In a secret Temple far beneath the city of London, an immortal knight and a Demon battle for possession of a key that can open a doorway to Hell.In a secret Temple far beneath the city of London, an immortal knight and a Demon battle for possession of a key that can open a doorway to Hell.In a secret Temple far beneath the city of London, an immortal knight and a Demon battle for possession of a key that can open a doorway to Hell.
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
What can you say when you've just seen the worst film ever, I certainly haven't seen on that looked so cheap. I feared the worst when I watched the first ten minutes and I was so wrong, it got even more terrible. With some of the worst special effects I've ever witnessed it almost made you feel sorry for the actors, but their awful acting is actually made watchable compared to everything else. Set in London it's a fantasy film set in Newgate about the search for an ancient amulet before an evil army of demons destroy Earth. Sounds exciting, but it isn't as it looks like a budget computer game from the nineties. AVOID.
Oh my lord, what a horrible excuse for a film. Bad acting, worse script, terrible story, ineffective sfx.
I can overlook a generic, cliché story and I can overlook special FX that look like they were from the mid 90's but it's the acting and audio quality I just can't get passed. No-one in this movie comes across as an actual actor and the audio quality is beyond belief. One person speaking can sound like they're using a cheap headset whereas another sounds like they're in the kitchen with reverb hitting everywhere.
It's not often I come across titles this bad. It feels so lazy to the point that it's not worth going into. It's just a massive waste of time.
It's not often I come across titles this bad. It feels so lazy to the point that it's not worth going into. It's just a massive waste of time.
The Acting is ok so far for a B or C Movie.
BUT it looks like a try of " Example " to spare EVERY kind of Set. AND it FAILED!
Much sorry, but the whole Movie is NOT even 1 second true set. Its a 100 % Greenscreen thing.
AND the worst. The Grafik level is about Resident Evil 4 GAME ( not remastered and not even bit close to the Remake levels ) .
Even some Actuall Games, who dont need high End Computers have better look then this whole Movie in every scene.
It looks like a School 3D Rendering Program, at more or less beginner or light Advanced level Person, who did the whole " Scenes " and actors only added with Greenscreen.
BUT it looks like a try of " Example " to spare EVERY kind of Set. AND it FAILED!
Much sorry, but the whole Movie is NOT even 1 second true set. Its a 100 % Greenscreen thing.
AND the worst. The Grafik level is about Resident Evil 4 GAME ( not remastered and not even bit close to the Remake levels ) .
Even some Actuall Games, who dont need high End Computers have better look then this whole Movie in every scene.
It looks like a School 3D Rendering Program, at more or less beginner or light Advanced level Person, who did the whole " Scenes " and actors only added with Greenscreen.
As this thing started and was clearly going to be an utterly embarrassing mess, I thought about how films like this not only get made, but get some kid of distribution. I made film many years ago that never got fully finished and have been planning to make another for many years. I'm plagued by the idea that I'd never be able to make something worth watching, so why bother. Then I see something like this and think, fuck it, why don't I give it another go. Then the strangest coincidence happened. A guy pops up in this film, who was actually in my unfinished film from all those years ago. A sign if ever there was one.
So onto this bloody thing. The entire thing was shot on green screen and then had CGI backdrops, monsters and even human actors added to it. It's basically a step above The Incredible Bulk. I found an interview with director W J Carter who talks about how this was both a budgetary and stylistic choice. Though why anyone would want to make this choice is beyond me. He also goes on to say "Total CG environments allow the viewer to become immersed in the world presented to them and accept it as 'normal'." They don't and it doesn't. At all. He also mentions in the interview, which is from 2016, that the film has been 9 years in the making, thus making that almost 15 by the time it came out. IMDB also mentions that writer, producer and director's dad Sidney Carter, sold his house to finance the film, which just genuinely makes me quite sad.
The CGI is somewhere between PS2 and PS3 level and horrible. The Story is as basic as they come and utterly forgettable. Acting is pretty bad, though the fact the poor actors had to do all their scenes in a room, presumably in the director's house, they can't be blamed too much. I know Daniel Jefferson, who was in my film, is a great guy and happy to work on this low to no budget stuff, so I can't say anything bad about him or any of the other actors. I don't like to say anything bad about the people who made it too as they obviously had ambition way beyond their budget and talent. From the interview, it seems that even making CGI as subpar as on show here was really time consuming and hard work, but it's near unwatchable in it's terribleness. I found an old Kickstarter that states that the film upto that point (in 2016) had already cost nearly £600K. That is a shameful waste of money as it is not on screen at all.
So onto this bloody thing. The entire thing was shot on green screen and then had CGI backdrops, monsters and even human actors added to it. It's basically a step above The Incredible Bulk. I found an interview with director W J Carter who talks about how this was both a budgetary and stylistic choice. Though why anyone would want to make this choice is beyond me. He also goes on to say "Total CG environments allow the viewer to become immersed in the world presented to them and accept it as 'normal'." They don't and it doesn't. At all. He also mentions in the interview, which is from 2016, that the film has been 9 years in the making, thus making that almost 15 by the time it came out. IMDB also mentions that writer, producer and director's dad Sidney Carter, sold his house to finance the film, which just genuinely makes me quite sad.
The CGI is somewhere between PS2 and PS3 level and horrible. The Story is as basic as they come and utterly forgettable. Acting is pretty bad, though the fact the poor actors had to do all their scenes in a room, presumably in the director's house, they can't be blamed too much. I know Daniel Jefferson, who was in my film, is a great guy and happy to work on this low to no budget stuff, so I can't say anything bad about him or any of the other actors. I don't like to say anything bad about the people who made it too as they obviously had ambition way beyond their budget and talent. From the interview, it seems that even making CGI as subpar as on show here was really time consuming and hard work, but it's near unwatchable in it's terribleness. I found an old Kickstarter that states that the film upto that point (in 2016) had already cost nearly £600K. That is a shameful waste of money as it is not on screen at all.
Did you know
- TriviaSidney Carter sold his home to finance "Knights of Newgate"
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime1 hour 26 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content