If you love really bad, and I do mean really bad horror films this is just the movie for you. The acting is campy, the camera work is elementary at best. But I Couldn't help enjoying it, I tried to hate it, I really did and it shouldn't have been a difficult task but I just couldn't do it. The Film has a very Scooby Doo plot, horrible special effects, terrible acting, all though Hanover and Berger do a fairly decent job. The opening sequence sets the tone for the entire film....BOOBS AND BLOOD!!! and it's all down hill from there. All that being said I still think that any B movie horror buff can find a reason not to hate this movie. Although Ebert and Roeper probably couldn't make it through the first 10 min. I feel it is worth a peek.
5 Reviews
Shun this film
juliankennedy2314 January 2007
The Shunned: 2 out of 10: The movie starts of with a fairly graphic exciting jolt. You will spend the next 70 minutes wondering if that was a trailer for a completely different film.
This is one of those first time micro-budget horror films shot on leftover film stock and a home movie camera and starring the directors drinking buddies. Unlike most backyard horror it has a couple of bright spots (The gore effects are competent and the old west setting is fresh.) But the problems easily outweigh the good.
First the director has no idea how to pace a movie, rewrite a script to make it suspenseful, light a scene, mix sound or edit. I realize that film school is pricey but really you need more than a High Definition camcorder and a Movie-making for Dummies book to create cinema other people might enjoy.
You can't hear what most of the characters are saying. Adam Gaitan, who plays the Marshall, mumbles every line in a strange trancelike monotone. It is your job as director to tell him to speak clearly and turn up his damn mike.
The old west marshal by the way is an African American. (Insert Blazing saddles reference here.) A fact that doesn't become apparent until very late into the film, yes that's right the scenes are so badly lit you can't tell the race of one of the main characters. And stop with the fake grainy effects. Your film looks bad enough as it is you don't need to help it.
And one last note pacing. This film has some of the longest scenes of two guys talking I have ever seen. Hey it's a movie show don't tell. Simply one of the longest 70 minutes you may ever experience the Shunned is the latest entry into fast forward theater.
This is one of those first time micro-budget horror films shot on leftover film stock and a home movie camera and starring the directors drinking buddies. Unlike most backyard horror it has a couple of bright spots (The gore effects are competent and the old west setting is fresh.) But the problems easily outweigh the good.
First the director has no idea how to pace a movie, rewrite a script to make it suspenseful, light a scene, mix sound or edit. I realize that film school is pricey but really you need more than a High Definition camcorder and a Movie-making for Dummies book to create cinema other people might enjoy.
You can't hear what most of the characters are saying. Adam Gaitan, who plays the Marshall, mumbles every line in a strange trancelike monotone. It is your job as director to tell him to speak clearly and turn up his damn mike.
The old west marshal by the way is an African American. (Insert Blazing saddles reference here.) A fact that doesn't become apparent until very late into the film, yes that's right the scenes are so badly lit you can't tell the race of one of the main characters. And stop with the fake grainy effects. Your film looks bad enough as it is you don't need to help it.
And one last note pacing. This film has some of the longest scenes of two guys talking I have ever seen. Hey it's a movie show don't tell. Simply one of the longest 70 minutes you may ever experience the Shunned is the latest entry into fast forward theater.
Not good, and in a not good way.
innocuous3 February 2007
This film is t'urble. The story is minimal, the acting is decent for a high school drama club, and the cinematography is all over the place. What's worst, though, is the sound. Every actor mumbles his/her lines and the whole thing sounds like it was recorded with a single cheap microphone placed on the floor. The mechanical noise and rumble are so bad that I had to turn off my subwoofer while I was watching it. It obviously couldn't be redubbed due to budget constraints, so it remains almost incomprehensible in some parts. The blood is second-rate and the boobs are minimal (contrary to some other comments), being either viewed through lace curtains or belonging to the recently deceased. The director tries to be artsy in some of the establishing shots, but just comes across as annoying. The whole project is third-rate.
I'd like to thank the Academy...
dedmeat33316 December 2005
Christopher M. Downs' first film is an epic tale with plot twists aplenty.all the while the viewer will be thinking...."WHY"?this film will sell you the whole seat,but you'll only need the edge!fast as a pit viper,all hell breaks loose when the sleepy calm of a small western town is shattered by mysterious murders and poor horseback riding.I feel that for a first time film maker this is a wonderful piece of B-movie history.it's funny as hell and has quarts of gore.the film also shows that first time director Christopher M.Downs has the "finnish at all costs even if people will say it's junk" attitude(hey,first film,little $$...what have you done?)and I hope his career as a filmmaker lasts,who knows what he could do with a couple million to play with?.
Western Horror pretty good
americanprods16 August 2006
Pretty good for a Indy film, I think Sean Knight should have been given a bigger role since he was clearly the better choice for the Marshall... The role of the bartender was played pretty good also, overall its a must see for any Indy movie fan or buff. Great Western horror and should have a sequel as it left a lot of questions unanswered...rent it or buy it, its good. The color could have been better, but like i said its a Indy film and it is worth watching just for Sean Knights acting and skills alone. But what gets me is the Piture that is Sean Knight, is not the real Sean Knight that Plays in the Movie. I Give it a thumbs half up for sure.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
