Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Bad Movies => Topic started by: clockworkcanary on June 09, 2017, 07:18:12 AM



Title: The Girl in the Photographs
Post by: clockworkcanary on June 09, 2017, 07:18:12 AM
Some spoilers:

Uggg. Insomnia leads to watching bad movies, modern bad horror movies to be exact. When I browse Netflix for horror, when I see the date is after 2000, I typically cringe. For this one, I watched it anyway.

Premise: bored clerk girl receives photos of other dead, mangled girls. Elsewhere, Kumar the photographer takes his crew to said small town. Everyone dies. There's a no-closure, non-ending.

Supposedly, this was produced by Craven before he passed. It's apparent he only dealt with the money side of things as this does not remind me of his writing style (for better or worse). This was no Elm Street or even Deadly Friend. Yes, I said that lol.

The killers are ridiculous. They are immune to cops, media, and general logic. Not much motivation or explanation of who they are, why they are doing what they are doing, or how they're getting away with it.

No atmosphere, no tension, plot points mentioned but never dealt with. No mystery, nothing to figure out, clues that don't lead anyone to anything. Worst of all, no closure.

Kumar's antics did make me laugh once or twice, but it seemed out of tone.

I give it 2 out of 5 tins of cat food.

What a lazy POS movie.


Title: Re: The Girl in the Photographs
Post by: javakoala on June 09, 2017, 10:07:57 AM
From the sound of your comments, it sounds more like a one tin flick.

I understand about the cringing when you see a movie was made after 2000. My cringe reflex triggers around 1994 or 1995, but I can feel the cringe starting as early as 1990. My god! There's nearly 120+ years of cinema out there; why do people only focus on the last 20 years or so? Oh, right...short attention spa -- SQUIRREL!!!!


Title: Re: The Girl in the Photographs
Post by: clockworkcanary on June 09, 2017, 12:41:56 PM
Well, I tend to save one or zero ratings for the absolute worst (Blood Freak, Manos, etc.). I'd say the only thing that gave this a point was perhaps some of the camera work (at least it works on a technical level), but yes, that's being generous.

I find the 90s stuff pretty weak (I'm a 60s/70s/80s horror fan myself), but it's leaps and bounds over modern stuff on Netflix. It's just that so much of the 2000 and later horror (at least what's on Netflix) just don't appear to even be trying, but then I'm sure horror fans thought the same thing during the 80s haha.


Title: Re: The Girl in the Photographs
Post by: javakoala on June 09, 2017, 02:54:05 PM
Oh, come on. BLOOD FREAK is at least a 2 tin flick, just for being so damn weird. Personally, I love it, but then, I am so damn weird.  :cheers:


Title: Re: The Girl in the Photographs
Post by: kakihara on June 11, 2017, 12:30:17 PM
not to be confused with the girl on the train, with the dragon tattoo, with all the gifts, nextdoor.