MovieChat Forums > Lost Tapes (2008) Discussion > Looks like the lowest of all low-budget ...

Looks like the lowest of all low-budget horror flicks


Though I guess that's what they were going for. Still, I think some of these concepts wouldn't be so bad in the hands of a a competent writer/director who could secure decent funding.

reply

At first, I thought it was real footage and got excited. But as the fake acting and staged scenes started to show, I felt like I had wasted 15 minutes of my life. The episode on the swamp creature in Louisiana was horrible! In todays day and age, you have to show real footage that is shocking and true to get people interested. I could of swore there was a scene from Blair Witch in this.


"60 takes, I didn't see a difference in one of them man."

reply

yeah i agree.....its a really low budget show......
more low budget than de sci-fi movies......LOL

reply

----------"In todays day and age, you have to show real footage that is shocking and true to get people interested. I could of swore there was a scene from Blair Witch in this."

That's because for the most part people expect any kind of show to have spectacular effects and what not...myself, I enjoy these shows not because of the spectacular effects but because of the ideas behind them. There are species out there right now that haven't been discovered and that is the basis behind the shows


Micheal Shermer sucks......

reply

Wow.. if you really think this show is equivalent to the lowest of low-budget horror movies.. you must not watch many of them. There are FAR lower quality movies.. hell, if you want to stay along the same line, go rent Bloodthirst: Legend of the Chupacabra. It's also about a cryptid (obviously) and is an actual movie.. but is WAY lower quality than these shows.

I've only seen a couple episodes, but I don't like this show. It's not supposed to be over-produced and have spectacular special effects; it's supposed to be raw, single camera, like it COULD have actually been real. Why don't people get that?

reply