Watching the Trailer, I might have given it a shot. But all the reviews from users with only one review have me running the other way. Guess you thought those reviews would increase viewership, not decrease it.
shareI thought that too at first.
But then I saw a few positive comments from people who seem to be legit lol.
I'm gonna check it out, anyway.
It's not a polished blockbuster, but I have to say I VERY much enjoyed it. I thought it was a good legit story and extremely well done for what they had to work with (an obviously lower budget.)
Craig
I saw this years ago on some website the film makers had, think it had a different name though. It is pretty decent for a low budget and it is an interesting twist. I am a Sasquatch fanatic though so I probably have a biased opinion.
shareFunny I just noticed the way I go through reviews, it's almost a subconscious reaction to not read a single written word from the reviewer/ignore their rating and go directly to click on their profile page, only then will I read wtf they have to say once I deem them worthy,lol. And hey it's not like my prerequisite for being considered worthy is some complex formula, just a few facts and and you just know.
Some have stepped up their game and will even have more than one review, but they'll usually be from something really old and or so obscure that you won't notice that they've been C&P'ed from others or other sites. Or other films that the filmmaker has made. A while back a friend of mine copy and pasted a few lines from his and my IMDB user reviews and googled them and found some on websites with other people's names under them,lol I know it sounds ridiculous but nonetheless true story. Lots of shady mofo's with no scruples out there.
Here here! I'm so tired of the fake reviews on this site that I've been doing the same thing. If it's obvious enough I'll even rate it a 1 without seeing it just to balance things out. Hopefully more users figure out what these shills are doing and do the same.
shareThat's also a shameful practice in and of itself, rating 1 'zout seeing the "art", but, no offense, i guess the internet arose in its wake a tide of wannabe justicers, & there is not much to do about it but help'em realize the errs of their ways.
For who came first, those who downrate a movie for the fun of it, for fanatical purposes or the likes of you ?
We may never know.
Scratch dat.
Shameful to who? These phony reviews usually come from people who were in some way involved with the film, so I feel no shame in giving a low rating. If they had a product capable of standing on its own they wouldn't need to encourage (or pay) someone to virtually suck their film off on IMDb. But hey, if the weather up there on your high horse is so nice & shame-free, hit me up again and further enlighten me on how ashamed I should feel, Mmkay?
shareYou should just watch the movie before rating it. A substantiated opinion on this movie would be nice for people who haven't seen it.
If you aren't interested that's totally fair, but I don't go around and rate Sex & the City 1, even though I know I would hate it, because I haven't seen it.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Isn't that a thing anymore? :)
no its three rights make a left
shareI don't rate movies low just because I know I would hate them. I rate them low because of the fake reviews. Try and keep up...
shareHi guys--
I'm actually one of the filmmakers who made The Sighting. It was originally called Paper Dolls back in 2006. I usually sit by, enjoy reading people's discourses, and keep my mouth shut. It's just that I despise injustice so I had to chime in.
Full disclosure: One review is from my father (he's very proud) and one is from a friend who gave it 7 out of 10. All the other reviews are written by total strangers when we took the film on the film festival circuit during 2008. Many of them saw us as an underdog and probably thought they were helping by over-stating how much they enjoyed the film. Many people did love it. The Sighting is very flawed, it suffered from an incredibly low budget and lack of experience. But our passion and hearts were in the right place and we put years of blood sweat and tears to make it the best it could be. It has been an incredible challenge to have this film released and I'm happy people can finally see it.
Every review we have on Amazon are from total strangers as well. Go check them out if you feel like these are slanted.
I don't care if you hate this movie. I would love it if you wrote about how much you hated it. There are times where I definitely hated it and times where I loved it. But at least give it an honest chance. That's all I'm asking. I guess that's all any filmmaker can ask. I would love to go through and rate every Michael Bay movie 1 star but I haven't seen them and I think that isn't fair. Maybe Michael Bay would surprise me with something actually good one day. :)
If you rate this movie based on the false conclusion of fake reviews, you are making a mistake.
Adam Pitman
So if this movie was released on may 10, 2015, why are there reviews from 2008? Maybe get IMDB to change that because it's really confusing. Also, the reviewers have only reviewed this film, which reeks of them being involved with the production. As a filmmaker I would think one would tell staff "hey guys, don't go on IMDB and create a profile to review this film. It KILLS any credibility we have".
share"Been a long time since I've seen a horror flick that got back to the bare basics and still managed to be scary and original.
The varying narratives are interesting, and it avoids being clumped into the Cloverfield/Blair Witch category. For a film of a low budget it's actually almost unnoticeable. It's completely worthy of a theatrical release and well acted.
Highly recommended."
Posted by user "Soultransfixion" in April 2008.
Care to explain?
Explain what? Who is Soultransfixion? The movie made the festival circuit in 2008 (when it was finished.) It won 11 awards and did well in festivals. Film Threat, Dread Central and many other publications gave it positive reviews. I don't know who this guy is but he must have seen it at a festival (we were in fourteen).
share[deleted]
I saw it many years ago and thought it was pretty good honestly , I liked the cool direction you guys went with the Sasquatch legend. Anyway just wanted to say that it was much better than the usual low budget films and I think if you guys had more to work with monetarily it would have been a very solid movie.
shareenjoy reading people's discourses, and keep my mouth shut.
Couldn't agree more. Those fake one star rates from people who haven't seen the movie are getting just as annoying as the fake reviews. Neither do this site and the movies any good...
I'm glad for once I didn't take the ratings seriously as I actually liked the movie and gave it a seven. IMO the movie didn't even need a bigger budget, or more monster time. The first guy that got killed on the bed was pretty neat, and the off-screen gurgling actually made me smile and set the tone for me. Sometimes a gurgle is more satisfying than an in your face gory shot, lol. I even watched and listened to it twice, lol. Same with the shot of the four creatures from afar when the two guys first meet them. More than enough. Almost felt like it could be a panel in a comic book. If that makes sense...
My point is, don't let all these negative people bring you down. I can only imagine how frustrating it must be - I know I would be - to see people take a dump on something you worked on so passionately. The movie is entertaining, the pace is good, the intermezzo with the teacher gone mad is a nice touch, explained a lot, and brought some variation to the movie. It might not be on the same level as say The Thing, but it's far from being the one star paint dry alternative some people here make it out to be...
You did a good job. Be proud of it. I know I would.
Wow. That is incredibly kind. Thank you. A respite from the trolls.
shareAdam,
I am one of those total strangers who saw this at a festival when it was still Paper Dolls. (Eerie, PA). I just watched and enjoyed The Triangle, so I re-stumbled across this message board as well.
Just ignore the trolls. You know what they are, and what they do.
I do not overstate my love for Paper Dolls. Yes, it is low budget, but holy crap do you guys overcome the hurdles. I guess you probably mostly overcome it with the financially cheapest component: a good story. But I sincerely think everything else is very well done as well.
You made a real movie. I said that from the day I watched it in 2008 (I think it was.) One of the few films I've seen at a festival that truly felt professional. It has solid writing, plot, production and acting. I was amazed because I could tell you had limited financial resources and you were kind of new to the business. I give it a sincere 10/10, though I'll admit it gets bonus points in my book because of my realization of how much you got from so little budget.
I guess it also doesn't hurt that I've always been a bit of a Bigfoot enthusiast too - and it is truly the best one I've seen. Even though it doesn't stick to the usual theories on Sasquatch. I've watched dozens of Bigfoot films. They all kind of suck.
But regardless, I love film in general, and this one simply works. If I had to make my own "Top 200" (IMDB style) The Sighting would probably make it. I'm not kidding. I think I wrote a review of it back when I first saw it in Eerie, but it seems to have disappeared from IMDB. I'm writing another one soon.
You should be absolutely proud of this movie.
Craig
[deleted]
[deleted]