User reviews

I'm mostly an art-house and indie film lover, but I've a penchant for horror, which means I watch a lot of schlock, knowing full well that budget and star-power don't mean a thing in terms of defining "good" within this genre.

Nonetheless, a single-actor, next-to-no-budget found-footage horror film in the vein of Paranormal Activity... that's the kind of thing any rational being should run away from, expecting a painfully unwatchable and sloppily structured video akin to uncle Bob & aunt Weave's redecoration home videos.

Yet, I was intrigued. A whole series?! Some of the reviews here solidified my curiosity, so I gave it a go.

It is what it is.

Haters will hate, and whiners will whine, which says more about them and their inability to understand "niche" and "objective". If you despise found footage films, just don't watch found-footage films. Easy. Unless watching them just so you can complain is your thing, which makes you far less interesting than found-footage films.

Having said that, I can respect legitimate reasons to hate this film that anyone may express... if or when I come across them. But, if you don't mind the genre, or if you love it, I'm sure you'll want to exclaim, "Good work, Nigel!" for this surprisingly engrossing one-man effort.

Well done, Nigel!

OK, this guy is the only person in the movie, so you have to get used to him first. I found him kind of hard to sympathize with.

He comes off as a bit of a schlub (almost a dead ringer for actor/comedian Brian Posehn) who wants to document everything about this house he bought at auction as he's prepping it for sale. Right away, odd things start happening - furniture moving, things in the attic, things in the basement, etc.). At first, he attributes it to people breaking in, but he soon realizes there's something more going on as he looks into the family that lived there before and mysteriously left everything behind.

I thought the tension ratcheted up nicely and I was surprised that I got caught up as much as I did.

I hate found footage films as a rule of thumb, and if I review them it's either because they really suck or because I actually didn't mind them. This film falls into the latter category.

I went into this film not knowing it was a solo film and a first venture, it was available on Prime and I was bored. I only found out the rest after, which made me extra impressed!

This film is simple, the effects are (generally, there is one that stands out rather negatively, you'll know it when you see it) are subtle and pretty well done. The reason for all of the cameras is pretty solid, and it's not one of those over the top "And then I was PINNED IN THE CEILING BY AN UNSEEN FORCE!" type of things. It's refreshing in it's simplicity.

While I wouldn't call it believable, the vast majority of this film feels more realistic than others of the genre and that's a nice touch. Although a bit more knowledge on the occult might have helped.

Not perfect, not very scary, but still much better than a lot of found footage films of late.

Honestly, Im not quite sure how to score this film..

Bad Ben is a very low budget film starring one man, Nigel Bach, who appears to also be the director and bizarrely, it seems the entire film is shot in his actual house. Its a found footage film. Its a Paranormal Activity style scary film. Seriously, everything about Bad Ben sounds, well...bad. But here is the thing - Bad Ben was oddly entertaining and held my attention for the entire duration and I still can't work out why.

Despite the low/non-existent budget it is shot fairly competently and doesn't suffer from the poor cinematography and terrible lightning that a lot of the low budget horror flicks I have subjected myself to over the years often do. The acting is okay, sort of, and Nigel Bach's character Tom Riley was very amusing in the way he went from mildly irritated to outright angry at the ghost's refusal to leave his new home.

Look, I'm not recommending Bad Ben. Part of me wants to but I just can't. But, if you're curious and want to get in on a potentially cult movie from the ground floor then, well, give it a go I guess. And if you like it, I hear this is the first in a trilogy. Yes, that's right - a trilogy. Good heavens.

Ive scored it a 3, but could quite easily score it higher. And some would possibly score it much, much higher and in a way I can kinda see why..

I should point out that I'm one of those rare breed of people that absolutely loves found footage films. But it's possible for them to be so awful, they're un watchable. Many of the recent ones I've seen have fallen in, or close to, that category but I was very happily surprised by this.

You can see that the one and only guy in the movie is an 'amateur', so to speak but he does a fine job of keeping you captivated throughout, simply by playing 'normal'.

The insistence of filming everything is questionable at times, particularly when some genuinely scary stuff starts going down, but I find people choosing to stick around once the scares go through the roof questionable in most films so can't complain too much here.

As somebody else said, the actor reminds me of that US comedian from the Big Bang Theory and Sarah Silverman Show and even sounds alike, adding to the comedy element of this movie.

I have a question though - what in %@*&'s name was Bad Ben at the end there?

Its quite Creepy at times and I like some of the stuff it does but nothing really happens it's like the bits in insidious where you see the ghost in the background but that's the entire film and nothing happens at the end but you can't expect much on really low budget

I actually saw this years ago when it was first released and really enjoyed it.

I thought I would revisit it now and actually put in a review.

+1 Star For Being One of the more entertaining 'Found Footage' movies out there.

+1 Star for still years after it remains, one of the better 'found footage' movies out there.

Really well done considering it's basically a one man show and Nigel has gone on to do many more projects since!!!! A fun watch. For me anyway. I could see why some would find it boring but I enjoyed it.

Nigel Bach has done the impossible, to produce and star solo in the done to death found footage/haunted house genre and make itit rath enjoyable. As a genre, it won't do what it really should have done a few years ago and vanish, but, Bad Ben perhaps shows that there is still a little steam left in it. Bad Ben looks like it was made on a shoe string, and that is perhaps it's charm, Bach is incredibly likeable in the solo role, and has enough charisma to make the film rather enjoyable. Not bad at all. 6/10

This film almost hits on the spooky or creepy style of horror and scares that I like, but unfortunately it fell off pretty quick. It quickly became cheesy with the obviously fake video overlays that may have looked real in 1995, but it made it feel fabricated.

Some of the scenes meant to be scary also felt thrown together and fake. I want a found footage horror to tell and not always show.

I fell victim to the rather derpy name "Bad Ben" as well as the odd choice of poster design on AmazonPrime. The selection kept coming up again and again no matter how often I overlooked it or showed no interest in it.

Last week, I almost gave it a shot, watching the trailer for it, and based on the trailer I honestly thought it was a joke. It looked absurd and childish, less like a horror movie than a series of bumbling outtakes from someone's home movies edited together like a horror movie.

Based solely on the overwhelming good reviews I kept seeing of it, I gave it a try, utterly astonished that this entire film was done completely and utterly by one man; the producer, the writer, the editor, the director, the star, the owner of the house, the guy who spent $300 according to IMDB to make this entire film.

this is a "found footage" film of a guy who bought a lavish house at a Sheriff's auction, and goes in to find it is still fully furnished and decorated, and equipped with dozens of security cameras around the house. As he documents his attempt to flip it and sell it, he deals with the usual escapades of these modern day haunted house situations; motion-activated cameras turning on at odd moments after detecting some apparently ghostly motion, doors opening and closing on their own, and random power outages and strong odors.

Being the only person on screen at all times, nigel bach is surprisingly good in his role, being comfortable and nonoffensive, possessing neither an unpleasant voice or attitude nor a particularly difficult accent or way of intonating. He has a way of acting that feels like he is not acting, like he really is just filming himself doing something mundane and isn't projecting or enunciating or emoting for the sake of the audience, while at the same time never coming across as flat or monotonous.

What little visual effects there are are done very quickly so as not to reveal themselves, while the vast majority of the horror comes solely from lingering creepiness and the occasional perfectly timed jump scare (such as the scene with him talking to the music box on the table).

While the name played a large role in turning me off from the film, the explanation behind it only adds to the film's creepiness and unsettling nature, in the form of a child's drawing of his mom and dad in front of the house, with himself labelled as "Good Ben" and another angry-looking creature apparently drawn underground labelled as "Bad Ben"

The film never lets itself go off the rails with a lengthy backstory or exposition dump, while only indulging a bit with its ending. For an estimated $300 this is probably one of the better "haunted house with security cameras" horror movies I've seen

If you do not like found footage movies than do not watch this. Found footage is a niche genre and it seems like only a select number of people actually like it. I love found footage films and I thought this one was pretty good initially.

Objects were moving on their own, doors were opening & closing, there was scratching on doors, and the occasional shadow figure. This movie had me entrenched from the beginning. For a low budget film the acting was never bad or cringe-worthy. The one guy in the movie did pretty well and made it seem prey believable.

The last few minutes of the movie were weird and left the film feeling unfinished. Maybe that was the intention of the director but I was definitely looking for something more conclusive.

Things that could have improved the movie I think would include the following. A physical revealing of Bad Ben; Not having the main character wear only boxer briefs throughout the film.

I give this film a C.

Bad Ben is a standard "Found Footage" film, with the unique element of a home security system and an Iphone being the sources of the footage. While I appreciate taking a new direction, we still end up going down the same, well worn path that 90% of Found Footage films follow. Plot wise, there really isn't anything new and it's pretty predictable. IMDB estimates that this movie cost about $300 to make, and it shows. There is only one actor in the whole film and he isn't that great; nothing he says is believable (which could be the writers fault and not his) and the only emotion he convincingly portrays is anger. His character is unbelievable and his actions are confusing at best. Most of the "action" is bad CG and practical effects. This movie is Paranormal Activity with slightly better acting and one-fiftieth the budget. It's not terrible, but it isn't particularly scary, realistic (for a "ghost movie"), or entertaining. For a movie that probably cost less to make than you spent on the TV you'd watch it on, it's decent. I applaud the intent and effort, but am unimpressed with the execution.

It's OK, far from great, but far from terrible. I've definitely seen worse... You know... Like the other two...

Considering the budget he had,and since he was the only one in the movie (or WAS he?) this film was actually pretty good! It DID lag on from time to time,but overall it was well made and acted. I've seen FAR WORSE "found footage" movies. If you want jump scares and sheer terror for an hour and a half,this probably isn't for you,but if you are a fan of just plain creepy films,give this a watch. I really thought it was a good film.

Very low budget but I have to admit that I could not turn away. I was not sure what I was getting into when I saw this pop up on my Amazon Prime list of movies. As a fan of found footage movies I really did not know what to expect while I hit play. Obviously from the start it is low budget which was not an issue for me but as the movie progressed I found myself actually curious to finish. Say what you will say about Nigel Bach but I had a good time watching this movie. At one point a jump scare got me for the first time in years when I thought I knew everything about modern horror movies. I was delighted to discover this was just the first part of of three movies! If you have Amazon Prime and want to watch something different watch this!

One of the worst horror movies I have ever seen. Very low budget, bad writing, and really bad acting. Avoid this one at all costs!

Found footage is one of my favorites if it's done right. Kind of a Paranormal Activity without the backstory. Lots of suspense and good writing, although it dragged at some points. Didn't get scary until near the end. My biggest complaint is the main character was a whiny, nasty little man who was beyond irritating.

Actual time of anything useful for the plot was 10 mins. Guy pretends to talk to someone on the phone or to people who may watch the videos whole time while he does tons of stuff to fill time. This is what people think of when you hear that only one guy made a movie and put it on the internet. If you like watching bad movies to make fun of the people who made it then watch it, if your looking for an actual movie, no movie here.

I have to say I have become dismayed by the horror genre lately, especially the over hyped, over budgeted Hollywood remakes. I also don't like the found footage style.

However, saying that. I found this to be a breath of fresh air despite its low budget.

OK, there was only one guy in it, but for an unknown, I can honestly say I enjoyed his performance and so much so, I am watching the follow up later this week.

So, well done to this man and I look forward to see what else you come up with.

I sat through this entire film hoping that at some point something interesting would happen but nothing does. I understand it was likely an amateur low budget film but there was just nothing remotely interesting going on. Overall it was more comedic than anything else but not in a good way. Just seemed like it was made rather quickly without any direction of where to go with it from the start to finish.

Don't bother wasting your time on this movie. Everything was just terrible.

I really like this film - it is very well thought out in camera deployment, by one person (with perhaps some uncredited off-camera help for a scene or two), S. Soma's review covers most of my thoughts. Having worked in the security biz, I can technically dismantle camera and mic usage, but by establishing specific camera locations, Mr. Bach did a great job of mimiciking them - it may have all been shot with a single smartphone, but looks like a couple other cameras may have been employed. (Night vision is usually achieved with infrared LEDs for illumination; it looks green, but not that green, and certainly no purple.)

Very well done! After Primer, this is second on my list of best microbudget flicks.