everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Dreadfully Boring

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Today I was scrolling through Netflix and just simply just strolling through the categories when I finally came across this movie. I had read the description and though to myself "this is very similar to Halloween", but due to my curiosity I watched it and my prediction was right. The film takes a small kid who had watched his family be killed right in front of him and is later framed for doing so. Then years later we see Chris Vane (the kid) grown up in an insane asylum, and for some reason burnt up to a crisp looking like Sam Raimi's Darkman, he soon escapes and heads back to his home to kid a series of kids who are trying to throw a party. The film on its own is okay, it takes a story that has been done a thousand times (I have been guilty of doing so myself) and just puts in a new killer. Basically it Friday the 13th but you put Michael Myers in that series. The film has some creative kills and some scenes that could be stuck in your head for a while, but I feel that it just does a few scenes to clique and some shots that aren't exactly... Necessary (you know what I mean) and puts them into I have to say alright film. In my opinion its not bad and you should check it out.

From Michael Gingold, the editor of Fangoria...You would think that Gingold, after viewing thousands of horror films, would know how to make a good movie. Now, granted, he did not direct it, he just wrote it... and granted, it does have a fair amount of gore. But he seems to have the same problem Rob Zombie does: he has seen so many films that he no longer has the ability to be original and can only steal from other (better) films.And why is the audio not synced up? Nothing makes a picture even worse than when lips do not match the words they speak. The visuals are alright, though, so I guess it is not a complete loss.

When a friend of mine recently asked me to look round for some fun looking horror films,i,spotted a pretty good looking DVD cover to this film.Though now i have seen the film,i feel that it does not live up to what i was hoping to see from the cover.This is partly due to some of the worst shot slasher/killing scenes that i have seen in a while.The plot:A guy who has been held in a maximum-security prison for ten years,kills two guards and,decides to go back to his old house.Where as a kid,he saw his mum get brutally raped and murdered.But,unknowingly to him,in the ten years that he has been in jail for,the house has been turned into a place for students to have Halloween parties!.For this years party,one of the students is planning to scare everyone at the party,by having him and a few of his friends pretend that there is an insane killer on the loose in the area.When the real killer returns to his old house,the prank starts to go very,very wrong...View on the film:The first thing i have to highlight is the guy that played the troll,who blocks the entrance for the party goers,that injects some really good comedy moments into the film,with a fun performance.To my pleasant surprise,i actually enjoyed seeing the section of the film where the prank is played out.With the gun standoff being pretty entertaining.Sadly,the rest of the film seems to try every thing it can to crush any good horror moments out of the film,by having all the murder scenes,including the two creative ones (one involving a clothes hanger,and another with a seat belt.)being cut in a very badly done way,with the all the killings looking like they were filmed on a budget of 20p.The main thing that i was shocked about with the film,was how badly the story lines had been written,with parts of the plot making no sense at all (such as the "killer" being held in prison,even though everyone knows that he did not kill his mum,and there being no sense at all in the flashbacks of him killing anyone at all!!)Final view on the film:A film with some very badly made slasher scenes,and a poorly written plot.

It's too bad that the makers of "Halloween Night" didn't submit the cover art to their DVD to IMDb. It's awesome: an evil looking jack-o-lantern has a hand gripping a butcher knife coming out of the top of it. The hand is covered with pumpkin guts which, if you look closely, has the bodies of the killer's victims blended into it. It is far and away the best thing about the movie.But now, if you will, consider the rest of the DVD box. It claims to be based on a true story. The plot has a young boy see his mom raped and murdered in 1982. He is horribly burned in the attack, but ten years later he escapes from an asylum and returns to his home, where a huge Halloween party is going on, steals a costume from a victim, and infiltrates the party. Because the party involves a huge prank, no one realizes he's actually a killer, even as he goes around murdering partygoers.So...based on a true story, huh? Apparently one of the producers used to throw Halloween parties involving pranks, and once someone escaped from an asylum while one of his parties was going on. But the escapee never came it to the party and no one was actually killed, making the 'based on a true story' claim even more meaningless than usual. It's kind of like me making a movie where I marry Sarah Michelle Gellar and say it's based on a true story because we were both alive at the same time. Sub-moronic.The cover art also says, "In 1982, Christopher Vail was sent away after his family was brutally murdered...10 years later, on Halloween night, he returned". The back cover elaborates: "Based on the terrifying true story that started it all! Based on the actual events on Halloween night, 1982, an inmate of a maximum security medical facility escapes after brutally murdering two guards. Upon returning to the house when he was born, he goes on a killing spree that will make him Southern California's greatest mass murderer".And let's break it down. The true story that started what all, exactly? If the events occurred in 1982 or 1992, that's still years after such films as "Halloween" or "Friday The 13th" used similar story lines, so I doubt it inspired them. And again, nothing like this ever actually happened, so how is he Southern California's greatest mass murderer? And why limit it just to Southern Cali; why not just say California since the whole thing is a lie anyway?Most confusing is the fact that the film, according to everything the cover art claims, takes place in 1992. Yet everyone drives modern cars and uses cell phones and laptops of models which were not around in 1992. There's a lame reference to Melissa Etheridge when two lesbians take the screen; the singer didn't actually come out until after the release of 1993's 'Yes I Am' album.Some other things:The killer (supposedly burned, clearly wearing a bad mask) stuffs a rag into a girl's mouth but doesn't tape over it, yet the girl is unable to easily push it out with her tongue.A body is hidden in a closet; someone then boards over the door frame and covers it with what appears to be contact paper. Despite the fact it doesn't match the pattern of the rest of the wall, sticks out a good three inches from the rest of the wall, and has a smelly, decomposing corpse in it, no one notices it for ten years. I would assume, since two people were murdered there, a cop might have noticed it at some point.When a girl taking a bath has her throat slit, blood dribbles out of a make-up appliance on her neck which doesn't even match her natural skin tone. Yet two seconds later, the tub is filled with blood.A blonde bimbo is somehow able to disarm a cop and shoot at someone over his shoulder before he can react. In addition, most of the gunshots leave exit wounds that splatter the walls but have no entry wounds.The cops set up roadblocks and have photos of the escaped killer, but never think to check his old house to see if he might be there.As for the rest of the film? It was filmed pretty well and had a couple of decent effects shots. But there is zero suspense, the acting is simply atrocious (I'm talking sub-porn level here, which makes sense because I'm guessing most of the actresses came straight from that industry), and the film's tone veers between boring and improbable (my favorite scene has one the lesbians, while naked, kicking the killer's ass). Asylum Home Entertainment is quickly becoming to go-to company for really bad, cheap rip-offs of better movies, and "Halloween Night" shows why.