don't we all want to kill someone.

Unfortunately too many films have to rely on this as a selling point. Nice to know that they at least attempted a horror film without either. Unfortunate to hear about the 'Halloween' rip-off score though. THat's been done to death.
CK

I bought it when I first heard about it a couple of months ago. I really enjoyed it I didn't think I Would but one scene really creeped me the fuck out was when the one girl was standing in the room with the table, and no one was behind her, then the shot away and back to her and the guy was standing outside the window with the mask scared the shit out of me for some reason.

It wasn't too bad, I don't think I'd buy it.

I thought it was a fairly decent movie. Not something I would buy, but I didn't feel like it was a waste of my time either. At least it wasn't another zombie movie.

Looks OK, might check it out.

Just watched it, it's pretty good but I'm not sure if it's all it's cracked up to be. Worth a viewing, though, for sure.

I had a distributor tell me movies need T&A to sell and then he signed a collection of mine that had no nudity. It had an implied nudity that was apparently convincing enough. The follow up (not really a sequel in the traditional sense, don't want to name the movies and spam while quoting CK) has nudity, but it was so key to the story even my mother approved and she sent me to a Catholic school. My point, flashing tits are nice and all, but they can serve to cheapen a movie if they are thrown in the way chrome wheels are used to sell a car, or a rear spoiler on a front wheel drive 4 banger. (What the hell is that about?)

Watched it the other day, could not belive how boring it was. It wasn't so much the acting, as it was the villain. It was another one of those many horror films ive fast forwarded through.

(i usually only skip through some of those $1 horror movies you find during the month of october, so that tells you something)

meow

is there any good gore in this?