MovieChat Forums > Small Town Folk (2007) Discussion > warning!

warning!

posted 16 years ago by haze-11
22 replies | jump to latest

i was tricked into seeing this movie by the comments and the rating here on imdb.
i expected somekind of artistic horror movie with some good acting but what i got was a truly amazing waste of an empty DVD-R.

i see a lot of movies and most of them are horror and some of them are quite crappy but this one.. wow..
its an insult to all B movies.

in all fairness i have to admit that i turned it off after 10 or 15 minutes so there's a remote chance it gets better after that but i doubt it.

i made it to the scene where some guy is about to get a blowjob from his girlfriend in some far far away forrest (theyre there on bicycles so how remote can it be?) and then the both get slaughtered while another friend (who's not afraid at all for some reason) is watching it from behind a tree.
parts of the scene was even out of focus.

its ok to borrow your dads old betamax videocamera and make a movie with your friends but why bother other people with it by releasing it on DVD?

[–] willowfield 16 years ago

How did you get to see this?

I've seen numerous b-movies where after 20 minutes I think, why am I watching this - then i've gone on to really enjoy the film (an example is Evil Aliens) - so perhaps you should give it a chance.

[–] haze-11 16 years ago

believe me, ive given it a chance.

i see a lot of movies and the only 2 ive turned off recently were this one and days of darkness (2007).
the latter i skipped through with the remote to see if it was going to get better (it didnt) but with STF i didnt even bother to do that.

ive even sat through a whole hack! (2007) without turning it off and that one was pretty bad aswell but still a lot better than STF :)

[–] Day_of_the_dead_living 16 years ago

10-15 minutes isn't "a chance", but seeing as you didn't
actually pay anything to see it, no one really cares if
you liked it or not, or gave it a fair chance. That you
make a post WARNING people about the first 10 or so
minutes of a movie you (and the rest of us, of course)
are getting for free, is absurd.

If you had bought it, fooled by the good ratings from
the girlfriends of directors and actors... that would be
a different matter. In fact, it would be false advertising,
which is illegal in most countries, and IMDb should do
something about this.

[–] haze-11 16 years ago

that sounds like the world upside down..

im not getting paid to see this movie so i think its my decision if i want to turn it off.
if you want to see it then go ahead (show me where i told people not to see it, btw) but im warning that its not as good as the comment says it is. in fact its really really bad.

'Top class acting skills shine through to keep a limited plot interesting...'

top class acting skills?? lol.. talking about false advertisement... :o)
'limited plot' probably, i didnt make it that far.

'and its shot digitally which looks great'

i can only laugh..

and even if a movie is free that doesnt mean my time is free as well.
evrything on public tv is free as well. do you watch and like everything just because its free?
there are thousands of movies i rather waste my time on than this one.

> In fact, it would be false advertising, which is illegal in most countries

well, im from holland and giving your opinion is still legal here.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Day_of_the_dead_living 16 years ago

I get the impression that you're replying to me,
but you also seem to be making quotes up as you go,
since I didn't write anything about acting, plot, etc.
In fact, I haven't seen the movie yet.
Or you could be replying to multiple persons in the
same post, some of them not being me, but... I'll reply anyway.

- "and even if a movie is free that doesnt mean my time is free as well."

How expensive were those 10-15 minutes you spent
watching this movie? Hmm? And while on the subject
of your expensive time... how much does does it cost
you to shave in the morning? How much before your
coffee is done? If 1½ hour of your life is so precious,
what are you doing watching movies in the first place?
Shouldn't you be out swimming with dolphins, sky diving
with koalas and partying with hyenas?

- "evrything on public tv is free as well. do you watch and like everything just because its free?"

I don't watch 10-15 minutes of a movie or tv-show
and then go on IMDb taking a piss on it, even if I watch
it on public TV, no. I change the channel or turn the TV off,
understanding that I'm probably not the target audience if I
can't stand more than 10 minutes of it.

- "well, im from holland and giving your opinion is still legal here."

I never claimed that it wasn't...
What I actually wrote was that people FROM the movie,
hyping it with fake reviews, posing as actual viewers
without an agenda, is false advertisement, which is illegal.
I'm sure that's the case in Holland too...

[–] haze-11 16 years ago

i was quoting from the comment on the main IMDB page for this movie.

perhaps you should 'waste' some of your own time and actually see this movie.
maybe you will have the same opinion about it as me.

> How expensive were those 10-15 minutes you spent
> watching this movie? Hmm?

do you want to know how much i make an hour? ;o)

a movie is supposed to entertain or make you think or make you scared.. etc etc.
if a movie makes you look at your watch, go to the toilet without pausing it, makes you yawn etc.. then its time to watch or do something else.

as i said i see a lot of movies and if theyre watchable then i rate them high.
here are the movies ive seen in the last 2 months or so (except lord of war cos ive seen that one a long time ago): http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=25007114

> I don't watch 10-15 minutes of a movie or tv-show
> and then go on IMDb taking a piss on it

me neither but the comments on IMDB were so unrealistic that i just had to warn potential viewers :o)

what do you think about this quote:

>> I haven't seen it either, of course. But I submitted my own comment and gave
>> it a 10-star rating just to counterbalance the previous 1-star rating.
>> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0478265/board/thread/34707464

atleast ive tried to watch it before i posted my comment! :oD

> I'm probably not the target audience if I
> can't stand more than 10 minutes of it.

that could be the case but this genre is horror/fantasy and thats a genre i like very much.

[–] peejoui 15 years ago

Oh yeah, you "gave it a chance"........all of ten minutes by your own estimate.

If you watcha lot of horrors, then you are probably quite happy with the formulaic american tripe that's spewed forth by that nation of real-life freaks and horrors.

Get a sense of humour and don't take life so bloody seriously.

[–] ellsy66 16 years ago

'i made it to the scene where some guy is about to get a blowjob from his girlfriend in some far far away forrest (theyre there on bicycles so how remote can it be?) and then the both get slaughtered while another friend (who's not afraid at all for some reason) is watching it from behind a tree.'

What the hell are you talking about??!?! Why are you on this site?!?! You don't even watch films, i'm surprised you know what one is?!? Actually i don't think you do............

'in all fairness i have to admit that i turned it off after 10 or 15 minutes so there's a remote chance it gets better after that but i doubt it.'

This line alone makes it clear you don't know what your doing, you obviously have more of an interest in porn than a quality amateur flick!!!

Your comments are completely unfounded because you haven't seen the film and i don't think you should, someone like yourself just shouldn't bother huh?! So basically, everything you have said above might as well be deleted because you could be talking about the wizard of oz for all the imdb readers know.

This film shows a lot of promise for future releases and as a first attempt with dvd release there's a huge amount that can be taken from it. If you'd have bothered to get passed the first 15 minutes you might have had something constructive to say about script, plot, camera shots, directing or sound...........or maybe not..............probably don't even bother to turn your PC on next time......but still use your keyboard mate, it'd be just as useful.

[–] haze-11 16 years ago

you must be part of the 26% who voted 10 :D

i really dont care about future promises when i watch a movie.
their next movie can be great or crap, who cares.

this movie is crap and im not the only one thinking so (check the rating).

further more.. switch to decaf :D

--
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=25007114

[–] ellsy66 16 years ago

I voted 8 and watched it to the end..............

[–] johnnyward 16 years ago

this is probably the worst movie i have ever seen and i really dont think i can overstate how bad it is. The acting is atrocious and the script is nearly as bad, the timing is terrible and plot is weak to say the least.

The acting is atrocious though let me reiterate that! to the extent that i looked this movie up to check if it was an amateur film, it really is that bad. I mean terrible, a waste of time. One more thing, the acting is atrocious

[–] flowerchild413 16 years ago

the only horror movie i couldn't bare to watch until the end was "Adam & Evil".... so if you're familiar with it (God i hope you're not) i was just wondering if this is worse.... because if it's not... then heck, i'll watch it :) i like bad horror films... :)

"Nobody puts Baby in the corner!"

[–] paal_erik 16 years ago

I agree with you this movies was Totally utter crap. i watch the whole movie. Its not even a bit scary. the only thing you will be doing is laughing because its so bad. Actings poor, everything looks awfull, i mean just look at the house on the top of that stupid hill. and when they are driving the car. and the lines in this movies are just so bad. and the weapons are awfull. the one who shoots a horse shoe with an crossbow. come on. and when kid is trying to swing from the rope an the kick the guy i just broke out in laughter. i could have understood a little if it was trying to be some sort of comic. i cant understand why anyone would let someone release it all.

It's a bad movie. a really terrible one. actually the worst one i have ever seen

[–] RoboCopperPot 16 years ago

I really dont understand it when some people get their film out there against all odds who have no connections with the film studios and then they gett ripped to bits by net trolls. This film is flawed but has some great performances and was made for 3 cents and shows a lot more inventiveness than a lot of this summers biggest movies,

[–] ramencigar 16 years ago

and when kid is trying to swing from the rope an the kick the guy i just broke out in laughter. i could have understood a little if it was trying to be some sort of comic.

Uh, yeah. I'm pretty sure that's that they intended. You couldn't tell that it was meant to be a comedy?

If this is the worst you've seen, you need to watch more movies, my friend.

---
Observe: This girl is about to be beaten with sticks. She has offended you, surely.

[–] 4ollis26 16 years ago

For some strange reason some people have commented on this site, slating the film as if it were some kind of box office flop that was funded with millions and starred long-term professional actors like De Niro or something.

It's really not that hard to comprehend the difference between an amateur film by first time movie makers with no budget, and a film that was made in Hollywood with a few hundred million behind it.

For what these guys had, they did pretty damned good! I'd like to see anyone else (especially the people with the negative comments) pick up a couple of cameras, get some mates together, and with no money make a film like this.

Why can't people distinguish between film types, No it's not the Matrix or Gladiator, or any other film like it, it's a completely different animal and should be viewed, and rated as such.

People really are dumb!

[–] wilmagerlsma 16 years ago

It's the worst movie I've ever seen and that's including and comparing it to all the other first time movies I've seen. It sucks, sucks, sucks, sucks....
I agree that you can't compare it to movies with a bigger budget or with more experienced film makers. But usually if the makers have any talent you can see it shine through the film no matter what the budget was. This film has no charm and no talent behind it.

[–] mat1972-1 15 years ago

utter utter *beep*
think plan 9 without the cult status.

[–] omega_21 15 years ago

as an old horror fan, and b-movies amateur (amateur means specialist here ^^ )
i must concede that my tireness was the only way i resume watching this movie during the first minutes....
but after the end, i just wanna said that it is the first good b-movies i seen from the "2000"
One and only "rednecks coming back" from the last 20 years mixing with "tales" atmosphere and realistic moments... really... it was fun for me

[–] steve1138 15 years ago

I've just sat through the whole film, admittedly I've seen better but I've seen much much worse (Dead Meat). I'd call it "quirky" not something I'm going to rush out & buy to add to my dvd collection but it was worth a watch, the style in which it was shot was actually quite good, acting, maybe could have been better but then again it's quite a tongue in cheek movie added to that getting Howard Lew-Lewis to be in it is shear quality

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]