Long Time Dead (2002) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
113 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Competent "scare scenes", but overall it's a mess
BrandtSponseller3 March 2005
A random group of young adults who are some combination of roommates/friends takes time out from their busy partying schedule to play with an improvised Ouija board, when they accidentally call forth a djinn who tells them that they will all die.

Long Time Dead is quite a mess, made all the more frustrating by occasional flashes of competence. It couldn't have helped that that a veritable army of writers--seven credited in all--worked on the story and script, including director Marcus Adams.

After a brief prologue set in the late 1970s in Morocco which was far more promising than most of the film proper, we begin meeting our bloated cast of heroes. There are eight of them, maybe all living in the same building or apartment, except for Lucy (Marsha Thomason), who appears to be living on a boat near the building. If I sound unsure, it's because Adams is not able to clearly establish the characters, their relationships to one another, or the relationships of one location to another. It doesn't help that a few of the five males look alike, and they all dress alike. Neither does it help that as the film progresses, various characters arbitrarily appear and disappear for random lengths of time. That fact is indicative of the pacing problems that plague the film on many levels.

It's not often very clear why any characters are doing whatever they happen to be doing at a given moment. Most of the plot seems like an excuse to put characters in very stereotypical horror/thriller scenarios, where they slowly walk around an environment frightened, becoming startled in various ways until finally some unseen thing kills them. These scenes are often competent, and occasionally they're good, but in the context of the film, they have little dramatic impact. Much of Long Time Dead plays more like a sample reel of "scare scenes"; it has little coherency as a story.

A big problem is that the chief villain is never clearly shown, explained or given any rules to follow. For most of the film, the villain is invisible. Invisible villains are usually a problem, and often indicate deficiencies in budget and/or imagination. Oddly, by the end, there is a concrete villain and the film has devolved into a fairly stock thriller, where we have to guess whom the possessed cast member is.

Although the story has promise, and the ending is somewhat of an improvement, even though it never rises above the cliché, Long Time Dead is too burdened with severe flaws in direction, cinematography (the film is frequently far too dark) and performances to merit a recommendation. I ended up granting a 4 (equivalent to a "high F" letter grade) because of the adequacy of some of the "scare" and death scenes, the good ideas in the backstory, and the slightly more engaging climax. The film would have been much better if the prologue and the subsequent events with Becker and the one character's father who ended up in a mental institution had been the focus, but alas, it was not to be. Let's hope Adams fares better the next time around.
29 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Seen it all before
BloodTheTelepathicDog26 April 2005
A group of disaffectionate youths play with a Ouija board, and unleash a murderous Djinn. The plot is used often, but there are plenty of thrills and chills, and the darkness adds to the terror.

Many posters enjoy this film because it is a European horror, but there is absolutely nothing distinguishing this from American horrors, albeit the accents.

There aren't any clever twists, unless you want to count the ending, but still, that was all too obvious. Lukas Haas, of Witness fame, and Alec Newman(who guest starred on an episode of Tru Calling) where the only recognizable faces in this film.

What irks me the most about this film, was that the most attractive cast member, and also one of the more talented, was the first to die. In movies like this, you have to keep the eye candy around for awhile.

For a superior European horror film, check out Lighthouse with James Purefoy and Rachel Shelley.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
"Calm down? We're getting killed one by one if you hadn't noticed!" Unremarkable supernatural horror film.
poolandrews24 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Long Time Dead opens to a caption that informs us that we're in 'Morocco 1979' where a group of people are holding a séance which gets out of hand when a fire demon called a Djinn appears & supposedly kills everyone... Long Time Dead then cuts to present day London where four house-mates, Rob (Joe Absolom), Liam (Alex Newman), Webster (Lukas Haas) & Stella (Lara Belmont) are planning to go out for the night. They hook up with their soon to be new house-mate the drug dealing Joe (Mel Raido) & three friends, Lucy (Marsha Thomason), Spencer (James Hillier) & Liam's girlfriend Annie (Melanie Gutteridge). While sitting around at a club they begin to have a discussion on what the biggest buzz in life is, from this rather innocent sounding topic the subject of séance's is brought up & for some reason they all decide to hold one. They find a suitable venue which appears to be in attic space above the club & begin, unfortunately they release the fire demon Djinn which spells the words 'ALL DIE' out on the Ouija board which freaks them all out, as it would I suppose. Shortly after Annie dies in an accident & her body has burns on it, the remaining member's of the group feel something is wrong & do some research which leads to some unexpected answers & the discovery that maybe not everyone is as they appear or who they claim. As more of the friends continue to die in accidents a way must be found to send the evil Djinn back before it completes it's mission to kill all those who summoned it...

Directed Adam Marcus I thought that this English & French co-production was a somewhat modest & undemanding way to pass 90 odd minutes. The script by Eitan Arrusi, Chris Baker, Daniel Bronzite & Andy Day really isn't anything special & I can't quite believe it took four writers to come up with this. Generally speaking Long Time Dead is rather slow & uneventful & the characters are so bland & similar with most of them looking & sounding exactly the same & the only one's I could really distinguish between are Lucy because she's black & Joe because of his hair! Everyone else barely registered with me & that made it very hard to care about anyone or anything, oh & they're an unlikeable bunch of teenage stereotypes as well which didn't help the film. The script also features various lapses of logic, at the end I just couldn't stop thinking that it was a bit of a coincidence that a bunch of kids would just happen to hold a séance & summon the exact same demon that their landlord & one of their Father's did years earlier, a fact which they only discover later on in the film. There is another scene in particular I keep thinking about that sums Long Time Dead & it's silly script up, when two people break into a police guarded house & turn the lights on only for the police officer on guard to be conveniently looking in the opposite direction & only looking back at the house literally seconds after the lights have been turned off. I also hated the scare tactic's that director Marcus employed, I mean people hearing noises only to have one of their 'friends' grab their shoulder & apologise for scaring them. What do these people think will happen exactly? Can't they just call out & say who it is that's creeping around in the shadows? Long Time Dead uses this clichéd & lazy technique on a number of increasingly annoying occasions. There are also plenty of cheap demon point-of-view shots which presumably help save money by not having to show the demon itself. On the positive side it tells it's story well enough I suppose & while it's not exceptional Long Time Dead is a well made film generally speaking. I also liked the ending where the Djinn appears to win, it's nice not to have a happy sugar coated ending for a change. Long Time Dead is one of those horror films that has nothing really wrong with it & entertains to a certain extent but suffers by being just so average a few script problems that should have been ironed out especially since four people worked on the thing. The gore quotient is sadly lacking with nothing more graphic than a few splashes of blood & someone being burnt. As for the Djinn itself the best the filmmakers could come up with are some CGI demon eyes on an ordinary actor. There's no sex or nudity either but there is some swearing & drug usage which the film treats lightly & doesn't say is right but neither does it say it is wrong just that it's a normal teenage thing to do. Overall I thought Long Time Dead was a slightly below average horror that didn't do much for me but at the same time I have seen much worse & at least it kept me watching until the end. Don't spend any sort of money on it but if you can catch it on TV for free & there's nothing else on then it's probably just about worth an hour & a half of your time, but only just.
9 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Popcorn entertainment, nothing more or less
Libretio17 February 2005
LONG TIME DEAD

Aspect ratio: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

During a Ouija session, several drunken teenagers summon a djinn which proceeds to kill them, one by one.

Though clearly influenced by American horror movies, LONG TIME DEAD finds an echo in Michael Armstrong's UK thriller THE HAUNTED HOUSE OF HORROR (1969), in which bored teenagers inadvertently sparked the wrath of a deadly killer - in Armstrong's film, the villain was an all-too-human maniac, whereas Marcus Adams' updated version unleashes the forces of supernatural terror on its hapless protagonists. Alec Newman (from the TV remake of DUNE) is the unofficial leader of the group, whose father (Michael Feast) was involved in similar jiggery-pokery many years earlier, leading to several deaths witnessed by Newman as a child.

The movie opened in UK theaters to scathing reviews and dismal box-office, and while the artless, multi-authored screenplay wanders aimlessly from scene to scene (the curse of so many modern horror films), it isn't nearly as bad as various reviews have suggested. Performances are uniformly fine (particularly Newman as the damaged young man forced to come to terms with his father's terrible legacy, and former soap star Joe Absolom as a potential victim), and Adams stages the various set-pieces with brisk precision, building to a fiery showdown between Newman and the unstoppable monster. The narrative makes little sense, but the movie is efficient and watchable, and amounts to passable popcorn entertainment, nothing more or less.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A Festival of Clichés
claudio_carvalho14 July 2003
A group of friends decide to use a Ouiji Board to make contact with spirits. Something does not happen as expected and an evil spirit is released. They receive a message from beyond advising they all will be dead soon. The quantity of clichés in this movie is amazing. You know what is going to happen in the next scene. The problem is to guess who will be killed next. However, the sound effect on DVD is great. The most original part is on the end of the movie, in the last scene: after so many clichés, you would never expect for such a good end of the plot. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "O Jogo dos Espíritos" ("The Spirits Game")
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Attack Of The Killer Clichés
Theo Robertson30 October 2004
I vaguely remember the trailers for LONG TIME DEAD and recall it did fairly poorly in cinema tickets and rental sales . I thought because it was released in the same year as two other very well regarded British horror movies , one featuring a squad of British soldiers as good guys fighting a bunch of werewolves and the other featuring a squad of British soldiers as bad guys battling against crypto zombies , that LONG TIME DEAD may have got lost in the market place but after finally seeing it I doubt if the merits of DOG SOLDIERS and 28 DAYS LATER had anything to do with its failure - The reason it bombed is that it's a rather poor horror movie

First of all can we please stop seeing movies where horny , drug taking teenagers get stalked and slashed . I had become very fed up by this plot by the early 1980s and it stopped being a good premise 20 years ago . Okay SCREAM and FINAL DESTINATION used the same plot but the producers at least tried to do something a little bit different with the plot where as in this movie it's just well worn cliché as is the set up with a ouija board

Okay I'm in a generous mood so I won't put the boot into director because it's a debut and I imagine Marcus Adams had a lot of enjoyment shooting the picture and it is fairly stylish . I should also point out that there is a not unimpressive sequence where two characters enter a house only for them to come to a sticky end . Unfortunately Mr Adams also wrote the screenplay and it's this that is the film's undoing

I'm not much of a horror fan and though I enjoyed the 2002 releases where the British Army let off a few shots at monsters in abandoned houses there's little in this movie to recommend unless you're a horror movie addict
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Underrated
johnhuk30 June 2002
I am surprised at the mixed views on this film. Reading the back cover I knew it was a gamble but it paid off.

I watched it without any hype or recommendation, and thought it was a pretty good film.

Someone rated it 2/10. Has this person seem some of the rubbish horror films in the video store.

I thought the acting was very good. A welcome relief from some of the American garbage.

7/10
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Shame on the UK Film Council!
manchester_england20042 August 2009
Britain has a long history of horror movie productions, with the heyday for such movies being the period of the late 1950s to 1980. Hammer, Amicus and Tigon combined produced the vast majority of British horror movies during this period and helped to keep the industry alive in the 1970s when American investment dried up. Two excellent independent directors, Pete Walker and Norman J. Warren, succeeded them in the mid-1970s and continued their excellent work.

Some viewers of movies from the British horror heyday get the false impression that they were all about vampires, monsters and witchcraft. Well, I admit there were plenty of examples of this type of movie but they were plenty of other types that fall well outside this category. Take for example, Hammer's DR. JEKYLL AND SISTER HYDE or the Amicus anthologies or Pete Walker's FRIGHTMARE. Or what about a movie that was not produced by any of the sources I mentioned - THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE.

Since the 1980s, there have been very few British horror movies worth mentioning. The British movie industry has tried unsuccessfully for nearly 30 years to mimic the style and content of infinitely superior American movies rather than staying to its true roots.

LONG TIME DEAD is one such unsuccessful example - funded in part with taxpayers' money through the UK Film Council. British people have the right to be angered their hard-earned cash has been put towards such a travesty as this without them having any say in the matter.

The plot of this movie sounds really great on paper - a group of students having an all-night party start messing around with a Ouija board and unleash an evil Djinn. One-by-one they are murdered in gruesome ways, leaving the survivors to solve the mystery.

Those who say this movie is a throwback to the heyday of British horror are simply wrong. The movie is very clearly inspired by superior recent American teenage movies such as I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER and URBAN LEGEND to name just two. There are even a few nods to modern minor classics such as SCREAM and one stylish nod to THE EVIL DEAD.

Unfortunately the final result of this movie is something less akin to the decent movies mentioned and more in common with lame cheap straight-to-DVD movies such as THE CHOKE and ONE OF THEM. As in those two movies, characters disappear for long periods of time without explanation. And when any are killed, their friends soon forget about them.

As one would expect with this type of movie, the acting is unilaterally awful, ranging from no acting to overacting. Joe Absolom was more interesting to watch as Matthew Rose in the British soap, EASTENDERS. He was a good choice of actor to have in this movie but his talent is completely wasted.

The dialogue in LONG TIME DEAD is truly terrible. I was reminded of another British horror movie made around the same time called CRADLE OF FEAR. However, CRADLE OF FEAR was much funnier and enjoyable on the "so bad it's good" level thanks to some overacting on the part of lead actors, some weirdo characters who were interesting to watch and cheesy special effects.

The score for this movie has nothing at all to do with the horror theme and sounds just like a random pop song of the kind Hollywood choose to tag on to the end of their movies. It is not worthy of a British horror movie. Listen to the scores of movies from Britain's horror heyday and make the comparison.

Perhaps the worst crime of all in this movie is the sheer tedium. There are long periods of time when nothing is happening. Characters are wandering around checking out places but there is no suspense, no tension. There are only the clichéd jump scares that became worn 20 years ago.

The movie does have a few good points. The killing scenes are well-executed, leaving the most gory effects to the imagination and there is at least some attempt at a decent build-up to them. It is only for this reason that I give the movie a rating of 2 rather than 1.

Overall, I do not recommend this movie at all. American viewers would do better to stick to their own movies, they are far superior. Those wanting to see a proper British horror movie should do themselves a favour by seeking one out from the 1950s, 1960s or 1970s when we had proper talent in this field.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very underrated, very enjoyable!
nitzanhavoc21 December 2012
Honestly, I am slowly but surely losing all faith in the IMDb rating system. At the moment, this film is rated 4.7, and in my humble opinion that simply isn't fair. I consider myself a Horror fan, and I really enjoyed Long Time Dead.

I've seen comments and reviews stating that the acting and script were bad. While people are entitled to their own opinion, I have to disagree. The acting and script might not have been Oscar material, but that doesn't make them bad. We are talking about a film that from the beginning revolves around like 7 characters, so having no characters stand out simply means that all the cast had around the same level of talent. As for the screenplay - I thought the story was pretty good, the whole Ouija-Board/Occult/Demon combination worked rather well. Cinematography and effects were also quite awesome, nothing too fancy and no "overkills", just the right dosage.

All in all, I enjoyed every minute, and while Long Time Dead (not the right title in my opinion) might not have been one of the best Horror films I've seen, it's a long way from being one of the worst. Seeing such underrating frustrates and annoys me, and I feel like rating it 8 just to increase the average ratings. However, remaining objective and honest, I'll stay true to my original opinion and rate it a 7. I recommend it to anyone who enjoys a good scare!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Good try but it goes downhill after 20 minutes
vocklabruck1 August 2007
The idea was interesting and the movie was OK at the beginning, then it goes downhill. I mean, it turns boring because it is the same we have seen a million times: A group of people are in a house and an unknown entity kills the guys one by the other.

Besides the characters are not particularly likable so you don't care if they are killed or not. Characters development is very important but the writer here did not pay too much attention to this, so each person means the same to you.

The movie has some good chilling moments, but it is that kind of flick only enjoyable by teenagers. By the way, there are some cheap SFX at the end that makes you laugh.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
English yet Hollywood-like horror
ofjeworstlust7 March 2003
If you liked Final Destination and horror movies because of the thrills and not the gore, you'll enjoy this one. Sometimes a lot of blood and people get killed (slaughtered sometimes), but many excitement all along. The first 10 minutes with loud music are a bore, but then the story takes off. Supernatural with an open end that could have been better.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not a bad little Horror.
CharltonBoy13 January 2003
although Long Time Dead has nothing new to offer to the diserning horror fan it isnt at all bad. When you think about it there arent that many films that involve Ouiji boards which is quite suprising when this activity is one of the most terrifyingly mysterious known. It is also nice to see another good British horror. If you like this then be sure to get hold of Dog Soldiers which is even better. There is some nice ( that is not really the apt word!)moments and even a good twist or two that for a change the viewer does not see coming. Not a cheerleader or token dork in sight. Long live british horror. 7 out of 10.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Final Destination with a boogeyman
crawdad-629 October 2005
This movie seems to owe a huge debt to Final Destination, in that the film is primarily about horrible fate hunting down a group of teens one-by-one.

I found the characters even more cardboard-cutout than those in F.D. Main difference is that here the threat is personified, but the boogity stays so undeveloped that this is a weakness. The father should have been developed quite a bit more, and the landlord could have been a very interesting pivot point for the story, instead of serving merely as a red herring or distraction.

The fact that the ending was actually an ending, rather than a Hollywood sequel-tease was nice, however.

Watchable, but only just. If, however, you go all weak-kneed over mush-moufed British accents, you might like it more than I did.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A hammer film it isn't - but not bad really
vampiresan17 September 2002
In the 1960's the Hammer Horrorr films helped to almost single handedly revitalised the british film industry - but lately we haven't seen much Horror (film wise) coming out of the UK. Long Time Dead tries to recify this with mixed results. Though not brilliant and lacking a lot of the audicity of the Hammer films, as well as the eerie spookiness of the lastets supernatural hits - THE OTHERS and SIXTH SENSE, Long Time Dead does manage a few tense moments - nothing overly scarey mind you but I didn't hate it.

The trouble is it is trying to follow an American formula - a group of teenagers fooling around with the supernatural unleash something terrible and most of them die as a result.

It also has the now mandatory - "it's not really over" ending.

That said it is okay and fans thirsty for a bit of spooky old fashioned horror/supernatural/teenage thriller will probably enjoy it.

Just as an aside I recommend viewers who did enjoy this or who are interested in the Demon DJIN which features in this film would enjoy WishMaster - the Wes Craven film. It is far more bloody and violent but the Djin is also much more developed.
12 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Roller Coaster ride of FEAR
Diagnosis Pete27 January 2002
Long time dead sticks to all the clichés of America Teen horror films, however it manages to do so with a lot more class. The story is more dark than funny, with some truly heart-jumping moments. It's set in London, in abandoned warehouses, scrap-yards, and dingy student apartments. The main plot involves a group of students deciding to do a ouiji board, but the consequences leads to a fire-demon monster being released into the world. The first half of the film is good and moves at a fair pace, with classic suspenseful moments. The fast movement in camera shot helps to make the viewer feel like being in this roller coaster ride of FEAR, and with one of the teens being possessed by the demon, it keeps you guessing, and a dark secret from one of the students causes more angst.

However as soon as it is revealed the film dies out to a predictable end. This film has been done before, but I'm sure it will be a success if only to see the scariest sets imaginable and the classic light bulb smashing scene!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
fair acting, sub-par writing and story
dutchchocolatecake28 September 2014
I got this movie in a four pack creature feature from wally world that had a discount for a movie ticket on it. So my expectations going into this movie weren't very high.

The acting is okay. The actors seemed to take their job seriously, save for the dude with the long hair. Direction is competent. The special effects are conservative but done well when they appear. Costumes and setting are very good. The background music is good, but the radio and club music is generic house pop typical of the early 2000's, making the movie seem rather dated; although that doesn't tend to bother me. It's the movie script and story itself that is the downfall of this movie.

I read that there were six writers of this script. Six? Really? The way it was written, it seemed like a college horror movie project with a big budget. While the actors did their job, the way the characters were written was typical and banal.

Like Wishmaster, it takes a cursory understanding of non-Western mythology and makes it appear scary and evil. A middle schooler could write the same kind of "oooh, bad spirit comes to the material world to kill and cause chaos" plot line. While it could have had potential, there is nothing interesting or clever about this movie, which is sad because it was so professionally put together.

5/10 stars.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
"There's no way I'm doing a Ouija board!"
lost-in-limbo6 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Saw this when it was released and I didn't think all that much of it. Thought it was quite poor. I hadn't seen it since, until now and I didn't find it as bad as I last remembered. However there are no pretensions that it's your typical run-of-the-mill, forgettable little post-scream British horror flick outing. Almost like a dark supernatural slasher, as a evil entity (Djinn - fire spirit) possesses a human body and goes about killing the college friends who were involved in summoning it through a Ouija board. That who it possess is kept hidden until the film's climax, as red herrings are thrown up and back-stories are revealed. The main problem I had with it were the characters themselves… quite an unlikeable, bland and indistinguishable bunch of players. Surprisingly the ones which might have seem important in some shape to carry it (the few sympathetic turns with some sensibility) were killed off early and this actually made it unpredictable it what order they would dwindle down to. The typical traits are there; false build ups, reckless decisions, surprising revelations to keep the story moving, roaming shadows, distracting noises, characters finding out the truth to only be killed, ghastly shocks with flowing blood, the killer POV shots and a cheap lasting jolt to close up shop. Director / co-writer Marcus Adams' escalates some suspenseful frights and paces it well enough, but still its slick and flashy techniques are systematically vanilla. Special effects are efficient (sped up visuals and CGI) and the simmering score heightens the danger with its heart-racing cues. The performances are okay focusing on a hip young British cast (Hass' the exception) with the ladies (Marsha Thomason, Lara Bellmount and Melanie Gutteridge) standing head over heals over the boys (Lukas Hass, Ale Newman, Joe Absolom, James Hillier and Mel Raido).
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Lovely Lara
n799046712 July 2001
I was lucky enough to catch a preview screening of this back in June 2000, and I will say that it is actually very good. Recent British Horrors haven't really been up to scratch, but this provides everything you need for a good time, and a good scare. Also, it stars the lovely Lara Belmont, and the talented Lukas Haas, so that makes it worth watching anyway!! I rated it 7 and reccommend it to any scare fan.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Best thing about it is that it's short!
pgtc8 June 2003
I've always been a fan of horror movies and must have seen hundreds of them. Some are badly done, some done on a tight budget, but most have at least something to keep you interested. The only thing I kept doing during this one was checking how long it would be before it ended, because this is AS BAD AS IT GETS. Avoid it at all costs!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Gives new meaning to the words 'Scary Movie'
jpcdee10 August 2002
Being a Catholic I was very apprehensive about seeing this film as it deals with the occult and Ouija boards. It has an on-the-edge-of your-seat feel. The young cast plays out amazingly well. English viewers will recognise Joe Absolom and Marsha Thompson. Lukas Haas adds to the international mix. If you've seen this and Thir13en Ghosts, you will know that this is the better of the two - That's my opinion anyway. This is simply an amazing film, you won't believe that it's a Brit-flick. It gives a new meaning to the words 'Scary Movie' A few words of advice if you see this at night, you won't wanna go to sleep for hours!!
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh Dear God!
iainn431 October 2004
I was really looking forward to this film and huddled up on the sofa with a glass of wine last night to watch it. As a horror movie fan, I was expecting something different from a British film and I certainly got my wish. While watching this steaming pile of horsesh*it, my mind wandered off to the point that I actually thought I'd fallen asleep. Suffice to say that I hadn't dropped off but suffered some temporary memory loss induced by this celluloid form of sedative. I couldn't care less who'd been killed, who was going to be killed or who the damn Djinn was. There was no continuity, the acting was truly abysmal and the plot had more holes than a slice of emmental cheese. If you're suffering from insomnia try this movie.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Good back to basics British horror
paddyt5 August 2002
It was an impulse decision, I wanted a scary movie and I just grabbed this from the shelf and I am glad I did. Its been a long time since I have seen a low budget British film that I have enjoyed and this came as a pleasant surprise, it is well filmed but doesn't go down the route of trying to be too clever. It just shows you what you need to see, avoiding most of the gruesome events and instead showing you the result. It entertains, suggests and of course scares. If don't have the preconception that you are going to watch an extremely clever horror and are just looking for a back to basics horror then you should enjoy this.
14 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good Horror film, Good twists! Don't base this film on it's title!
franceseca_orr20 January 2003
No offence to British film-makers, hey I'm British, but they are usually very, very bad at creating horror films, so I didn't really know what to expect when I went to see this film, but it got into the cinema so it must be worth it, with the exception of, 'Jay and Silent Bob strike back!' and 'Dog Soldiers' (that was a bit unoriginal and had some pretty pathetic lines in it), I mean. But actually it was quite good, lots of jumps and I liked the characters, at times it was quite scary and I thought the ouji (don't know how to spell it) board idea was good, people say its unoriginal but hey, how many movies about ouji boards have you seen? Anyway I found this quite a good film and the acting was quite good, I thought the way it was shot was really cool and gave a great effect to the movie, overall I give it ******** out of ********** for a horror flick

Good Movie!

Top_Movie_Fan-Fave-Film_Powder_4eva!
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh the horror, the horror!
edwardkeaton19 January 2002
What an utterly incompetent piece of absolute garbage, can someone please tell me how movies like this get made? On my Episode 1 rating (You know how bad Episode 1 is? Well I now rate movies as to how long they take me to get restless, bored and angry as that George Lucas trash did) this rates a 7. That's 7 minutes it took me to realise I was watching a stinker; even Rancid Aluminium scored a 10!

The plot, such as it is, is that a group of teens decide to have some fun with a ouija board but inadvertently raise an evil Djinn, who then sets about killing them all in gruesome ways. So OK, we're in comfortable teen horror movie territory here, but wait, there's been so many of these movies recently, we need to find a new spin on it, right? So what can we do? I know, great idea, let's just do the same old crap, but let's make it British! Yep, instead of annoying American high-school kids getting gutted instead we get annoying Brits. And that's it. Acting is appalling, direction sub-standard, writing woeful, even the production values are on the shoddy side. At least the 'enjoyment' in these movies is seeing people murdered in gory ways, but here the killings happen off screen. And every bad horror-movie cliché is relentlessly churned out, then used again for good measure, and again, and again.

Example, the old staple of young guy (let's call him Chad), unwisely exploring shadowy lit basement hears loud thump, so nervously calls out name of his buddy, `Chris? Chris, is that you? Hey man, quit screwing around!' But Chris doesn't reply. So, tentatively, Chad walks down the corridor, slowly at first, then building up a little as he nears the door. And as the sweat breaks out on his revered brow and he strains to hear every sound, he tentatively reaches out an outstretched hand to the door knob, yanking it open in terrified despair only for Chris to jump out at him and shout `Got you Chad!'

Yahhhhh!

How many times have we seen this fake tension builder before, I ask you? Well obviously not enough, because director Marcus Adams uses it five times in this movie; I know, because I counted! I mean, what gives? Does Marcus Adams want to be the next Danny Cannon? They even had a spooky old man, straight out of Scooby Doo, who pops up at appropriate times saying things like, `You kids don't know what you're dealing with here!' And this took four people to write?!

Ahh! I refuse to write any more and waste my time on such junk.

THE HORROR!
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed