hearons

I made it to the end of this movie only because I found Robert Englund's performance to be captivating in every scene he was in. So, if you watch it for him, you won't be disappointed (in his performance). I'm glad he had a chance to shine again in another movie, even one this bad. It's worth a watch for any Englund fan, in my opinion.

The rest of the movie made me think it was just the best audio/video, supporting cast, set design and special effects they could afford with a budget of under maybe $100,000. I'm a big fan of indie horror, so I'm desensitized to low budgets and can enjoy them even when those things are subpar. Then, I was stunned to see that the budget for this was $1.5 million. If that money had gone into the production value, this could've been a solid 6/10 stars. It really did have potential. Maybe it will be remade someday. I hope so.

I'm a huge Béla Lugosi fan, so that's why I looked up this obscure movie in the first place. If you're checking off Lugosi's filmography (available here on IMdB), don't skip over this movie. (In fact, don't skip over any movie or TV episode of his except for "Glen or Glenda," in my humble opinion.) Having seen it many times (I own it), I can vouch for the entertainment it offers - provided that you can forgive the racial stereotype of the era.

It's a B movie, so approach it with lowered expectations. (Hence my 5/10 rating.) That said, it's amusing (an accidental comedy at times - but in a so-bad-it's-good kind of way) and worth watching at least once, Lugosi fan or not, if you like vintage horror.

The acting, directing, cinematography, score and screenplay have been carefully crafted in this well-above-average indie horror flick. It reminded me of many other horror movies I love ("The Ring," "The Possession of Michael King," etc.), but still stood out strongly as its own story. I was very impressed by the acting, character development and dialogue in particular. I'm glad I heard about this one!