Out of all of the low-budget, independent films that I have viewed over the years, this on really takes the cake. It is downright AWFUL! Very, very, very poor acting, and a totally ridiculous plot. Even the Gothic girls in the film were just white trash in black. The "special effects" consisted of making a guys eyes glow red. Herschell Gordon Lewis did 100 times better than this 30 years ago. Avoid this film. Don't waste your time watching this crap. I'm not going to complain about the poor quality of the DVD, or the deceptive hype on the back of it, but I have to say that this is just stupid. A total waste of time. Maybe if I had saw the first one, I might be able to follow that plot a little more easily (but I Doubt it). I will say that the special features were pretty good, several trailers for films that looked waaaaay better than this one, and even "bloopers" (as if the film itself wasn't a 100 min. blooper) and a "making of" segment. Honestly, I would rather watch paint dry.
19 Reviews
it's worse than that other guy says
elSOOPERmex3 July 2006
Aspiring to be an Evil Dead homage (or rip-off), this piece of trash has tons of advantages over Evil Dead, and yet produces an unwatchable idiotic movie. Every aspect you can think of in the movie-making process is poorly done here. Hell, even the "best boy" effed up his job. The makeup was horrible, the special effects were...whatever is the opposite of special. Mundane Effects technician is what they had. One thing that is has, is consistency. You definitely cannot say that any part is crappier than any of the others. They're all equally crappy. If you dare to test your patience, please make sure to be somewhat drunk, or to have lots of friends around you that can make fun of movies. This one deserves the lousy treatment.
If you spent 1 cent , you wasted your money
CharlesFort19 August 2006
Nearly unwatchable trash from the studio of BrainDamage films...I got this in a set (Vamps) with 3 other low low quality movies. Now, I like low budget crap, and I love horror movies...this was Z-grade disappointment. Horrible writing, acting, directing, sound, sets, etc. Gives indie films and BrainDamage a bad, bad name.
The plot is barely decipherable (girl goes to house where sister disappeared w/ fat cop in tow, they enter a new dimension). I pretty much had to fast forward to prevent from hanging myself. Slow, incoherent drivel seems like it was written the day after a hangover by an illiterate blind ape. A couple boob shots added nothing, I was depressed I own this. Zero redeeming qualities. Shame on everyone who touched this.
The plot is barely decipherable (girl goes to house where sister disappeared w/ fat cop in tow, they enter a new dimension). I pretty much had to fast forward to prevent from hanging myself. Slow, incoherent drivel seems like it was written the day after a hangover by an illiterate blind ape. A couple boob shots added nothing, I was depressed I own this. Zero redeeming qualities. Shame on everyone who touched this.
Not so bad ...
CHUDtheBUD26 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
... and not so good either. I'm giving this 5/10 because it had good bad parts and bad bad parts. There is some obvious suck but some of the cheese works. The fact that most actors in this shot-on-video movie look nothing like actors, is a great bonus and gives one much opportunities to mock 'em. Of course the "acting" is stiff/mechanical/bad and some of the lines they say are just (unintentional) amusing. I did enjoy the mashed potatoes they used for puking and other effects though. All this add up for fun enjoyment but as I said before, there is also unfunny badness so rent/watch with caution.
I have home videos that are better quality.
princessjenifer3 December 2004
How on earth did this actually make it to video store shelves? I honestly do not understand how that occurred. This movie could only be considered cool if a group of my friends made it after drinking all day, as a joke. Also, it pretty much goes without saying that anyone who gave this "film" even a remotely positive review was either A) somehow involved with the cast or crew or B) twelve years old, and excited he got to rent a movie with topless girls in it, without his parents noticing. (Note in regards to the topless girls: NOT the kind of girls you want to see take their clothes off.) The only good thing I can say about this movie, is that it kind of inspired me to get a group of people together, get wasted, and improv a ridiculously bad horror film....which is pretty much what Abomination seems to have done, anyway.
Typical low-brow, atrocious Brain Dead production.
FiendishDramaturgy7 January 2004
Warning: Spoilers
This has to be one of the worst three films ever made. As a sequel to EvilMaker 1 (which was no better, I assure you), the girl who survived tries to figure out what happened...She's clueless. She wanders around like no one could understand what was going on in the first one. All they needed was a kindergarten education to grasp the wannabe movie. She meets with some friends and they all wandered around and around, seemingly with no direction, the worst dialog you've ever had to sit through, the most disgusting performances since Alien 51, and no story whatsoever worth even attempting to put on film.
This whole thing looks like it was shot with a camcorder on the cheapest dollar store brand VHS video tape they could find, with the soundtrack recorded on a pocket micro-recorder which lent no distinction to the words said, whatsoever. There were even scenes in which you couldn't make out what they were saying, and I had the (supposedly superior) DVD!
It's fuzzy, grainy and garbled beyond understanding, and you don't care, because the story is so utterly puerile and lacking in intelligence that you really don't care if you can see it or not. At least, I didn't.
There was no attempt at style, art, or artistic expression. This was just a sad, wasted 80 minutes.
It rates a 0.1/10 from...
the Fiend :.
This whole thing looks like it was shot with a camcorder on the cheapest dollar store brand VHS video tape they could find, with the soundtrack recorded on a pocket micro-recorder which lent no distinction to the words said, whatsoever. There were even scenes in which you couldn't make out what they were saying, and I had the (supposedly superior) DVD!
It's fuzzy, grainy and garbled beyond understanding, and you don't care, because the story is so utterly puerile and lacking in intelligence that you really don't care if you can see it or not. At least, I didn't.
There was no attempt at style, art, or artistic expression. This was just a sad, wasted 80 minutes.
It rates a 0.1/10 from...
the Fiend :.
Pathetic. This is absolutely ridiculous.
grahm_cassius18 February 2003
After viewing the cover and reading the case at Hollywood Video, I thought this film could be interesting. I am a big fan of horror movies, finding the films which involve the underlying substance of evil particularly appealing.
From the second this film is played, you can't help but notice that the menu layout on the DVD had a higher budget than the film itself. I wouldn't put this on the "worst" list for this site, I feel bad saying it is the worst movie I've ever seen because it shouldn't be credited as a real movie.
I am not exaggerating, I have a $200 camcorder and a $600 digital camcorder. The picture looks like the $200 camcorder. It is so unclear it practically gives you a headache, no modifications were made whatsoever to present it more attractively. No work was done with the audio, I would be surprised if it wasn't camcorder's built-in microphone they relied on single-handedly. The filmmakers do have a computer, that's how they put the red dots on the actors eyes and added music to the background.
It doesn't take a big budget to make a great film. It does, however require something to make it great. What "Abomination: Evil Maker 2" has is acting worse than softcore porn, a Polaroid picture, and a disappointingly weak plot. Just cause you put purple under your eyes and dress in black, it doesn't make you anything. None of the characters are interesting to the least bit, and they rarely change facial expressions. I believe someone really wanted to be a filmmaker so they convince a couple of people to try it.
Effects were properly manipulated, which doesn't make them good, maybe even predictable. You can tell a few times someone had a gore vision, from the thick jell highlighted in red with black dots on the back for melted skin and food spit out of the mouth for throw-up. You could have atleast put some sex with the gothic sister in. It wouldn't have made a good film if they would have followed their script.The real compliments go to the fact that the film got such distribution.
It takes more than considering yourself "not good" to be interesting, and that's not more quarter-machine eye-shadow. It's not more profanity either, although that was my favorite part of the film. THAT was hilarious! An old lady telling a daughter sister "I don't need this s--t, so f--k you. Now get the f--k out of here!"
I just think people should know before coming across this films decieving appearance in the new release section. NOW I feel really bad. You may laugh, however, maybe once, maybe more. I'm sorry, it's just a disgrace to filmmakers for this one to be two shelves above it.
From the second this film is played, you can't help but notice that the menu layout on the DVD had a higher budget than the film itself. I wouldn't put this on the "worst" list for this site, I feel bad saying it is the worst movie I've ever seen because it shouldn't be credited as a real movie.
I am not exaggerating, I have a $200 camcorder and a $600 digital camcorder. The picture looks like the $200 camcorder. It is so unclear it practically gives you a headache, no modifications were made whatsoever to present it more attractively. No work was done with the audio, I would be surprised if it wasn't camcorder's built-in microphone they relied on single-handedly. The filmmakers do have a computer, that's how they put the red dots on the actors eyes and added music to the background.
It doesn't take a big budget to make a great film. It does, however require something to make it great. What "Abomination: Evil Maker 2" has is acting worse than softcore porn, a Polaroid picture, and a disappointingly weak plot. Just cause you put purple under your eyes and dress in black, it doesn't make you anything. None of the characters are interesting to the least bit, and they rarely change facial expressions. I believe someone really wanted to be a filmmaker so they convince a couple of people to try it.
Effects were properly manipulated, which doesn't make them good, maybe even predictable. You can tell a few times someone had a gore vision, from the thick jell highlighted in red with black dots on the back for melted skin and food spit out of the mouth for throw-up. You could have atleast put some sex with the gothic sister in. It wouldn't have made a good film if they would have followed their script.The real compliments go to the fact that the film got such distribution.
It takes more than considering yourself "not good" to be interesting, and that's not more quarter-machine eye-shadow. It's not more profanity either, although that was my favorite part of the film. THAT was hilarious! An old lady telling a daughter sister "I don't need this s--t, so f--k you. Now get the f--k out of here!"
I just think people should know before coming across this films decieving appearance in the new release section. NOW I feel really bad. You may laugh, however, maybe once, maybe more. I'm sorry, it's just a disgrace to filmmakers for this one to be two shelves above it.
Blurry, shot on video garbage
Leofwine_draca7 March 2017
Warning: Spoilers
ABOMINATION is the sequel to THE EVILMAKER, a worthless shot-on-video would-be horror movie featuring Stephanie Beaton. This film's plot sees the main character looking for her friends, who were the group of girlfriends who disappeared in the first film.
What you have is a really boring shot on video effort featuring really blurry footage. The main woman tries to find out what happened to her friends but just wanders around endlessly until the viewer gets really, really bored. There's a brief sex scene and some brief snippets of gore but it's all really bad with a really poor standard of acting. A waste of time, in other words.
What you have is a really boring shot on video effort featuring really blurry footage. The main woman tries to find out what happened to her friends but just wanders around endlessly until the viewer gets really, really bored. There's a brief sex scene and some brief snippets of gore but it's all really bad with a really poor standard of acting. A waste of time, in other words.
Yet another terrible Brain Damage film
Cosmo32216 February 2003
Though I have not seen the first movie, "The EvilMaker" I do wonder why they would make a sequel. Are there people out there demanding that this story be continued? Did the first movie leave a bunch of unanswered questions? Besides the common question of 'Why was this movie made?' I'm amazed that these movies are able to get national distribution. They shouldn't leave their city of origin. Not only is the story weak, the acting bad but we are to believe that this one "actor" (a poor man's Captain Lou Albano) is a former cop kicked off the force for unethical behavior. How about kicking him off cause he looks like he ate one of the cop cars. Well GoreHounds, (so-called fans of Brain Damage films) this is another stinker. 1/10
Amazingly bad
Mercury-428 February 2003
Bad beyond description. There is absolutely nothing good about this movie, from the incoherent script to the abominable acting, the idiotic special effects.
They have a little 'outtakes'/documentary/whatever section at the end which was dull but less dull than the movie. The shame is, the lead actress struck me, from that part, as having real potential. It's somehow a comment on how truly bad the movie is that it could be directed so poorly that the actors are less interesting in the movie than in the outtakes.
They have a little 'outtakes'/documentary/whatever section at the end which was dull but less dull than the movie. The shame is, the lead actress struck me, from that part, as having real potential. It's somehow a comment on how truly bad the movie is that it could be directed so poorly that the actors are less interesting in the movie than in the outtakes.
Better acting seen at the department of motor vehicles.
ttrooney27 December 2003
bad, bad, oh my god bad. It was so bad that when I fast forwarded though it(about the last 90% of it), that was even pathetic. I'm amazed that Hollywood video had 7 copies of it on their shelves. It is literally the worst thing I have ever seen. I thought the worst I ever saw was "cannibal camp out", but that was intended to be kinda stupid so it was at least remotely funny. The sad thing is this is trying to be good and sadly enough, it seems that it truly thinks it is. The intro on the dvd alone should have clued me in. Any future film makers want a confidence booster?.... rent abomination. The other film previews on the dvd are at least something funny to watch.... QUILT FACE!!! heheheh.
Good no budget flick
pig_7124 March 2003
I'm a big fan of no-budget horror. I have seen a lot of crap in my time. Like alot of no-budget flicks, somethings don't work out, but overall this movie tried to rise above and did. It relied more on scares, and there are a few great scare/tension scenes. The Fx are fantastic, except for some of the cgi. Overall, if you are into no-budget then check this out.
Garbage in a video box
onionhead10119 July 2007
Easily the worst 90 minutes of my life, irretrievable. Better time could have been spent on the toilet with diarrhea. John Bowker is Satan, his movies suck pig puke, and The Abomination, a SEQUEL no less, is probably the worst film I have ever sat through. Kathy, the heroine, searches for clues to the disappearance of her sister, runs afoul of stupid characters in stupid situations in stupid settings, and at one point exclaims, "I'm getting tired of this s**t!" This was probably directed at her part in the movie. It certainly was my opinion. The absence of a plot, horrible acting, abysmal grade-school level special effects--it worked for Plan 9 from Outer Space, but this pile steams. Better save some money for the Immodium you'll need after this bowel-churner, or better yet just buy the Immodium and skip this crap.
a nice DVD presentation for low-budget fans
minimogul25 February 2003
"Abomination: EvilMaker 2" is an adequate sequel to the original without going over the same ground. The new lead is not as powerful as the original (Stephanie Beaton), but she comes across as so sincere and good-natured that she does the job. Big surprise is Jon Wilmot, who underplays the role of the disgraced ex-cop successfully. It is indeed Felicia Pandolfi, back in form as one of our favorite "b-movie goth chicks" who brings the most energy. Musical score is above average for an effort of this type. DVD also has some very good features about the making of the film, and the film makers, to their credit, point out several obstacles they had to try to overcome to finish the film. The last 20:00 does contain some good twist and turns, one or two that I could not predict. Whereas the b-movie horror makers in California are more or less a heartless machine (I've never liked the films of Fred Ray, Winorski or their ilk), I would prefer renting or buying a horror film done for the right reasons, like this one. It took a second viewing to spot the subtle color scheme whenever sister Racheal appears. Here's hoping there will be a nice wrap up, completing a memorable low-budget trilogy.
Just as creepy and scary as the original
bfan8317 February 2004
After watching the first Evilmaker I patiently waited for them to put out sequel. So when they did, I was surprised and a little sad to see that this one didn't have Stephanie Beaton in it. But Kylene Wetherel did a decent job replacing her. Anyway, the movie starts off with a supreme feeling of dread and suspense. The thing that I thought was really bad in this film was Shannon. I honestly think that she was reading her lines off of a cue card. It was that blatantly obvious. Other than that, rent this movie if you have only seen the first otherwise you'll be confused as to what's going on. And I hope to see more of that Kylene chick. She really shines!!
Hmmmm, well...this is really, really BAD
Katatonia25 February 2003
This was released on the Brain Damage films label, and from my experience they release a few good low-budget horror movies ("The Coven" namely), and the rest of their releases are utter garbage. Abomination is utter garbage, make no mistake.
It looks like it was shot on VHS video, the picture is extremely murky (i saw it on DVD). The sound is like it was all recorded on location with cheap equipment and never mixed from the raw stock. It's very difficult to hear the dialogue many times throughout the movie.
The acting is VERY BAD, even for a no-budget film such as this. The plot is equally as terrible. When i read the DVD cover in the rental store it sounded like it might be a good little movie, but alas i was wrong. It's quite boring also, nothing very interesting happens until near the end...and even that is rather stupid.
The special effects are laughable, we have "vomit" that looks very much like Tapioca Pudding (i guess that is what it really was). The death scenes are so fake it is almost hilarious when you're watching them.
What amazes me is that the DVD for Abomination includes a "Making Of" that is over an hour long, another 36+ minutes of interviews, and another 15+ minutes of bloopers/outtakes. No, i did not waste my time watching any of those! Who exactly would waste their valuable time to know more about this movie?!?!?
The only saving grace i can possibly think of during this film was the music score had a few good moments. That's it...no scares...no laughs...some brief nudity, but the women are not very good looking...
There are so many low-budget horror films out there that are vastly better than Abomination. Even if you are the type of horror fan who watches every horror film released (like me), you should avoid this like the plague........
It looks like it was shot on VHS video, the picture is extremely murky (i saw it on DVD). The sound is like it was all recorded on location with cheap equipment and never mixed from the raw stock. It's very difficult to hear the dialogue many times throughout the movie.
The acting is VERY BAD, even for a no-budget film such as this. The plot is equally as terrible. When i read the DVD cover in the rental store it sounded like it might be a good little movie, but alas i was wrong. It's quite boring also, nothing very interesting happens until near the end...and even that is rather stupid.
The special effects are laughable, we have "vomit" that looks very much like Tapioca Pudding (i guess that is what it really was). The death scenes are so fake it is almost hilarious when you're watching them.
What amazes me is that the DVD for Abomination includes a "Making Of" that is over an hour long, another 36+ minutes of interviews, and another 15+ minutes of bloopers/outtakes. No, i did not waste my time watching any of those! Who exactly would waste their valuable time to know more about this movie?!?!?
The only saving grace i can possibly think of during this film was the music score had a few good moments. That's it...no scares...no laughs...some brief nudity, but the women are not very good looking...
There are so many low-budget horror films out there that are vastly better than Abomination. Even if you are the type of horror fan who watches every horror film released (like me), you should avoid this like the plague........
Awful Cheep Movie Inspires Rental Rebate
darkmanted21 February 2003
I didn't understand this movie at all. Something about a girl that got killed and someone investigating. I wouldn't recommend it at all. The picture is grainy, it looks like it was shot with a VHS camcorder and the audio was so low I had to turn my TV all the way up and still could barely hear it.
There was some possession thing going on and some girl got covered in ice cream in one scene (this is an effect? WHAT?!?!) and there was some horrible looking "animated" effects that made me cringe. I thought the effects in Japanese movies were bad, the opticals in this thing were atrocious. This movie is actually the first rental where I asked for a refund of my rental money and when the manager popped the movie into a machine and saw the quality, he was gracious enough to give me a free rental because of the awful quality. (I rented Blood Works and it was GOOD.) People should not be charged to view this kind of thing, the entire budget couldn't have been more than the $4.00 rental charge.
I will say the box art got me to rent this movie, but never again. Avoid this movie at any and all cost, folks. Nothing personal to the folks who made it (I assume they had a $3.99 budget, a camcorder, and some ambition), but this is the kind of thing that you keep in the closet and maybe just show it to your friends and family, saying "hey, I made a movie." That this was commercially released and packaged at all is truly...an abomination. The title says it all and never again will I get suckered by good artwork and movies with no stars, there's no redeeming quality at all to the presentation save a couple of scenes with bare breasted women (and if you want to see this, rent something good, like Basic Instinct).
They really should label these movies properly on the boxes, saying "made by amateurs with a camcorder", that way the public wouldn't be suckered into renting this trash. Glad I didn't purchase this, but I guess the disc would've made a nice frisbee.
Believe it or not, the DVD contains making of stuff and it's exactly what you think it is: people standing around in front of a camcorder. That's right, one camcorder filming another camcorder, I couldn't believe it. Family barbeques are more entertaining.
Skip this one. Worse than Blood Cult.
There was some possession thing going on and some girl got covered in ice cream in one scene (this is an effect? WHAT?!?!) and there was some horrible looking "animated" effects that made me cringe. I thought the effects in Japanese movies were bad, the opticals in this thing were atrocious. This movie is actually the first rental where I asked for a refund of my rental money and when the manager popped the movie into a machine and saw the quality, he was gracious enough to give me a free rental because of the awful quality. (I rented Blood Works and it was GOOD.) People should not be charged to view this kind of thing, the entire budget couldn't have been more than the $4.00 rental charge.
I will say the box art got me to rent this movie, but never again. Avoid this movie at any and all cost, folks. Nothing personal to the folks who made it (I assume they had a $3.99 budget, a camcorder, and some ambition), but this is the kind of thing that you keep in the closet and maybe just show it to your friends and family, saying "hey, I made a movie." That this was commercially released and packaged at all is truly...an abomination. The title says it all and never again will I get suckered by good artwork and movies with no stars, there's no redeeming quality at all to the presentation save a couple of scenes with bare breasted women (and if you want to see this, rent something good, like Basic Instinct).
They really should label these movies properly on the boxes, saying "made by amateurs with a camcorder", that way the public wouldn't be suckered into renting this trash. Glad I didn't purchase this, but I guess the disc would've made a nice frisbee.
Believe it or not, the DVD contains making of stuff and it's exactly what you think it is: people standing around in front of a camcorder. That's right, one camcorder filming another camcorder, I couldn't believe it. Family barbeques are more entertaining.
Skip this one. Worse than Blood Cult.
What is this a home movie?
polholterheath1 December 2004
I could not believe this movie when i pressed play. We were greeting by this fat ugly looking woman with her breasts hanging out! I gave it a chance and was not surprised when it SUCKED! I could not follow the story line at all. The actors were so fake and unpersuading. The gore and blood was very amateur. Camera angles, editing, and sets looked so cheesy and homemade it made me sick. I watched bits of the special features to laugh, I watched a few outtakes as "cathy" is reciting her terrible cheesy line and she bursts out laughing. I did that threw the whole movie.I didn't understand how this movie made it to Hollywood video? We definitely took this one back and got our 3 bucks back because I wouldn't watch it for 3 bucks if you paid me! "starring SEXY Cathy" sexy ya hmmm
This is the most dumbest and most pathetic movie I have ever seen.
summer465110 February 2003
This movie deserves 0 stars. The script is dumb, the actors are bad, and the camera operator doesn't know what he/she is doing. The editing was good though, but the way the film is presented, meaning how its like a home video, is really dumb. I warn you,do not waste your money on this pathetic movie.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
