Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAfter accepting a job at a low-rent pornographers, a feisty young woman must fight to survive against an ancient evil intent on killing everyone in its path.After accepting a job at a low-rent pornographers, a feisty young woman must fight to survive against an ancient evil intent on killing everyone in its path.After accepting a job at a low-rent pornographers, a feisty young woman must fight to survive against an ancient evil intent on killing everyone in its path.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Prix
- 11 victoires et 20 nominations au total
Avis en vedette
As a horror fan I was pleased to be able to watch Mask of the Devil last night. The film starts with a bit of a back story of where the cursed mask came from, for a low budget film this was ambitious, but so superbly done it hooked me in right from the start! As we get to present day the believable set up with Mary still living with her strict parents again is convincing with a nice level of humour and stylishly done. When Mary starts her new job in a seedy porn production company there are lots of cringey moments and as the character has been set up well you care what happens to Her. Once the horror starts again there are some nicely done effects and visuals, it does becomes a little more predictable as the crew are picked off, but it is still an enjoyable watch!
Over all I think this is a great achievement for a low budget film, it certainly entertained me. Well done to Richard Rowntree and crew, defiantly the best film yet from Ash Mountain Films!
Over all I think this is a great achievement for a low budget film, it certainly entertained me. Well done to Richard Rowntree and crew, defiantly the best film yet from Ash Mountain Films!
Some of the cinematography is excellent, getting good value out of limited locations. The visual effects, while clearly low budget, were very well executed,
The script and acting, however, are awful.
There are one or two moments when I thought it was meant to be deliberately bad in order to parody some stereotypical situations, but then I realised it was just going to be like that all the way through.
The pacing of the film is also slow and dull, making it hard to stay engaged in what story there was. The plot itself is quite weak, you get no character development or interesting twists and turns. It's exactly what you'd expect from reading the summary.
Overall, this film was a disappointment. The limited locations were the only redeeming factor, but even they were not enough to save the film from its poor script, acting, pacing, and plot.
Unless you are studying low budget filmmaking techniques, avoid this one.
The script and acting, however, are awful.
There are one or two moments when I thought it was meant to be deliberately bad in order to parody some stereotypical situations, but then I realised it was just going to be like that all the way through.
The pacing of the film is also slow and dull, making it hard to stay engaged in what story there was. The plot itself is quite weak, you get no character development or interesting twists and turns. It's exactly what you'd expect from reading the summary.
Overall, this film was a disappointment. The limited locations were the only redeeming factor, but even they were not enough to save the film from its poor script, acting, pacing, and plot.
Unless you are studying low budget filmmaking techniques, avoid this one.
This movie is a total disaster.
It's amazing what people film and put in the horror genre.
British films of the last decades are a mixture of comedy and horror and everything in between.
To make matters worse, the budgets are obviously very tight, so the film's class is 0th production.
I would not recommend anyone who is a sincere admirer of film as an art that speaks in pictures to watch this film because it would be a waste of time.
Not horror, not comedy, not scary, not funny, not good for anything.
The bottom of the bottom.
The worst thing is that there is no group of film critics who would discredit such films in a timely and impartial manner so that we don't get annoyed for nothing.
It's amazing what people film and put in the horror genre.
British films of the last decades are a mixture of comedy and horror and everything in between.
To make matters worse, the budgets are obviously very tight, so the film's class is 0th production.
I would not recommend anyone who is a sincere admirer of film as an art that speaks in pictures to watch this film because it would be a waste of time.
Not horror, not comedy, not scary, not funny, not good for anything.
The bottom of the bottom.
The worst thing is that there is no group of film critics who would discredit such films in a timely and impartial manner so that we don't get annoyed for nothing.
Despite looking like Vicky Pollard from Little Britain, Mary (Nicole Katherine Riddell) finds herself hired as a fluffer on a low budget porn shoot. Unfortunately, one of the props being used on a XXX parody of Tarzan is a wooden African mask that transforms the wearer into a vicious demonic killer.
The first half of this film is played as an offbeat comedy with dark humour, but it isn't funny, even though the irritatingly quirky soundtrack does its best to convince the viewer otherwise. A porn-shoot premise offers plenty of scope for lewd gags and general outrageousness, but this film somehow takes the world of low-rent sex flicks, with its many sleazy characters, and makes it boring.
The second half of the movie is more focused on the horror, but with lousy acting, subpar gore, way too many cheap and nasty visual effects, and scene transitions that look like something out of a Powerpoint presentation, the whole thing is too simply too shoddy to be scary.
Given how many producers, co-producers, executive producers and associate producers are listed in the credits on IMDb, I'm guessing that the film was crowd-funded, which is why I'll never stump up cash to help kickstart a film: I don't want to risk having my name forever associated with something this bad.
N. B. An early scene, in which antiques shop assistant Todd sells the mask to the prop hunter against his boss's wishes, seems inspired by the opening scene of Gremlins. Later in the film, porn talent Otto tears flesh off his face, dropping bloody chunks into a sink, in a scene reminiscent of Poltergeist. Sadly, Richard Rowntree, producer/writer/director of Mask of the Devil, is no Spielberg, Dante or Hooper.
The first half of this film is played as an offbeat comedy with dark humour, but it isn't funny, even though the irritatingly quirky soundtrack does its best to convince the viewer otherwise. A porn-shoot premise offers plenty of scope for lewd gags and general outrageousness, but this film somehow takes the world of low-rent sex flicks, with its many sleazy characters, and makes it boring.
The second half of the movie is more focused on the horror, but with lousy acting, subpar gore, way too many cheap and nasty visual effects, and scene transitions that look like something out of a Powerpoint presentation, the whole thing is too simply too shoddy to be scary.
Given how many producers, co-producers, executive producers and associate producers are listed in the credits on IMDb, I'm guessing that the film was crowd-funded, which is why I'll never stump up cash to help kickstart a film: I don't want to risk having my name forever associated with something this bad.
N. B. An early scene, in which antiques shop assistant Todd sells the mask to the prop hunter against his boss's wishes, seems inspired by the opening scene of Gremlins. Later in the film, porn talent Otto tears flesh off his face, dropping bloody chunks into a sink, in a scene reminiscent of Poltergeist. Sadly, Richard Rowntree, producer/writer/director of Mask of the Devil, is no Spielberg, Dante or Hooper.
This ... movie? ... starts out with what looks like a "Coming Attraction" trailer for another "movie," presented as if it were ripped straight off a forty year old VHS tape with tracking problems. The "stars" in this fake film have equally fake names like "Voohees," "Krueger," ... yeah.
Once that's over, the "Feature Presentation" ain't no better. Poor acting, poor lighting, poor quality, poor sound.... In case you can't tell, everything about this is poor. Add boring into the mix and ....
Good Lord. You can only say so many things about a movie that isn't even worth 15 minutes watch time. Oh good... Minimum Character Limit Met.
DO NOT EVEN BOTHER.
Once that's over, the "Feature Presentation" ain't no better. Poor acting, poor lighting, poor quality, poor sound.... In case you can't tell, everything about this is poor. Add boring into the mix and ....
Good Lord. You can only say so many things about a movie that isn't even worth 15 minutes watch time. Oh good... Minimum Character Limit Met.
DO NOT EVEN BOTHER.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Mask of the Devil?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Durée
- 1h 28m(88 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant