Well executed.Perfect example of a good film with limited resources.

When I finished watching this film, I felt sucker-punched. I was hoping for some laughs from another grade D horror film. I guess the joke's on me. Little Erin Merryweather was good, not perfect but good. David Morwick is kind of the man behind the curtain as director, actor, writer. (most indies require people to wear a lot of hats which he did well) But I think it's safe to say his strength is in the acting department.

Morwick is very funny and likable in the lead role of Peter and probably brings in the strongest performance. We all know that bumbling, fidgety kid we went to school with and Morwick plays that part perfectly, to a tee. Although Vigdis Anholt (Erin) doesn't say much, her performance can be summed up by the old adage, "if looks could kill. . ." Her body language and chilling stares is what spooked me the most. I give the filmmakers two thumbs up for turning the genre on its head in a sense and letting a female villain take a whack at this. Where the film falls short is in the pacing. It's just a little slow at times, probably due to budget issues. But, this has made up for an overall style, mood and atmosphere of the film. Before you poo-poo this as just another low budget slasher, take another look. Speaking of the look of the film, it really captured those rich, depth of field shots.

What struck me the most with Little Erin Merryweather and I have seen other people comment on this is that they really achieved the throwback to the "70's". This film looks like it was made in 1976, 1977, right down to the actors. I would never have guessed this was made today. There's no morphed reflection of today's society at all. I don't know how they achieved this, but they did.
This is your comment, you may delete or edit it.