Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings352
BakuryuuTyranno's rating
Reviews141
BakuryuuTyranno's rating
Probably a film that while it influenced many media, that many people who saw said media probably never heard of.
It's very energetic and has likable characters - and, interestingly, the gang at one point threaten other people to get information, thus reminding us our protagonists/potential victims are, on a normal day, probably to be avoided themselves.
Individual zombies have personality too, notable because many villains in films have no personality - and unfortunate convention, but often it seems a movie's villain only exists as an obstacle for the hero.
Fortunately, there isn't much stupidity here as the threat is dangerous that the potential victims are pretty much fighting an uphill battle.
The music is pretty amazing.
It's very energetic and has likable characters - and, interestingly, the gang at one point threaten other people to get information, thus reminding us our protagonists/potential victims are, on a normal day, probably to be avoided themselves.
Individual zombies have personality too, notable because many villains in films have no personality - and unfortunate convention, but often it seems a movie's villain only exists as an obstacle for the hero.
Fortunately, there isn't much stupidity here as the threat is dangerous that the potential victims are pretty much fighting an uphill battle.
The music is pretty amazing.
I'm not sure what to rate this film.
Some horror films focus on gore and sometimes nudity; those are splatter flicks enjoyed more frequently by younger viewers (i.e. teens and maybe early twenties). Many older horror fans prefer films reliant on character development and atmosphere.
When I was younger, I found this boring. Now I find it incredibly stupid.
Beyond the opening part, most scenes have something wrong - often a complete disregard for common sense.
Apparently a guy who only runs amusement parks - unlike Disney or Universal, he has no other assets spoken of - can afford to throw away millions of dollars like its nothing. Note that the existence of another big amusement park would reduce the income taken by each company, making this less believable.
Ali Larter's character, on seeing the house locking itself down, preventing the cast from escaping, thinks its an attempt to scare them into leaving and forfeiting the money.
Rush's character provides the guests the means (loaded guns) and motives to murder each other. Forget the $1 million, or even $5 million. The lawsuits this surely opens himself to would ruin him.
Rush and Janssen play a couple who would be at home in a "Tales from the Crypt" episode. Kattan plays an unlikable guy who despite believing the house to be evil is willing to let people die for a few thousand dollars. These people play the only real characters.
Larter and the other girl might have been if they stared with their mouths closed but lips slightly apart, often while looking up, they would be paid for acting. Diggs has nothing to work with besides a couple of generic "movie black guy" lines toward the start. Whoever played Blackburn kinda just stood there mostly.
Essentially, there's a "Tales form the Crypt" plot line, which isn't that bad, and a haunted house plot line, which never makes sense. Even poor films like "Mirrors" and "The Unborn" had more logic to what their malevolent spirits were capable of - here, the darkness within the house was contained by cork board through most of the movie.
At one point, Diggs's character or a ghost resembling him is encountered by Larter's character. That ambiguous aspect is closest the movie comes to being scary. It's ruined because either the lighting or effects team resulted in the glowy eyes.
On the upside, it's very enthusiastic and feels the behind it were actually trying to make something entertaining - a feeling missing most big-budget horror films today.
Some horror films focus on gore and sometimes nudity; those are splatter flicks enjoyed more frequently by younger viewers (i.e. teens and maybe early twenties). Many older horror fans prefer films reliant on character development and atmosphere.
When I was younger, I found this boring. Now I find it incredibly stupid.
Beyond the opening part, most scenes have something wrong - often a complete disregard for common sense.
Apparently a guy who only runs amusement parks - unlike Disney or Universal, he has no other assets spoken of - can afford to throw away millions of dollars like its nothing. Note that the existence of another big amusement park would reduce the income taken by each company, making this less believable.
Ali Larter's character, on seeing the house locking itself down, preventing the cast from escaping, thinks its an attempt to scare them into leaving and forfeiting the money.
Rush's character provides the guests the means (loaded guns) and motives to murder each other. Forget the $1 million, or even $5 million. The lawsuits this surely opens himself to would ruin him.
Rush and Janssen play a couple who would be at home in a "Tales from the Crypt" episode. Kattan plays an unlikable guy who despite believing the house to be evil is willing to let people die for a few thousand dollars. These people play the only real characters.
Larter and the other girl might have been if they stared with their mouths closed but lips slightly apart, often while looking up, they would be paid for acting. Diggs has nothing to work with besides a couple of generic "movie black guy" lines toward the start. Whoever played Blackburn kinda just stood there mostly.
Essentially, there's a "Tales form the Crypt" plot line, which isn't that bad, and a haunted house plot line, which never makes sense. Even poor films like "Mirrors" and "The Unborn" had more logic to what their malevolent spirits were capable of - here, the darkness within the house was contained by cork board through most of the movie.
At one point, Diggs's character or a ghost resembling him is encountered by Larter's character. That ambiguous aspect is closest the movie comes to being scary. It's ruined because either the lighting or effects team resulted in the glowy eyes.
On the upside, it's very enthusiastic and feels the behind it were actually trying to make something entertaining - a feeling missing most big-budget horror films today.
One interview video I watched once involved, after the interviews, the interviewer/presenter stated that the reason one person wasn't hired was because she would've made a good drinking buddy, but wasn't the material they needed.
"Buried Alive" is kinda like that. Little happens, but the characters are very entertaining, and mostly juvenile, but their antics stopped the movie from being boring.
Tobin Bell is essentially a poor man's Tony Todd, wondering around and providing some sense of menace.
There's some very gory murders, but much screen time is taken up watching the amusing potential victims, which alone should tell you whether you would enjoy watching this or not.
"Buried Alive" is kinda like that. Little happens, but the characters are very entertaining, and mostly juvenile, but their antics stopped the movie from being boring.
Tobin Bell is essentially a poor man's Tony Todd, wondering around and providing some sense of menace.
There's some very gory murders, but much screen time is taken up watching the amusing potential victims, which alone should tell you whether you would enjoy watching this or not.