Is it really that bad?
-
ladylucifer1 — 17 years ago(April 12, 2008 08:12 PM)
well we honestly tried to watch it 5 freekin timesevery time we tried we fell asleepit really is that horribleits a great premise for a movie but this movie just isnt great im sorryi did finally watch it on the 6th try and i feel as tho i wasted what like 90 minutes or something of my lifewill never watch it again however did you happen to watch your "free" crappy movie lol if so what did you think of it
-
metalliam — 17 years ago(May 01, 2008 05:40 PM)
Massively bad. No redeeming factors. Even watching it before seeing Ringu I thought it was a poor film, and having seen Ringu since you realise just how bad feardotcom actually is.
Use the CD as a coaster man. -
jmoira-1 — 17 years ago(October 30, 2008 09:35 PM)
I'm going with very badly done,
not inherently bad.
Not disagreeng with anyone, just a different take.
I suppose it really grinds people
because the film makers realllllly
insult their audience from the beginning
and treat us stupidly throughout.
THe core insult is thar we are supposed to accept
this is taking place in New York City????????
Total crap.
I found it impossible to believe it was luxembourg at that!!!
Hell, they couldn't photograph that beautiful city,
much less pass it off as someplace else.
It looked like some dark eastern european mountain town
at it's worst after a war.
So it major league sucks from a production value standpoint,
bad enough to destroy credibility.
They couldn't eeven shoot a sunny day,
much less clean up Michael sarrazin.
It all looked like the dirtiest place on earth.
BUT, at least the actors tried.
They stayed faithful in spite ofthe weak story.
So if you look past that,and can enjoy the grim
manifesto the story presents,
and embrace the horrific misery that the antagonist creates,
and try to solve the mystery, which was weak but interesting,
it's slightly bearable if only in that regard.
It's not better that a sitting for "Hostel" or "Saw"
but not a whole lot worse.
I never bothered with the sequels to either one.
Just my thoughts.
in 15 years this will become a "Freaky Cult Classic" anyway. -
JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies — 17 years ago(December 29, 2008 07:54 AM)
I love it.
- I enjoyed the story.
- I liked most of the performances.
- I like William Malone's style a lot. I liked his
House on Haunted Hill
remake a lot, too. He's as poetic and surrealistic as he is "logical". I like that. - The cinematography, production design and editing in this film are all Oscar-worthy, in my opinion. Seriously.
- It's got a great score, too.
- Natascha McElhone has always been just stunningly beautiful and entrancing to me. Even if I didn't like all that other stuff above, I'd enjoy watching the film just to see her.
Is everyone in this house a total nutzoid or is it just me?
-
GatoradeBoom — 17 years ago(February 01, 2009 01:26 PM)
Ah, it was okay. I saw it for Udo Kier and Jeffrey Combs, even though Udo was only in it for the first ten minutes, at best. Oh well. You're right, at least it was free I got a deal with some books that was like that. The two that I bought were absolutely amazing, but the free one ended up being terrible and I couldn't even make it to the third chapter, lol.
What is this? This is piss. Piss with ink.
-
flaccidstraw — 17 years ago(March 26, 2009 01:59 PM)
Yeah, it is really bad. I was high-budget, pretty well-known, and I get off on crappy horror films. Me and my friends like to laugh at how ridiculous they are. But this one was so bad I couldn't even laugh about it. The plot is pretty much nonexistent. The acting is, well, unconvincing at best. There is not a single sentence in this movie that hasn't been uttered in countless horror films. I expected it to be crap (as most horror movies are) but not this crap.
-
moola_boola — 16 years ago(December 16, 2009 10:49 AM)
I can usually find something good to say about almost any movie. I often seek out bad movies deliberately, because they can be fun to watch.
'Feardotcom', however, is just plain bad. It's so bad that it made me feel angry and depressed. It is a miserable excuse for a movie! -
Lord-Nihilus — 15 years ago(July 07, 2010 10:31 PM)
just know that the website in the movie is "feardotcom.com" and judge based on that
"Life's too short, but, Goddamn, it can take so long" -Me -
utahman1971 — 11 years ago(December 22, 2014 01:49 PM)
I saw this when it was released in the theater, and did like it, but the only thing that really turn me off was the buildings. None of them looks nice, and they all look like no one knew how to clean up at all. That I think is why no one like this movie. The setting is just bad. Every time I watched it, it just was like the trashiest city ever. Dark with very low lighting. Besides that it is a descent B movie. I never like remake Ring. Never watch J-horror or K-horror. Captions are just stupid.
I am a gore watching freak!!!
If it don't have it, it isn't worth the watch. -
slasherguyy — 14 years ago(July 31, 2011 10:08 AM)
Just thought I'd add my 2 cents and say yes, it really is that bad. I gave the film the benefit of the doubt and watched it with low expectations, but it just wasn't good at all. And what sucks the most is that this joins the ranks of being one of the biggest missed opportunities in horror. It had a decent story, a GREAT poster and a good cast what the HELL went wrong? Bad acting, bad writing, plot holesto name a few.
You're either playing dumb, or it's not an act.