Woodyanders A savage and predatory hairy humanoid creature that's the result of a government experiment gone awry escapes from a lab located in the basement of an old dilapidated house. Naturally, two teenage couples decide to check out said rundown abode. Guess what happens next? Boy, does this dreadful bilge strike out something rotten in every possible way: Clumsy (mis)direction that allows the dull, uneventful, and meandering narrative to unfold at a painfully sluggish pace and fails to generate any much-needed tension, momentum, and creepy atmosphere, infrequent and poorly staged monster attack scenes, a drab and talky script that gets bogged down in way too much tedious chitchat, tacky gore, plain cinematography(the cheesy monster POV shots in particular are pretty sad), groan-inducing attempts at dumb humor (the two inept comic relief federal agents are especially pathetic), obnoxious and unlikable characters, a generic hum'n'shiver synthesizer score, a laughably lousy rubbery-looking beast, uniformly cruddy acting from a lame no-name cast (top thespic dishonors go to Jill Adcock as the bitchy Dana Anderson and Randy Craig as the doltish Sheriff Marty Holt), and, worst of all, a dismal and dissatisfying "it ain't over yet!" sequel set-up non-ending. On the plus side, Pamela Anderson shows some decent boobage and at a mere 80 minutes it's mercifully short, but that's about it. A real dud.

slayrrr666 "Carnivore" is a really bad creature that has some decent moments.**SPOILERS**While working on an experiment, a creature escapes from it's cage and escapes into the house above ground. Assigned to keep the creature from escaping, Dana Anderson, (Jill Adcock) is sent to the house, and heads over to the house. The local teens in the town, Scott, (John Jacob) his friend Marc, (Jeff Swan) his girlfriend Bobbi, (Lori Johnson) and her sister Dee, (Pamela Thompson) decide to go to the house for a fun weekend away, and are soon confronted with the creature. When Dana arrives with back-up, they try to stop the creature from escaping.The Good News: This isn't all that great, but there is some nice moments here and there. The monster is nicely played as a rubber suit with no traces of CGI anywhere, and it gives a real impact when it's on-screen. There's not a whole lot of scenes where it looks realistic, but the non-CGI is a plus. There is a lot of havoc created late in the film, with several scenes being quite memorable. The moment where it throws a pile of organs at a character after disemboweling someone right in front of them a moment before is quite nice in it's exploitation sensibilities, as it follows the most brutal killing in the film and is played out nicely. Another rather amusing kill scene is a spiked board in the face that begins to bleed heavily that looks really nice and gory. With some nice suspense worked out in the end and a really impressive jump that works, that's about all for the decent moments.The Bad News: This is a really disappointing film, and it's centered on several reasons. The fact that it so rarely makes any sense is a major crime. The science used to explain the creature and it's existence in the beginning is full of pseudo-scientific ranting that has hardly any bearing on any real scientific reasoning. The fact that hardly anything is explained in a satisfactory manner is a constant distraction, as nothing at all makes any sense. The other big problem is that there is a ton of scenes that stretch it out, yet the film has no reason to be like that. That's really disappointing, when a film feels stretched out when it's so short to begin with. It barely lasts an hour, and most of that is wasted by useless wandering around the house. The beginning is also very padded out, and that mostly leaves this being a really boring experience. There's more here to hate about the film, but it would take too long to list them all.The Final Verdict: A really slow and padded out film that really didn't see the need for it and is saved from total mediocrity by having a couple of nice gore shots along the way. However, this is still a really bad film and is really only for those that enjoy the worst of the worst.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language and Nudity

dnasmith The little movie that could, and did. You can see a lot of work went into this Indy. The characterizations were diverse. There were plenty of locations. The actors were interesting. Randy Craig's performance was exceptional. This film truly showcased his acting talent. This film may not have the outlandish budget of a studio film, but it has a decent cast, plenty of locations, and good special effects. Most importantly, this film has guts. Ken Mader and Frank Kurtz should be commended for bringing their story to the screen. They made their dream of movie-making reality. Way to go guys. Oh, and I enjoyed it thoroughly.

ResidentHazard POSSIBLE SPOILER... not that it matters here...I love horror movies. I love slasher flicks. I love all manner of violent, horrific, cheesy, bloody, gory movie anyone can muster.... Generally. This is, thus far, the crappiest movie I have yet seen. It actually has no redeeming value. The creature appears to be a crappy costume cross between a Ghoulie and the big Critter from the first Critters film. It looks plasticy and cheap and really unscary. The whole thing appears to have been filmed on a camera someone puked on or at the very least, a VHS camera that someone dropped... down a staircase... into vomit. It's grainy and ugly and appears to have been filmed in the early 70's. The date I found for it's making was actually 2000, and there is a dumb-ass reference to a movie made in 1992 (I don't recall which movie) which would add to the belief that this crapfest is more recent than it looks. The movie doesn't seem to have any cohesive plot at all and some of the worst acting imaginable. There's a quick breast shot and a shot of the, uh, "monster" ripping someone's organs out and throwing them all over a room that didn't suck too bad, but they still don't make this worth seeing or buying for that matter. It seems to take place in an old house with a lab hidden in the basement with the creature and a scientist--who apparently have lived there a very long time, but the movie at times seems to take place entirely within a week, and yet there are cotton webs, er cobwebs everywhere! How on earth did this house get covered with webs and fall into disarray within a week? It never really seems evident. Then some teenagers go in the house for hanky-panky--didn't see that one coming did yah? I'll save you the suspense, as the nerdiest guy is the hero. And yes, it actually did hurt to find that out. Then some chick with two bodyguards of some sort go into the house and one of the guys is pointlessly psychotic shooting at whatever he pleases with, believe it or not, an Uzi. That's right, the most over-used, stereotypical 'bad-ass' weapon of 80's action flicks. I think real bodyguards would carry, you know, a degree of intelligence-which these two never showcase. The movie was so god-awful boring that I started falling asleep a third of the way through, but I stayed awake so I could see just how crappy it was. I want my 80-odd minutes back and so will you if you waste your time with it. STAY AWAY!!www.ResidentHazard.com