Teardrop

This will probably go down as the worst movie I'll see in 2022; the story was interesting at first but then devolved into nonsense, the movie plodded along at a snails pace and didn't get interesting until the midway point, and the production values just weren't much better than your average made-for-TV train-wreck that has no business receiving a budget.

That being said, the acting was...good? Most if not all of the characters played their roles well, and even with a crap script, they made the best of it. The teenagers were surprisingly adept at delivering their lines like real teenagers do. Now if that's a compliment or an insult, I'll let you decide.

This movie was garbage and will be forgotten and ignored like it deserves to be.

Beware the reviews on this movie; I see a lot of accounts that reviewed this and only this movie, which lets me know that these people know someone that was involved in this movie or worked on it themselves. Disingenuous reviewing is the bane of this site, but it continues to happen; don't fall for their lies.

To those reviewers; you aren't doing anyone a favor by lying about the quality of this movie. It's trash, I know it's trash, you know it's trash. At least be honest about it when you review it.

Actually its more a noose around ... let's not get too much into this though. We don't want to give away too much that is. The movie is quite simple in some ways and quite complicated in others. For a low budget horror movies, the effects are ok.

The story is predictable but still has some twists and turns that you may be able to appreciate. Acting is fine and while there are a few cliches that you have to endure, it is nothing that is too bad ... the ending is interesting and may elevate this for some ... again decent effort for a low budget movie.

Good story line, acting is mediocre except Denver. Some of the set is to laugh at. The desk for instance in this 100 years old building has metal slides.

This movie is below average but I didn't feel it was a complete waste of time. I was mildly entertained/interested by the main character flashbacks and the saloon bartender.

The acting was as you would suspect with a low budget film. Average, at best. The characters were very stereotypical but I think that was intended.

The writing was predictable. There were many, and I do mean many, opportunities for jump scares or other horrific elements, but they were, mysteriously, overlooked and skipped. However, the overall story was interesting and the setting was somewhat unique.

The ending was predictable. I kept expecting a twist of some sort because the main character is a (this is not a spoiler, you find out in the first 10 minutes)"best-selling novelist." However, the end went exactly where you were expecting it to go.

If you've got an hour and a half to spare, you can give it a try but lower your expectations to settle for below average.

Overall, I liked the movie but felt there could have been more time spent on the development of the characters, the location, and the casting. The director's work was unremarkable, and although the FX were good, there just were not enough of them or scary scenes. I also found myself wondering who the target audience was for the film. I'm guessing late teens/early twenties??

The reality is filming post-covid is a challenge on many levels for filmmakers and I understand why some of the choices were made. But I'm a big movie buff, especially the horror genre, and love getting lost in the characters, location, director's choices/vision, and the writing. Except for the latter, not much else stood out for me.

That said, I'd recommend this movie as a good "starter" flick for movie night.

Q.