Boardinghouse

I own not one, but two copies of this movie and both of them are the "directors cut", which would be fine except both copies are nothing BUT the directors cut, without the option of watching the movie as it is actually supposed to be viewed. Brutal. At 2:35.00, it's easy to see how an hour could be shaved off this thing. If you miss the 80's, you can leave this thing running with the sound off while you are making a tuna casserole with music playing in the background but sitting down and watching it is tedious and borders on masochistic. It's a shame because it actually looks like an OK piece of 80's shlock. The girls are mostly hot, show skin and the death scenes are decent, while the leading man looks like David Lee Roth's tweaked-out second cousin and for some reason seems to have given up acting after this mess. Can't imagine why.

If you're evaluating this movie in terms of plot structure or character arcs, you're missing the point. If you're saying "the image quality isn't sharp enough," you are consuming the wrong genre.

If you do like backyard horror films, Boardinghouse belongs in the good pile. It has something that most of these films lack: passion. The filmmakers clearly put in more time, effort, planning, and care than most of their peers. The result is something with a vision and level of energy that's hard to replicate, even on films with budgets in the millions.

I'm watching BOARDINGHOUSE as I'm writing this and the "film" is woeful. There's almost no redeeming quality to it. It feels and looks like a porno production but without any hardcore sex scenes. In this case, the "horror" scenes have replaced the sex scenes. The film even warns you at the beginning that every shocking scene will be preceded with a warning of sorts. Funny enough, throughout the movie, people (mostly women) get killed without any warning to the viewers. The producers weren't even able to do what they promised they were going to do. Yep, the film is THAT cheap.

The only thing one can credit this film of being is that it's one of the first direct-to-video "film" specifically made for the booming video market of the early 1980s. Today, they're dime a dozen. So, I guess the producers of the film were ahead of the times in this regard. But that still doesn't change the fact that BOARDINGHOUSE is devoid of acting, a script, special effects or any suspense or fright whatsoever. I can't even tell who is supposed to be who.

You do see a lot of women sans clothes (all natural breasts, no less) and guys in bikinis. Ah, the 1980s.

Boarding House made in the 80's was one of the first shot on video features. What is interesting is that it actually played in a few theatres and of I was one of the 6 people who saw it at a Long Island NY drive-in. Who cares about how poor the acting and story is, there is plenty of gruesome gore and nudity in this one. This movie will numb your mind quite well and you will just want to keep watching it over and over again!! I own BOARDING HOUSE and I'm proud of it!!! BOARDINGHOUSE is good for all the wrong reasons. Good Gore, poor acting, sound, and everything else. I like Cheese I'm Sorry but I'm addicted to bad movies .

Surprisingly watchable shot-on-video horror flick about mysterious happenings at a boardinghouse where people have been dying in various OMEN-like ways. Enter a psychic dude who takes up residence at the place and all hell breaks loose.

Apparently made by people who usually produced porn but decided to try their hand at horror for a change, and it shows.

Nothing about this movie is anywhere near "good", but the filmmakers show a sort of mischievous enthusiasm for their work, and two or three scenes deliver on an amusingly adolescent level.

Basically, it's a showcase for some second-rate gore effects which are preceded by a William Castle-like gimmick consisting of a flashing neon image and an electronic zinger sound. Yes, it's extremely dumb, but at least it's never boring, and it's far more entertaining than other straight-to-video crap such as BLOOD CULT and THE RIPPER.