down, he snatches the gun. Big surprise!

There are myriad scenes where someone is pretty sure they had killed an adversary. They turn their back with relief only to have the "dead person" jump up to attack again.

There was an excessive amount of squirting blood in the fighting. People's faces were regularly covered. It was too much and a sad waste of tomato sauce.

There are serious timing problems. One example: When one guy draws a man out of his house, the woman is supposed to enter it to see if her friend is there. She goes in and walks around so slowly. She drops her coat on the floor before slowly climbing the stairs. Why not hurry it up? The man would likely return at any moment!

Finally, too many bizarre coincidences. The woman escaping from the bad guys spends a night alone and resumes hiking the next day. She passes the very cottage that the bad guys are living in and sees one of them on the back porch. He also sees her before going inside. Why didn't he chase her? Why didn't she run to get the police? But no. She approaches the cottage and spies on the man through the window. Perfect timing, since he gets stabbed by someone in the cottage!

This movie would have been MUCH more enjoyable if the characters were smarter. I get annoyed when I see someone does something unrealistic and dumb. I guess when it comes to slasher movies, common sense is not so common.

The plot of this movie concerns what horrible secret waits in a deep shaft in the artic north of Russia. The film IS actually Russian and the outside scenes were shot in the Kola Peninsula, which provides the extra sense of freezing desolation.

The scientists take an impossibly long elevator ride deep into ground ... and then the fun starts! The story held together well and entertained me. Of course, the tale has been been told in similar ways before, most notably with The Thing. But, so what?

What intrigued me is that there actually IS a deep hole in the Kola Peninsula. The Soviets created it during a 1970's research project to breach the Earth's crust. They did not succeed, though the resulting borehole is just seven miles deep. And at ten inches wide, nobody is likely to start exploring anytime soon.

The other intrigue was that the story takes place in the 1980's during the waning days of the Cold War. The scientist in this movie comment how the USSR is falling behind the USA and they are looking to catch up by creating a superweapon. Hence the reason for this deep hole?

Considering that this movie was shot in 2020 as relations between Russia and the USA had already been deteriorating, there is an interesting parallel between the 1980's and the 2020's.

Spoiler alert!

This movie was well done and the acting was quite solid. The year is 1999 and the place is Chicago. A man, James, grieving for the disappearance of his girlfriend, Hannah, a few years ago buries himself in his work as a film editor. He also regularly attends group therapy sessions with other folks processing their grief.

While reviewing a video from the late 1980's, James stumbles on a strange 'intrusion' of several seconds. Someone wearing a mask in a darkened room is wailing at the camera. There is a lot of background noise. Very strange and intriguing.

James decides to follow up and find out the source of this illegal broadcast. Along the way, he meets a Dr. Lithgow who reports there were two (or possibly three) such broadcasts. The FCC, in their search to find the perpetrators, has come down hard and confiscated as many copies of this video as they could find.

Some odd characters come out of the woodwork to warn James about these videos. He also learns that he is being followed by a strange woman named Alice. He ducks into a bar and she follows him inside. Alice will only reveal what's up if James agrees to get drunk with her.

From this point, we venture into more strangeness in James' obsessive pursuit of the source of the broadcasts. From the dates, James figures out there is a connection to disappearance of Hannah. There is a storage shed containing nothing but a rotary phone and an old answering machine. This leads them to a P. O. Box.

They then find the perpetrator... or do they? James doesn't think so. Alice however does and then vanishes that same evening. Incredibly, James the next morning barely notices or cares.

I am convinced that what we are really watching is James' descent into madness. It is all of his grief which is manufacturing some solution to how Hannah vanished. I wonder if Alice and Dr. Lithgow even exist! Poor James is losing his mind. The movie seems to end abruptly without resolution.

No spoilers, I promise.

Whenever we watch a horror movie involving vampires, there is a certain suspension of disbelief. We know that vampires are not real, so we put that aside for the sake of being entertained. Fair enough.

The problem with this movie is that, in addition to vampirism, there are many other weird things we also must accept. We have characters that do and say things that make no sense. Why would a young woman driving alone down a dark road at night have a collision with some shirtless guy and date him that same night after he commandeers her car?

My problem is this: When the characters are conversing, what they say has little or no relevance to what is going on. And, what IS really going on? What are they always running from? It's all a mess.

Maybe this was intentional? It might be like a dream sequence or something... I cannot say. Meg Foster is in this movie. But what did she tell us? I don't understand what her point was. I am sorry that she is apparently in such dire need for employment.

The story begins when a group of young guys are hanging out at the local joint one evening and they spot some attractive women sitting down at a nearby table. They make introductions and invite these ladies to a party at their residence. And here is where the problems arise, because the ladies are vampires!

This movie was shot on a shoestring budget and it shows: low-end props, cheapo special effects, and continuity issues with the sound. With that said, I stayed glued to my screen since this reminded me fondly of my early college days when I also worked on amateur projects.

The story holds together well and overall is competently crafted. The acting is, well, I will assume that the cast knew each other as friends. I am sure that this movie was fun to make. I am grateful to have the opportunity to view gems like this on YouTube.

Here is a "collection" of five different stories involving zombies. However, on closer inspection it would appear to be one story told five times slightly differently.

Here is the premise (no spoilers): We have a couple of very attractive young women yapping away about something, maybe their makeup or boyfriends. They have shrill voices. And then, seemingly out of nowhere, a zombie appears! Yikes, what are we going to do now?

Okay, so this is horror-comedy, which is fine in my book. It is also very low budget which I have nothing against except when it shows. And here, it is glowing red!

I was definitely entertained, though I would not likely watch it again. No special effects and also no nudity/profanity. This is something you could show the younger set.

This documentary reveals the plight of several Roma families (otherwise known as Gypsies) who had been forcibly evicted from their homes near downtown Sofia in 2001. Why? The entire location was cleared and replaced with a large supermarket.

The Bulgarian government moved these families into "temporary" lodging: a horrible shantytown without proper sanitation. And now, ten years later, these families were still waiting for the government to fulfill the promise and place them into proper housing.

There were plenty of church groups and government officials who were trying to help this situation, but not much could be accomplished. In Post-Communist Bulgaria, money is tight. Among the filth and despair, we find a young Roma girl with a gangrenous leg that needs to be amputated. Few of the children attend school and even fewer can read or write.

Interestingly, for all intents and purposes, these gypsies ARE Bulgarians. It was their forefathers who had travelled from India centuries ago to settle in Eastern Europe. And because of that, these folks have darker skin and live segregated from everyone else. And the cycle of poverty continues, generation after generation.

In spite of the harsh message, we could see the laughing children constantly playing games. They are happy. And the adults live their lives with quiet acceptance and occasional humor. They have accepted their fate.

I found it interesting that things were actually better for the Roma under Communism. As the great 'equalizer,' everyone was treated more equally; but under Capitalism, there are winners and losers, and these are definitely the losers. Still, at the end of the documentary, we learn that the government moved the families into apartments by 2012. They got their housing after all.

In Polish with subtitles.

This movie caught my eye on Netflix. Curious, I decided to watch it. Noticing also that it did not have an IMDB review, I wanted to "take one for the team" and write one. Warning: This review has spoilers. I normally avoid writing spoilers, but in this case, I could not imagine revealing only part of the story without exposing the ending.

The title, Spiral, refers to the spiraling down of depression. That is at least my interpretation.

Part I The events start in the snowy mountains. The scenery is both beautiful and gloomy. The lone protagonist (Tomasz Piatek, played by Jan Nowicki) drives his car to a desolate parking lot and silently tosses his keys away. He is obviously not returning. He then hikes up to a large wooden lodge of hikers. They are festive and Tomasz mingles, engaging them with bizarre conversations about life's meaning and our human fear of death. They are friendly and tolerate his quirks, even though he is prone to weird outbursts and inappropriate advances. One woman especially, Maria played by Zofia Kucowna, repeated turns him down. Tomasz has no climbing gear and did not even reserve a bedroom. He wanders around, bothering the guests, until he retires to the dining area. Everyone goes to sleep. Lights off.

Part II The bright morning reveals that Tomasz left early to hike alone and took little protection from the elements with him. A few hikers form a search party and go looking for him. People ask each other who knew 'this strange guest' the best, and it appears that nobody did. Someone decides to check the parking lot to see if Tomasz had maybe left instead, though there is uncertainly as to which car belongs to him. They confirm his car is there.

A search party climber suffers a minor accident during a steep climb which forces the folks waiting in the lodge to summon a helicopter instead. The search party gradually comes back down as the helicopter flies around the area looking for any signs. And they find him! Tomasz is sitting near one of the peeks in a squatting position to keep warm. The helicopter lands and the crew determine that Tomasz has frostbite. They place him on a gurney and fly off. The folks at the lodge are relieved that Tomasz was found before freezing to death.

Part III Several weeks have passed and we are viewing the confines of a sanitarium. The head psychiatrist, played by Alezsander Bardini, explains to a classroom full of students how Tomasz had a seemingly full life but was unable to enjoy it and that is why he tried to kill himself. Tomasz now spends his days in bed or walking around the facility wearing his hospital pajamas. His right hand is fully covered with a large bandage.

The woman at the lodge, Maria, visits Tomasz to see how he's doing. Strangely, he seems angry with her. He is also despondent that the doctors could not save his right hand. He shares his hospital room with another patient who complains that Tomasz has received preferential treatment. After all, how much did the helicopter flight cost used in the rescue? The roommate complains a lot.

Maria consults with the psychiatrist telling him that she intends to visit every day. She asks how long Tomasz has got left, and the psychiatrist answers with a few more days. Maria intends to visit each day that she can, much and all as it seems there is no point.

Tomasz is walking down a hallway and passes the morgue. He sees that the fresh corpse on the table is the complaining roommate. The orderly shouts at Tomasz to leave, who then goes outside to cry. The following day, he opens a large window on the second floor and climbs onto the sill. He removes his bandage exposing a red hand and then falls to his death.

In the final scene, we have Tomasz's lifeless body viewed from above as people run out of the sanitarium to find him. They are in shock.

It is October, 1958, and "Peter Jenson" (played by William Bendix) is in the office of a New York psychiatrist named "Dr. Arnold Gillespie" (played by Martin Balsam.) Peter made the appointment since he has been suffering from the same nightmare for the last several nights. He is very anxious.

In this dream, Peter always finds himself at a hotel in Honolulu. The date is December 6th, 1941, which is the day before the Pearl Harbor attack. So, how can he warn people of the impending doom?

Dr. Gillespie listens patiently and tries to help convince Peter that it is all just a dream, regardless of how real it might feel at the time.

Together, the two men smoke a lot of cigarettes as they try to get to the bottom of what all this means... wait for the twist ending!

This was a well-done drama. Convincing characters and intriguing story. I strongly recommend it.

The "plot" here involves a woman going to a deserted beach house with her girlfriends over the same weekend that her violent ex-husband is getting released from prison. The beach house is very remote, so if something bad were to happen...

I see nothing wrong with the plot, though I would wonder why anyone would want to put themselves so out of contact, regardless of whether a violent ex-felon were suddenly looking for them.

The filmmakers here were extremely clever in convincing us that this beach house was remote. What they did was give many shots of the young women driving, and driving, and driving. Throw in some long shots of the beach, with nothing going on, with waves, and more waves, and we see that this place is really quite remote, I mean really far away, from civilization.

During some of the conversations, there were peculiar jump cuts that I could not quite understand. Since we are at the same point of view each time, it was distracting, especially when the cuts were in the middle of a sentence.

The sound sometimes also dropped off, which again made me wonder if it was intentional. It was too frequent to be just bad editing... Or was it? I think also a few people misspoke their lines, getting the phrase correct the second time. Normally, of course, this would be edited out, unless the editors thought that they did such a great job the first time that they decided to leave the whole thing in?

There is a very attractive woman (Diana Prince) who goes topless for about 30 seconds (jump cuts strung together, each 10 seconds long = 30 seconds) You can't miss it, since the lead (Taya Parker) exclaims something like "Look - She's going topless!" right beforehand. Lucky for me, otherwise I would have missed it. By that point, I was not looking. You see, while I watched this "movie," I found myself suddenly fascinated by things in my living room that I had not really appreciated before. The coffee table over the carpet, for example. I was fixating on that more and more as this "movie" played out.

Let me give them some credit, though. There was a surprise ending. Something did happen that was not expected. And a lot of women were quite easy on the eyes.

I think that this movie could have been done a lot better. First and foremost, the editing needed a lot of work.

This movie is about zombies roaming the countryside after a nuclear holocaust. That is the gist of it.

Diving deeper in, there are several characters doing different things. There is a serum which is supposed to cure the zombies. There are also Islamic terrorists, Russian agents, evil scientists, and bank robbers. As I followed along and tried to understand, the story threads rolled into a large knot which I could not untangle. I honestly don't know who was doing what, or why. There were some very attractive women in the cast, and the locations (mostly Kentucky) were quite scenic so I stayed to the end of the movie. I knew it ended only when it told me and not from anything that was going on.

Please don't worry, I will not give away spoilers. I don't really know what was going on through most of it. It was long and ended at 133 minutes. I knew it was over, but could not tell you what happened.

This movie was made on a shoestring budget with shaky video camera and sometimes choppy sound. I want to say that a low-budget movie need not be a low-quality one. But in this case, unfortunately, what you pay for is exactly what you get.

I am giving them "2" out of "10." I would have given them a "1" but at least they finished it. I would have given up on it much earlier, if I had been viewing the dailies.

This little gem, I suppose, would be categorized as science fiction, since it involves a time traveler.

The year is 1956, and the location seems to be New York. The protagonist of this story is a young Polish immigrant named Johnny (played by Jacques Sernas) who works two jobs and is also enrolled in night school. He is very hard-working and has a delightful innocence about him. In his precious spare time, he likes to read books to improve his English.

So, during one of his bookstore purchases he gets an old dusty book, an American almanac, and takes it home. After dusting it off, he notices that this almanac is for the year 1997! (How on earth did it end up back in 1956?) Johnny at first suspects that it is a misprint, but as he reads about coming events, it is clear that the book is genuine.

Shortly after Johnny's lucky find, a mysterious character by the name of B. O. Boyne (played by Charles Ruggles) appears at the bookstore, asking about getting the almanac back. Mr. Boyne is strangely dressed and speaks in a slightly different manner than everyone else. His cigarettes also apparently light by themselves.

It does not take Johnny too long to realize that he could make a bet on a horse race to make some serious money. However, unfortunately for him, some local gangsters take notice of his amazing luck and want to learn what kind of 'system' he is using to place his racing bets.

Mixed in with this story is also Johnny's love interest, Maureen (played by Gloria Talbott), who wants to marry a rich man and have a great life. She cares about Johnny, but does not see a serious (and financially secure) future with him.

So, while Johnny is chasing after Maureen, he is being chased by gangsters as well as Mr. Boyne!

I liked this movie, since the characters were all quite likable. The gangsters were thugs, but in a silly and goofy kind of way. And the kindly Mr. Boyne was just mysterious enough to keep people guessing about his true origin. I especially enjoyed the comment Maureen made, when confronting Mr. Boyne about 1997, asking why he was not wearing a space suit!

I also enjoy any movie that shows what people in the 1950's thought the 1990's would be like: space travel, time machines, self-lighting cigarettes, and the like. Sure, why not?

I saw this movie entitled as "To Live and Die in Hollywood" and right away noticed something wrong: Everything is actually in Georgia!

Oh well, the title really means that we are talking about a producer who makes big "Hollywood" movies. From what little we see of his movie-in-the-movie, it doesn't exactly look like "Blockbuster Material," if you know what I mean...

Okay, so our big producer "Ben" (played by Jordan Williams) has to cut costs and does not have any safety measures in place while filming a car chase. As a result, the lead stuntwoman dies during filming.

Ben's trophy wife, "Sue" (played by Wendy Guess) thinks everything should be okay, even though Ben is facing a serious lawsuit for negligence. She wants to party, drink, and have great sex. Ben, meanwhile, is worried about losing everything he owns.

Ben flies off to meet with lawyers for a few days, and Sue is left alone. After a seemingly casual and illegal drug purchase, her car breaks down and she is forced to walk through a rough neighborhood to get home. While doing so, a motorcyclist, Rick (played by Pierre Perea) passes by and offers her a ride. She accepts and then invites him into her mansion for a beer, which was probably not the smartest thing to do.

There were few surprises in this story about love and revenge. Indeed, many other movies have done a better job. The editing sometimes made it difficult to follow, and there were dream sequences that were a little unclear - were those really dreams, or did it happen? Maybe I was the one who fell asleep and was dreaming! Another thing was that the stuntwoman looked a lot like the wife. I was confused at the beginning, thinking they were the same person.

One positive thing: I liked Pierre Perea's acting. He was convincing, showing a range of different emotions. And maybe Wendy Guess also deserves credit for playing a dumb blonde. She did that rather well.

If this movie happens to be available to watch, you might just want to pass on it.

This review contains spoilers. Consider yourselves warned...

The charming town of Bisbee is located in southern Arizona. I was lucky enough to visit the place several years ago. Though not very large, it offers a nice hotel, some galleries and cafes, all with an Old-West backdrop. I highly recommend it.

The movie "Bisbee Cannibal Club" is about a group of cannibals that reside in Bisbee. They are very particular about their food - they only want to dine on vegetarians (vegans in particular), so they hang around the local vegetarian restaurant and scope out suitable prey for their next feast. The restaurant is not large, and often they are sitting very close to their next victims, as they engage in their own musings over how the victims will taste.

As more people start to disappear, another group of folks take notice. A quick stop for research at the local library determines that the disappearances are caused by cannibals picking on vegetarians. So, this group now calls itself the "Bisbee Cannibal Hunters" and decides to find the cannibals.

Since Bisbee is such a tiny town, it turns out that the cannibals live just two or three houses up the street from the hunters. Convenient, to say the least. And another thing: When any following is done (either by cannibals or hunters) nobody ever notices, even when the person is ten feet behind.

It was sometimes difficult for me to distinguish cannibals from hunters, since they generally looked about the same: 30-something roughneck bikers, all acting tough. Their music was loud and they drank heavily. They also liked firearms; lots of them.

The vegetarians, on the other hand, looked different: much softer and sensitive in appearance. When they were not eating tofu, they would go to poetry events and recite the worst spoken word I have ever heard. I was not sorry to see their numbers diminish.

So, at the end of this movie, there is a huge shootout at someone's house and only a few hunters are left standing. All the cannibals are dead. The hunters then decide to try some of the "steak" that the cannibals had been cooking. Quickly realizing that it was the best they ever had, they now turn into cannibals themselves, which is perfect timing since a visitor shows up who tells them he is vegan.

This movie was clearly shot on video and the editing was passable enough, I suppose. There were some day and night sequences that were hard to follow. (One case in point: Someone hiding outside at night was looking in a window; we then see a daytime event; we then go back to the man outside at night. Did a full day pass?)

There was a "garden" somewhere outside of town where people were burying bodies. Unclear where that was, or what was going on. And of course, as all this mayhem was going on, the other townsfolk seemed oblivious and the police were not interested.

It kept my interest long enough to watch to the end. I give it a 5.

This "movie" is really a collection of different shorts that are not related to each other. Some stories are quite brief (lasting a few minutes) and others much longer. All of them deal with the supernatural in some way. There were at least a half dozen different stories.

Interestingly, two stories are in foreign languages. The first, 'The Lady in White' deals with an urban legend in Venezuela. The subtitles were helpful, to be sure. The second, 'She is not my Sister' deals with something out of this world in the Czech Republic. The subtitles for the second one were small and difficult to read.

I enjoyed watching this. Not surprisingly, I enjoyed some of them more than others.

This is a question people have been asking since the beginning of time. And who really knows?

In this 20-minute short, we get a glimpse of what might happen. People suddenly appear in a small white room. There is a clerk (played by James Cromwell) sitting at a desk, who politely tells them to sit down and wait. These people don't know how or why they are even there, and the clerk responds that they have just died. These are people who died at the exact same moment, so they might not even know each other.

In the few minutes they have in this waiting room, they have to accept the shocking truth that they are dead, and that eternity (in Heaven or Hell) is coming next. What should they say to each other? How is God judging them?

I think this was well done. After watching it, I could not help but wonder.

Countless horror films deal with young people trapped in a remote place, and getting killed off one by one. Dead of Winter is yet another example...

The story starts out simple enough. Recently paroled "John Garber" (played by Damon Runyon) lives in snowy Colorado. He is unemployed and desperately needs a job. His sister suggests he work as a bus driver for a local company that sponsors treasure hunts. John agrees to do it.

These treasure hunting events are specifically called "Geocache Treasure Hunts." It is similar to looking for Easter Eggs. Strange clues will indicate where to find them. There is a prize of $25,000 for the person who finishes first.

John takes a busload of treasure hunters on a drive up to the mountain. During the several-hour drive, we meet different characters, all hoping to win the prize money. The character of "Bradik" (played very well by James Wallis) is particularly obnoxious, annoying people as well as making moves on an open lesbian couple.

The bus finally parks. The wintry destination is truly breathtaking, as well as freezing and desolate. The treasure hunters then break into small groups, and set out to search for clues.

Very soon, it is apparent that things are not as planned. People are starting to die, and then they unexpectedly lose the bus! The are stranded far away from civilization, have no phone signals, and must find shelter. Who wants them dead? It is unclear if any of them will survive.

I enjoyed watching this movie though I have seen variations of it many times before. For a relatively low-budget film, they did a great job. The acting was convincing enough as well.

This film is entirely Canadian-made, location as well as actors. Interesting that they set the story in Colorado (USA.)

This drama centers on an ex-actress ("Alexia", played by Laura Reilly) who lives in New York and owns property in Los Angeles. The property in question is an apartment building called "Luna Park." The actress' younger brother ("Christi", played by Taylor Caldwell) lives in one of the units as the caretaker. Christi is mute and spends his days spying on all the hunky neighbors. Finally getting caught hiding in a closet, Christi is in trouble, so Alexia sends a friend ("Max", played by Michael Brent) to Los Angeles to do damage control and watch over Christi. She cannot go herself, since there is too much "bad family history" between brother and sister.

Christi is gay, as are all of his hunky neighbors, as are all of the guys in New York associated with Alexia. Of course this makes sense, since she produces gay cinema.

As Max settles in at Luna Park and tries to help Christi, he learns more about the family history and also starts to fall in love with Christi. This of course complicates things even more!

I enjoyed watching this, though there were lots of cuts back and forth (locations and time) that were seemingly disconnected. The same treatment with color and black and white. Clearly, the dreamlike quality was intended.