Ghost of Goodnight Lane (2014) User Reviews

They made it this way on purpose. Doesn't mean it shouldn't have been better.

[face-819-933726 · 4/10 · 11 June 2014]

Well this is just awful, but what makes it even worse is that it has all been done on purpose. Many people will watch this for Billy Zane, and for those people this will be exactly what you are hoping for in Zane's non stop blabber and off hand remarks that on some occasions don't even have anything to do with the movie. Now fans of Lacey Chabert will be completely disappointed by the amount of screen time she actually gets, and the limited depth of her character. Lacey has talent, (find, and watch Thirst if you are not already as sure of that as you should be) but once again, she is being wasted in a terrible movie that very few people will actually ever watch. Now about the movie itself, there is no reason why it has to be this bad, they started out well, and they have stocked the movie with a lot of talent, it is just that the intention of the production team seems to have been to create something funny, sadly that mark was missed. Every door before it opens has to be shown first as a scary thing that the cameras must rush up to as if a great invisible beast were coming (every time). Why does it hate the doors so much? is almost funny, and sadly the only almost in there. The ghost is in the house, and of the house, so where is it coming from each time that it needs to storm the doors, or when no one is looking to get scared, why would it need to open doors sneakily? I'm sure I am taking this movie a lot more seriously than the cast did while they worked on it, but if you are going to choose a movie to be entertained by for an hour, and a half or more, you should at least be entertained. The acting is all fine, how can you fault a room full of improving actors when the script most likely just gives a rough idea, and says go nuts. I did not Enjoy this movie, and do not recommend it at all. Even a horror parody has to be based in something, or anchored somehow to some rule that does not change, this is too loose for it's own good.

Jesse of www.Jesse.ca

Eh...

[buffypoloka · 4/10 · 5 February 2022]

At first I wanted to shut it off because it was so random and looked like a Ron Jeremy low budget after-school soft mild porno only 12 and 13 yo boys would rush to their tree houses to sit around talking about and taking turns "holding " the movie. Just to get close to maybe a side boob. Then someone said it was supposed to be funny.... so I restarted it with a different perspective and WaLah it was a comedy Billy Zane made with the change out of his pockets by pulling his car over by the studio had random people get in the shot and improv the scenes therefore writing it in about an hour...

Almost... almost a 5.

[sstetsko · 4/10 · 23 June 2014]

So I thought I might get some laughs tonight and check out a horror comedy... disappointingly I got not much more than a handful of slight grins from this dull piece of work. While the acting is good, the effects are passable without evidently requiring much of a budget (if they had a real budget then shame on them), and the characters are not bad, it just doesn't have anything special to offer. In fact, the whole thing is stock... run of the mill... ho hum. Plot, dialog, pretty much everything is clichéd, but not in that meta sense where it is playing off of it for irony or even... gasp, humor. Therein lies the biggest disappointment, and I already said it once but I will repeat it... it just isn't very funny.

Nor is it a really good horror. It does succeed in setting up a few creepy scenes... not really scary scenes, just creepy, but they, as stated, are not innovative. It has some okay deaths, although, again, they are not innovative. It has a basic plot with only the slightest variance from what we have pretty much seen a hundred times before. You would think with all the effort it takes to get the funding this movie must have needed, and to get the decent cast it has, someone might have really taken the time to have a better script.

It is not a terrible movie by any means... there is a bit of skill involved here. If you don't expect anything going into it you might find it mildly entertaining. A mindless way to pass some minutes away. But if you go into it with any higher hopes than that, well...

Just plain awful.

[cockadoody73 · 1/10 · 15 June 2014]

I'm not sure which film my fellow reviewers were watching, but anyone who can give this atrocity anything more than one star should be forever banned from calling themselves a horror fan. The fact that Billy Zane and Danielle Harris (who has starred in some pretty good horror films- Urban Legend for example ) star in this film made me think that it might be slightly watchable. Sadly that just not the case.

Diabolical acting, ridiculous storyline and the fact that it looked like it had been filmed on someone's camera phone, means that this is basically 90 minutes of your life that you will never get back.

Avoid it like the plague. Find yourself a patch of wet paint, and watch it dry.

The Worst Piece of Crud I've Seen in Years

[jaeelbooks · 1/10 · 9 October 2020]

So, this terrible piece of garbage is what happens when the director is also the writer, producer, an editor, and gives himself a cameo in his own picture. There is no one to tell him exactly how bad of a job he's done until it's too late. The cast is decent, and the movie made me feel sorry for them. Two things came to mind. Either they were friends of the director and decided to do him a favor by appearing in his insanely low-budget and badly written film, or they were hard-up for money. Either way, 'Ghost of Goodnight Lane' manages to taint the careers of everyone involved. The ghost's story is ridiculous and even manages a tie-in with Charles Manson, because why not? Aside from that, the ghost has so many powers - too many powers - and they keep changing. The characters are equally as uneven. Billy Zane's character behaves in a way that makes him seem pretty naive and useless as a film producer in the movie. While his crew is being slaughtered - or rather slaughtering themselves - he just keeps on with his picture like it's the most important thing that needs to be done right then. I honestly wanted to gouge my eyes out as I forced myself to sit through this monstrosity. Fortunately, the ending with the director's cameo satisfied that craving. Don't waste your time with this film. The only purpose it serves is to turn me off of watching anything else that the director has ever made or will ever make. Billy Zane - what happened, dude?

Ghost of Goodnight Lane

[Scarecrow-88 · 3/10 · 21 December 2014]

An independent movie studio connected to an old house with a history of violence is tormented by the vengeful ghoul that insists her home is not bulldozed over by other potential buyers. The head honcho of the studio (Billy Zane, who mostly looks bored and disinterested, with less-than-subtle hints of sarcasm in his performance towards the project he's stuck in) plans to finish his latest project then sell off the house with plans to move to a brand new studio but when the ghost of bad little girl Carly starts raising a violent, psychopathic ruckus, he might just have to consider. Zane's cast and crew will also be under siege and terror, attempting to escape but unable to do so, some meeting horrific ends, others trying to "negotiate" their way out of the place to safe freedom. Decent cast (the aforementioned Zane, Lacey Chabert, Matt Dallas, and Danielle Harris) is really trapped in a bad horror movie with variable special effects (primarily laughable) and some okay dark humor. The film can't escape a putrid low budget, and the cast running around a studio attempting to find safe haven from a ghoul (that pales in comparison to the Japanese Onyro ghouls so popular about ten years ago) that isn't all that scary doesn't help. There are some eerie dolls in a room, a nasty bit of business involving a mirror slashing (the ghoul can "manipulate" people into harming / killing themselves), and Zane trying to talk the ghoul into leaving them alone has a bit of funny to it. Harris is too good to be stuck in parts which do nothing with her and too often these days she is…this film especially wastes her talents. Chabert keeps on a serious face as does Dallas (as the put-upon rookie, placed with doing multiple duties due to the crew losing their head editor (B-movie vet, Richard Tyson) in the opening sequence), her lover, but the plot is anything but worthy of a straight performance…the content and effects accompanying it leave much to be desired. This is fit for syfy and that is not a compliment. I think Zane knows what kind of crap this is and his performance doesn't hide that fact. Carly's mother's back story is even linked to Charles Manson! Christine Bentley services the film as some nice eye candy in scantily clad outfits (she *almost* gets nude for a shower sequence) as Zane's "star" and Allyn Carrell is the creepy old lady with a story to tell and secrets to unveil. One truly funny and odd scene has Carrell just appearing and walking throughout the studio as Zane (and his kooky crew member Johnny (Adam Whittington, a very realistic loser)) is bewildered at how to get her to leave. The back story involving Jeanie and Carly's reasons for acting out are particularly weak but the film probably couldn't have made it out successfully regardless. Lynn Andrews III is the token black character (he is over the audio/sound department of the studio)who actually makes it out alive, but not without a few bumps and bruises.

So damn funny

[chrismackey1972 · 5/10 · 27 August 2014]

Billy Zane plays the director of a music video, which is filmed in a studio that used to be the home of a girl, who is now dead. Her ghost is haunting the place, and Zane talks his sound techie into keeping quiet about it for fear of losing his crew. As the story proceeds, we are introduced to his crew and actors, many of whom are there to be kill bait for the malicious ghost. This was much better than I thought it was going to be, and it was done in a tongue-in-cheek manner. I like the twist towards the end where we find out about Charles Manson's (yes, the serial killer) kid. I found the movie surprisingly fun. It's not great, probably not even good, but it was entertaining. The special effects were nothing to brag about, but considering the budget was probably low, the effects weren't bad. Boobs, butt, blood, and gore are in this. There's plenty of gore to go around, though they didn't go crazy with it. Christine Bentley gets naked for a shower scene, and later, she is forced to stick her face into a fan, chopping it off.

Billy Zane is hilarious. He can't get Laurel's name right. He keeps calling her Lauren.

Lacey Chabert has become a really good actress, however,- as I said earlier - this is done in tongue-in-cheek fashion, so don't expect an Oscar worthy performance.

Danielle Harris looks a lot like Chabert - they could be sisters. She does a good job on her role as one of the dancers who becomes possessed by the ghost.

Christine Bentley has a hot body...it's even hotter in the nude scene. Overall, she's brought into the movie to be the big-boobed, blond sexpot.

I gave this a 5-star rating because it was funny, entertaining, and it didn't hurt that the girls were hot. Oh, it was also somewhat original, as I've never seen a movie that had a ghost haunting a studio, not that I can remember anyway.

A low brow comedy with horror tendencies

[Pressparr88 · 6/10 · 18 June 2014]

This is a bizarrely mismarketed low budget gem I had the pleasure of watching recently. The cast is well rounded (Zane,Chabert, and the lovely Danielle Harris), save for Matt Dallas who while easy on the eyes won't win any awards for this role.

The principal location for the majority of the film does start to suffocate the film a little bit, and some of the usual low budget horror film setbacks are there as well, but that is to be expected.

The plot is threaded in a bit harshly, and some of the effects are a bit stale, but the film is nothing less than entertaining, which is what it sets out to be.

The film is more of a comedy with horror tendencies. It is not the type of film where you are on the edge of your seat with surprise, but more of a film that you can just sit back and enjoy.

Don't let negative reviews keep you away, I was glad I didn't!

one of the top scary movies of the year . A must see

[bardiaamirlak · 9/10 · 27 January 2013]

I was pleasantly surprised when I watched a screening of this movie .Although not a 100 million dollar Hollywood budget the special effects are done very well . Alin Bijan is a brilliant director and has made this movie into a fun but yet extremely scary one . What makes it more scary is that its based on true story of the studio at goodnight lane and its shot in the same studio ! Billy Zane does a great job as well . Lacey Chabert is adorable and does a good job as well

It can definitely compete with the really scary movies such as paranormal activity, the ring , etc but yet fun and has funny scenes that are awesome. I can say by the near end of the movie I was hearing screams and the girls sitting beside me jumping off their seats

Excellent Fun

[kyleallencole9 · 6/10 · 27 June 2020]

I personally enjoyed this rather messy supernatural flick. Lots of good death scenes and plenty of gore to spare. Billy Zane was horrible in this movie, but the rest of the cast were great. An evil ghost kills off a group of people trapped inside a eerie film studio that is connected to a haunted house where violent murders occurred.

Surprisingly fun

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 19 August 2021]

I'm not adverse to B-movies so I found myself pleasantly enjoying THE HAUNTING OF GOODNIGHT LANE (aka GHOST OF GOODNIGHT LANE), a 2014 cheese-fest from Dallas. This one's about a film crew shooting in a creepy old run-down studio that turns out to be haunted by the spirit of a young woman with murderous intentions. It's a film that plays up the comedy just as much as the horror and because of that I think it works quite well. Billy Zane is the big name here and he plays a laconic, laidback, wisecracking director and I thought he was a hoot with his one-liners; Richard Tyson and Danielle Harris are some other familiar faces. The CGI effects are pretty poor and the whole thing is rather generic and cliched, it has to be said, so not for all tastes, but I did enjoy it regardless.

A very good horror comedy

[gregoryaudio · 8/10 · 21 January 2022]

This is actually a very good high comedy, much misunderstood by many of the reviewers here. You're not supposed to take it that's seriously, it does what it says on the can:)

WHY DOES SHE HATE THE DOORS?

[nogodnomasters · 10/10 · 2 May 2019]

Alan (Billy Zane) is the director of a low budget indie production. The editing of the film is set in a studio located in a haunted house. One of the scenes has to be reshot which requires the dancers to come back.

The ghost scenes were done very well, but the dry one liners spouted by Billy Zane kept this film from having a great scare factor, instead it had a decent comedy value. While this film was in no way a spoof, it did seem to spoof the genre in general.

The worse part of the film was it didn't tie in to the woman's warning that "childish games can turn ugly." There was an implication there was a hide and seek game turned bad, but that was not the case as childish games were never part of the flashbacks or the film. They needed to tie that together, but didn't bother. In spite of that, this one is a keeper.

F-bomb. Nudity.