Cory I felt compelled to write a review for this movie. I just have to say that this was such a fun movie to watch. It was so funny and the entire time it had me fully engaged and loving it. I recommend this movie to all. Watch it and have a good time.

skybrick736 To start Behind the Mask, namesake stemming from Behind the Music, is an extremely clever idea for a fun serial killer documentary. Right off the bat the film takes a very light tone pitching the horror icons of Jason Vorhees, Freddy Krueger and Michael Myers as real-life serial killers. There are all sorts of funny little digs at typical horror clichés, for example moments of the victims running while the villain is walking happens often, therefore cardio for a killer is very important. In the meantime, the flow of the story is well-timed and Nathan Baesel was consistently great. There is a predictability about the film, which can be quickly picked up on but the real problem was the switch of point of view and film making toward the end. The supporting cast around Baesel was weak and there never was a good ending climax. Besides the letdown the film is still very much worth a watch with quality comedy and a cool looking horror villain in Leslie Vernon.

Coventry Two viewings in one week and lots of contemplating later, I still can't decide what to think of – and how to rate – "Behind the Mask: the Rise of Leslie Vernon"... One thing is for certain, namely this definitely isn't my favorite kind of movie in any way. I don't like "mockumentaries" or "found footage" movies (with the exception of two or three titles) and I most certainly don't like wannabe clever movies that spoof the horror genre (and slashers in particular). They think of themselves as ingenious and witty, but in reality they are just pretentious and disrespectful towards all their colleagues in the film industry. The main reason why I postponed my viewing of "Behind the Mask" for nearly 10 years is because I read that this film was sort of like a crossover between "C'est Arrivé Près de chez Vous" ("Man Bites Dog") and Wes Craven's "Scream". To me "Man Bites Dog" is a sacred and unsurpassable classic, although I might be a little bit biased because I'm from Belgium and this is the only genuine cult monument we ever brought forward, but "Scream" is a vastly overrated and snobbish film. The comparisons are justified, though. Like in "Man Bites Dog", a psychopathic killer allows for a student film crew to follow him around and shoot a documentary about his evil activities, and like in "Scream", the screenplay clarifies several 'rules-of-the-game' as well as terms & trademarks and it magnifies the genre's biggest clichés and stereotypes. Normally I would really dislike both styles, but strangely enough I tolerated the narrative style of "Behind the Mask" and even gradually grew to appreciate it more and more. The story takes place in a world where notorious horror franchises, like the massacre at Camp Crystal Lake by Jason Vorhees and the Halloween murder sprees by Michael Myers, are supposedly real. Three young film students, led by the nervous and insecure Taylor Gentry, receive permission from an aspiring mass murderer to follow him around as he makes the preparations for the upcoming bloodbath; which is apparently something that maniac killers must do in order to be successful. The soon-to-be slasher icon thought about everything: he invented a tragic background story/urban legend, chose an abandoned farmhouse location for the killings to take place, carefully scouted a group of victims including the surviving "final girl" and drew out a detailed scenario with the exact chronological order and places for his victims to die. Leslie even receives an unexpected pleasant surprise when it turns out that he has an "ahab"; which is a good guy – like Sam Loomis - following him around. Taylor and her friends cheerfully register everything on camera, but then it's time for the actual murders to take place… Will they remain at Leslie's side and stomach his atrocities? Will the walk away with a troubled consciousness or will they try and prevent the massacre from happening now that they know the rules? As indicated before already, I seriously don't like horror film makers that depreciate the genre by pointing out all of its clichés and shortcomings. It made me hate Wes Craven and his films "Scream" and particularly "New Nightmare". But for some reason the horror background information and clarifications that we receive in "Behind the Mask" don't come across as pretentious or satirical at all. They are even very respectful and shine new light on traditional horror franchises. Don't you think for one second that Jason Vorhees or Michael Myers were impulsive and brainless lunatics that just wandered around swinging knives or machetes… They needed a detailed plan of action, sufficient time to hide the bodies at strategic places and a great physical condition in order to keep up with their running victims whilst they are walking! Most horror spoofs aren't funny and (unintentionally?) ridicule the genre, whereas writer/director Scott Glosserman's script doesn't even try to be funny and even makes you think a little deeper about horror franchises and/or characters you probably never thought about before. Also very meaningful is the character of Eugene, who in fact represents various random (and often nameless) movie maniacs that predate Michael Myers and basically remained "supportive" characters throughout the whole film. There are some truly great signs of intelligence, expertise and respect in "Behind the Mask" and the narrative style is also fairly unique since it switches from a mockumentary into a (more or less) genuine & old-fashioned slasher in the third act. Glosserman was even slick enough to inject a couple of refreshing and inventive plot twists during the expanded finale, and admirably debunks a couple of ancient clichés (what if the supposed virgin doesn't turn out to be a virgin at all?). Fact remains, unfortunately, that the first hour is very talkative, slightly hectic and even rather boring. Horror fanatics expecting a straightforward bloodbath, complete with sleazy images and nasty make-up effects, will definitely be turned down and might not even make it towards the more exhilarating last half hour. Good performances from protagonist Nathan Baesel and the rest of the fairly unknown cast and, hey, any movie that features the song "Psycho Killer" by Talking Heads during the end credits receives an additional point from me.

Dom Nickson Spoiler Alert!!! This film had a very good idea about making a documentary about a serial killer who plans every move. However the way it was done out I found very boring and a little disappointed that there were very little actual killing scenes. There weren't very many on-screen kills featuring at least a sight of blood and gore. OK Look a slasher film shouldn't be filled with gore I'm just saying this film seemed to be missing all of it's gore. I think if it had just a tad bit more blood it would of been one of the most underrated slasher movie masterpieces since Scream. However since there was almost no blood or gore this movie could have easily been rated pg-13 because quite a lot of the kills were shown off-screen. The story was good but I think it needed a little bit more blood and gore because in this story it pretty much promises blood and gore which isn't true. I give it a 4 out of 10 because if it did add just a little bit more blood and gore I would be in love with this movie and possibly give it a 9 or a 10!