danielmartinx The acting was terrible in the early scenes. The punk and his rather Junoesque girlfriend beating up the black retarded guy, for instance, that was unforgivably bad. And when the main character and his wife speak to each other, it was terrible. However, it's a surreal and unreal horror film, and once the unreality of it became more pronounced, I was able to follow the story.Problems with the story? Narrative problems? Yes, totally. But the main character's descent into sadistic cruelty was kind of shocking, perhaps more shocking after all of the jokey scenes preceding it.I enjoyed the development and remain in shock that one of the characters was totally naked for the entire final half of the film. The nudism, plus the sadism, plus the rape, plus the murder, plus the Satanism -- it kind of creeps up on you and creeps you out. At least it did me.Would I recommend this? Yes, watch it. But go in with open eyes and expect some campy horror scenes. Not method acting, but delivering lines in order to make the story go forward.

Maxine Green This movie was SO poor, and the initial reviews so inaccurate (I do wonder how many have been written by friends of the cast/production team) that I finally gave in and went through the IMDb registration process just to rant about it.I was looking for some slightly cheesy horror, so the premise of this movie, sounded rather good - innocent writer is possessed by an evil spirit haunting his typewriter - excellent start! Black Ribbon, on the other hand wasn't 'so bad it's good' but just plain bad. I have some sympathy for the actors. The flaws in this film start with the script and work outwards. Kenneth Richardson as a character does not invite sympathy. Rather than the nice guy afflicted by evil spirits, the opening dialogue with his wife portrays him as an insensitive ass with no social skills, and he merely gets ruder and more self-centred throughout the film. Also the writer is clearly too lazy to bother even with basic research. According to the film, the sadistic killer Blackwood died in 1856, whereas the Underwood typewriter company, who supposedly made his typewriter wasn't even formed until 1874. That wasn't necessarily the death of the film though. With good acting and direction, even the poor script could have been rescued. However, the film opens with the least convincing 'attack' I have ever seen outside of student film, and fails to improve. Tony Rugnetta is abysmal as Mr. Richardson. The faces he pulls when he is 'possessed' belong only in comedy, and his only method of emoting is to turn up the volume. Even schlock horror should be played with a straight face, and this guy just cannot cut it. He and his 'wife' together make the least convincing couple I have ever seen. There is no touching, no eye contact, no emotion between them at all, and her acting in solo scenes is as bad as his (and who the hell reads a website aloud to themselves anyway? Fine, it was a plot device, but it could so easily have been a phone conversation...). The pair of them come across through the entire film as though they are reading a train timetable under duress, and getting rather fed up with it. The only ray of light in terms of acting ability in this entire movie is the housekeeper, of whom there is sadly little. The scenes of 'torture' are laughable, the supposedly two century-old props look suspiciously like modern creations, and the sound track, whilst not actually awful, is edited in with a lack of subtlety that reminds me of the earliest episodes of Star Trek. Yes, there is nudity, but frankly, if you're watching this for kicks you'd be better off with Baywatch, and for emotional intensity - try some amateur porn. The only reason I watched this film all the way through was in an attempt to find something good to say about it. Sadly, I failed.

movieman_kev Ken Richardson (Tony Rugnetta of "Requim for a Vampire" which this movie even name drops) is a writer who buys a typewriter that belonged to a demonic man, whom he gets fascinated with in the extremely low budget film. He soon befriends a mentally challenged young man who's more then willing to help him in his new unholy endeavors. Wow where do I start with this film? It has plot lines that literally go nowhere and whole characters appear and disappear from the movie without a second thought. It's extremely disjointed and seems to have been cobbled together with no rhyme nor reason. But be that as it may, at points the film is (unintentualy) hilarious and provided me with enough drunken amusement to at least warrant a recommendation. The acting is supremely awful and beer or hard liquor is pretty much a prerequisite. As a matter of fact if I were to rate this film purely on it's merit I'd likely give it a D-, but instead i'm rating it on it's hilarity.Eye Candy: Debbie D is fully nude for most of her scenesMy Grade: BDVD Extras: Slide show; Bloopers; Cast interviews; auditions; deleted scenes (wth more nudity from Debbie); and trailers for this film, as well as "Clean" (with still more nudity), "Dr. Shock's Grindhouse of Horrors", & "the Innocent"

mortgoldstein Another refreshing Thriller from John Orrichio. The movie has good character development, good plot, acting and some very strange twists. Tony Rugnetta, New Jersey actor, who was in a few Soprano episodes and a film with Frank Sinatra way back when plays a writer who becomes possessed by the spirit of sadist when he buys a haunted typewriter. As for comments made by reviewers like Strazdamonas who claim to edit better, do everything better, one has to ask If he can do all of this, why doesn't he have any films in distribution? If his only claim to fame is a youtube video, maybe he does watch paint dry. Ignore posts by ignorant wannabes and watch it for yourself. Joe Franklin appears in a brief role as Tony's father. If you enjoyed watching him on TV as I did growing up, you'll get a kick out of seeing him again. Still the same old Joe.