Horror

That movie is really CRAP. Nothing in it except very bad casting. Very bad shooting . The worst effects & make up . I guess there was no editor in the movie!

It takes you from the beginning with those guys escaping from Rehab in a van passing by terrible (supposed to be) spooky moments & ending in an unknown aim.

Flying Evil Pumpkin heads like those used in horror movies in the 50's & 60's . Stupid zombies who have no role in the movie & finally no meaning to the whole plot.

An advice to say: If you are a horror fan , never watch this film by any means. I give it 1 out of 10 .

First off, I am a fan of Dante Tomaselli's work, ever since seeing the creepy and bizarre "Desecration," with it's disturbing visuals and obscure dark/erotic overtones. (A film featuring zombie nuns from Hell cannot fail IMO.) His other film, "Satan's Playground" I liked immensely as well, and found it a fun, atmospheric classic of low budget horror. So what happened here, i wonder? "Horror" is a disaster, and seems like it might have been his first film. While the eye catching cinematography is there, the style, the weird atmosphere etc, this one is sabotaged by the most laughable makeup effects since Ed Wood was making films. The "ghouls" here look like the kids on Halloween after being made up by their mothers with food coloring and cookie dough! Props meant to be scary look like plastic decorations you would find on any suburban front yard around the holidays. None of the "actors" could land a part as a bush in a high school play, and Kreskin is more zombie-like than the laughable zombies who appear halfway through the film (for no reason whatsoever.) What a wasted opportunity, as there are good things about this film, like the beautiful cinematography, the seeds of a fascinating story, and an ending that is actually the best thing about the whole thing. I like actor Danny Lopes, who appears in all of Tomaselli's films so far. He was good as the teen loner in Desecration, and believable as the autistic boy in 'Satan's Playground," and has a definite screen presence. "Horror" also suffers from going the sellout route of using the tired "teens in a haunted house" setup. A few good scenes drown in a sea of underwhelming tripe, "Horror" is perhaps the only film in history where the most interesting character was a billie goat...

First of all, this is a low, low budget film. A basement film. A film clearly made by a gang of enthusiastic amateurs rather than a Hollywood production studio. The acting is basically what you'd expect from a movie starring your stoner friends. The sets are what you might find around town, or what a relative might lend you for the weekend. The camera-work, editing and cinematography, while occasionally inventive, are far from professional. Hell, even the special effects are rudimentary (when they're not flat-out laughable).

But I kinda liked it. I didn't love it, and I'm not even really recommending it, but it's definitely the most unique and troo-kvlt horror flick I've seen in quite a while. Basically, what you have is a bifurcated storyline in which two distinct threads unfold and eventually merge. In the first, a young girl struggles to understand her relationship to her spooky parents and the creepy old house she's seemingly trapped in. In the second thread, an escaped gang of teenage rehab patients finds themselves drawn into the same spooky house. Presiding over all this is the young girl's grandfather, a mysterious figure named Reverend Salo (played, for no good reason, by The Amazing Kreskin).

The plot of this movie, however, is inconsequential. Horror is almost entirely senseless. Like Suspiria (which it resembles but can't begin to compete with), Horror cares more about building atmosphere and presenting disturbing visuals than about telling any kind of coherent story. While one might hazard a theory this way or that about why the events of the film unfold the way they do, it hardly matters. I listened to enough to DVD commentary to realize that director Danta Thomaselli's explanation is far less enlightening than what the average viewer might come up with on their own. "This is a movie that challenges all reality," he says. Uhhhhh, yeah. Take it to the man, Dante.

Again, in spite of all that, I did like this movie. Its heart is in the right place, even if it doesn't have a brain in its head. The visuals are imaginative, unsettling and clearly tied to a personal sense of what horror is all about. And, at 77 minutes, it never gets a chance to wear out its welcome.

6/10 (though I get the feeling I'm being waaaaay too generous)

First of all I must say that this is definitely NO HORROR movie, and it's not an art-house movie either... so what is it?

If this was a student's high school film project I would be impressed, but this is supposed to be the work of a "indie-maestro" director??? Oh my...

The "story", if you can find one, has absolutely no coherence and is really totally confusing. And in this case that is NOT a good thing! You do not WANT to think (or care) about what is going on in this senseless mess. If you are into weird confusing plots that make you think - go Lynch!

Can't say a good word about the "acting" either, i totally agree with one reviewer who said that the best actor was the goat! LOL

The visuals... OK let's give him some points in that area. The cinematography is quite well done, there are some quite nice shots and it is really obvious that the director is into "eye-candy". But he's far too hard TRYING to be surreal and artistic, and ends up only RIDICULOUS. If you're into psychedelic visuals and surreal/symbolic Horror - go Argento or Ken Russel.

There are also a lot of references to genre classics, which are really dilettantish or blatantly stolen.

Unfortunately I also cannot agree to any comedy value, but i have to admit that i was laughing when the Jack-O'-Lantern "Demons" first appeared - unbelievable that this was meant serious!! Oh my...

According to the director the movie is about eternal damnation, it's meant to be a nightmare that never ends - its not true - it ends when this shitty movie is finally OVER - thank god!!!

This is just a "wannabe" pretentious NOTHING...

I also suppose the very obvious correlation to massive drug abuse means you have to be in the same state to "understand" or really appreciate the director's visions...

I rather would NOT, thank you!

I was very impressed by Desecration...it had some of the creepier images I have seen in some time and the story held me...Unfortunately that was not the case with HORROR. Yes it had some great images and atmosphere but that is not enough to make a good horror film. No the story doesn't have to be amazing, but this film's story was weak...the dialogue was weak and the acting was weak...I am a firm believer that even the lowest budget horror films can and should have strong acting...strong actors are what actually sell the fright side of any horror film...This would have made a really good 10 minute short, or if it has a strong script and good actors, could have been a really great horror film.