The Dustwalker

I've been around IMDB long enough to realize that some people just seem to love to leave crappy comments for movies. not every film can be the "worst" ever made. i mean, i'll leave "santa claus and the ice cream bunny" to fill that spot for me.

this film is slow and creepy. the acting is no better or worse than any other independent horror movie, but the story stuck with me after it was over. that's the sign of a good scary story, told well.

a small dying outback town has a visitor from far away, and the townspeople are being systematically taken over by a parasitic alien lifeform. we're just as in the dark as the unaffected residents who don't understand what's going on.

the scenery is gorgeous and it reminded me of another sci-fi story i read a long time ago, "stinger" by robert mccammon. another story of a desert community terrorized by aliens.

This is so bad I only watched half of it. This movie is an abject lesson in how not to make a sci-fi/horror film. Contains mostly awful acting, awful characters, awful editing, awful story and awful CGI. It's just awful. The only redeeming feature was the magnificent scenery of the Australian outback.

Please do not waste your time watching this turkey. There are thousands of movies better than this.

It's not the worst movie I've seen by far. I couldn't tell the budget from this movie, but I could tell they spent much more money on special effects rather than directing or the actors. Terrible, overused sound effects. I did like the concept and idea with the monster, but they went down the wrong path with it if I'm honest. Not horrible but also not very good. Acting was fine but directing sucked, also some chase/action scenes had terrible camera direction. Also something minor but that really bugged me was how clear the radios were it was super unrealistic.

Not the worst I've seen, and that seems to be the best thing I can say about it. It's a low budget film, so I can deal with bad special FX's. But the acting was bad, and characters were unbelievable. The story itself wasn't too bad, with a better director it might have succeeded. A writer should not direct their own work, especially amatuers. It was very slow, all the way through. Not really worth a watch.

The poster is very cool. Too bad it has nothing to do with the movie. I don't know if I've seem a more poorly edited film. I realize the budget was low, but that has nothing to do with putting the scenes together in such a way that a story makes sense. Anytime something happens we either cut away in the middle or jump in after it's happened. There is no narrative here, just random scenes that tell us nothing about what is happening. Then with virtually no setup a completely new element randomly appears, but other than one initial reaction none of the characters seem the least bit curious how it relates or what they should be doing about it. If my assumption about the plot is correct there is an interesting story in here somewhere, but it's lost due to a weak understanding of story structure and the aforementioned poor editing.