Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

The acting in this movie is really good.

As much as I would love to give the cast and crew credit for this independent effort, I can't recommend it. In fact, in many ways this is the epitome of what's wrong with most indie films: bad acting, clumsy direction, poorly developed characters and a threadbare script."The Ghosts of Edendale" has an interesting premise. A couple, hoping to strike it big in the entertainment industry, moves into a neighborhood where Hollywood history was made during the silent era. They encounter quirky neighbors who seem to know a bit too much about them. The man becomes increasingly strange as his obsession with his script grows, while the woman becomes increasingly alienated by his coldness, frustrated by her modeling career, and spooked by the visions she sees in the house.Unfortunately, the execution leaves a lot to be desired. "The Ghosts of Edendale" fails to build any suspense, the actors lack passion for their roles, and the script is burdened with clichés about Hollywood being a "tough town." When the filmmakers run out of ideas about where the story should lead, they pile on embarrassingly bad digital effects in a failed attempt at dramatic tension. I will continue to support independent efforts — especially in the frequently disappointing horror genre — but films like this really try my patience. John Cassavetes made remarkable indie films 30 years ago, but it seems today anyone with a camcorder, a handful of friends and a free weekend is becoming a filmmaker. To the independent visionaries with ideas, I say: More power to you. To the cast and crew of "The Ghosts of Edendale," I say: Better luck next time.

I've seen a lot of people saying how bad this movie is... I think I understand why they didn't like it.1. It doesn't contain the special effects most people take for granted.2. It doesn't have an ending where there is a definitive winner per se... thus it can leave the viewer unsatisfied as they only want set answers.. usually where the bad guy wins.3. Not all That much happens.. the movie is based on you the viewer trying to work out what is going to happen and when...You end up while watching this movie trying to figure out how much is real and how much in the imagination of the female lead.You are given the information quite early on that she "sees" things after she sees a little boy in the cupboard who just runs away.The movie progresses from there with the turning point happening as she goes away for 5 days to a shoot which you know the husband isn't keen on.From there on hubby gets more and more wooden acting as though he were not quite sure how to react or respond to anything save for being mean.It does appear at first as though the guy doesn't know how to act, but in actual fact, watching it carefully you can see where he has taken on the role of the character who is supposed to be possessing him.There is only one definite murder in the entire film, and the ghosts themselves hurt no one... as with the rumours of ghosts, the only thing their role is for is to scare the hell out of the lead female who grows more and more paranoid up to the climax.The special effects are used nicely showing only as much as is necessary to make you jump if you're concentrating on it. With a nice trick of using the scenery to make it appear as though she is imagining everything still.. and apart from the death itself that Does happen.. you are left wondering even after the final credits roll...How much is in her mind...How much is real.I'd recommend watching this but don't expect to see tons of blood.. in fact.. don't expect to see Any blood. For someone who doesn't watch horror films to get grossed out... this film was fantastic.Rebby.

Found this one in a bargain bin, and decided I might as well give it a shot. Well, I certainly wasn't disappointed! Though it did have the overall feel of an ultra low budget film, the actors weren't bad and all things considered the effects were pretty good. Interesting storyline, added in some partially true Hollywood history which I enjoyed. Methinks Ill have to watch this one a couple more times to try and figure out the ending though. Overall, if you see this in a bargain bin, I say pick it up! Might take awhile to get your head around, but definitely better than a lot of recent low budget garbage.8/10

I've seen worse, for sure. Watching the director commentary of deleted scenes, I've come to the conclusion that the cuts that were made strengthened this film. Less in this case is definitely more. The movie as originally envisioned would have been a waste of money indeed but the twist at the end propels Edendale into the ranks of underrated mind game attempts. Yeah, it's cheaply shot and the actors look alike except for the two leads who kinda resemble Willem Dafoe and Keener from Malkovich. The fake Dafoe guy will never be seen again but the fake Keener actress who plays rachel throws in a disquietingly sincere performance and may be heard from again. Thank God, the disappearance of Rose is not ex-positioned which lifts Edendale from the trash heap to the garage. Always like a Tom Mix reference. I'm going to keep my eye on this director. I'll definitely rent his next especially with the Hollywood Video MVP deal which enables me to rent films like this for free. If you can get this for free, give it a try. I've seen a lot worse.