thekingofhorror Reviews

Scarlet Moon (2006)

Another Warren F. Disbrow Masterpiece!

[7/10 · 6 October 2007]

After watching and enjoying this movie, and in response to the completely unprofessional, unnecessary, slam of this film by another reviewer I decided to do some research to see what other people though of NY Times Critic's Choice director Warren F. Disbrow's Scarlet Moon. I personal enjoyed this movie very much. It did suffer from budget and maybe not the best acting but those are not the only things that make a movie. The story is good: Satanist trying to get their hands on this ancient Egyptian jewel called "Scarlet Moon" in order to rule the world, with their will being carried out by extremely entertaining, though a little over the top, vampire, drug addict, hit men. People need to pay more attention to Warren F. Disbrow. He is one of those rare filmmakers in our presences who will be remembered, for better or for worse, in the future, but WILL be remembered never the less. This is what I found: "Headed by Warren F. Disbrow in the seat of the writer, director, all around do everything guy, you just can't go wrong!" Marc Patterson, Film Critic.

"Wildly, weirdly resourceful no budget director Warren F. Disbrow helms this deranged horror comedy of apocalyptic Proportions" Turner Classic Movies.

"If Warren Disbrow is comparable to a genre David Lynch, then Scarlet Moon is his Dune. Dripping with ambition, dense with ideas and attempting the idiosyncratic, this determined effort at a new modern mythology works...Warren F Disbrow represents the reason independent film continues to thrive. Outside the mindless mainstream of demographically determined movie-making, he is a man who plays by his own arcane rules and puts his own unique stamp on even the most tired of terror tenets. And if that's not the definition of 'auteur', it's hard to imagine what is. Imagine what he could do with an actual mainstream budget. Scarlet Moon is highly recommended" Bill Gibron DVDTALK.

"He is passionate about what he does, and that's what appeals to us. I'm not saying he is Ingmar Bergman, but he's a true artist" Lloyd Kaufman, President of Troma Entertainment, Inc. quoted in NY Times.

Megalodon (2002 Video)

Watch it just to say you did and then move on.

[5 September 2004]

I really hate ripping up low budget movies because that is the business I am in and I would hate for someone to do it to me. I'll say something positive first and then move on. THIS IS THE BEST SHOT ON VIDEO SHARK MOVE I HAVE EVER SCENE!!! With that being said lets go to the breakdown: This entire movie was shot in a studio on high quality video. The sets are so and so and the acting is also so and so. There is no nudity even though we were all expecting to see some from one of the two lead female actors. Even though this movie takes place on the largest oil platform in the world there is a surprising lack of background actors. This is summed up at a dinner table scene where the multi billionaire owner of the oil rig tells the reporters visiting that they are so automated that they only need 24 people to run the entire platform. Even with that I don't think we see 24 people the entire movie. Couldn't they have done the old Beastmaster trick of having extras walk back and forth in front of the camera during some scenes? It's a move folks. Lets at least try to fake it. The movie is complimented heavily with CGI some of which is good (But that's the exception) but the sheer amount of it starts to take its toll. The oil rig is CGI; the helicopter at the beginning is CGI; All the underwater scenes are CGI; The shark is CGI; The snow outside on the ice flow is CGI; Many of the interior sets are either CGI or enhanced with CGI; The yacht at the end of the move is CGI; with all this couldn't we at least add some CGI actors??? With everything going against it there were some times when I was a little interested in the movie and wondered where it would go, but in the end I found myself just trying to guess which actors would die and how. I'll give it one star because it at least kept my attention long enough to finish the thing. I'm mainly disappointed because there was obviously some money involved in this move and even with all that, and some great computer talent, they couldn't save it in the end. Its called writing folks. Take a class. MKB

Megalodon (2002 Video)

Watch it just to say you did and then move on.

[4 September 2004]

I really hate ripping up low budget movies because that is the business I am in and I would hate for someone to do it to me. I'll say something positive first and then move on. THIS IS THE BEST SHOT ON VIDEO SHARK MOVE I HAVE EVER SCENE!!! With that being said lets go to the breakdown: This entire movie was shot in a studio on high quality video. The sets are so and so and the acting is also so and so. There is no nudity even though we were all expecting to see some from one of the two lead female actors. Even though this movie takes place on the largest oil platform in the world there is a surprising lack of background actors. This is summed up at a dinner table scene where the multi billionaire owner of the oilrig tells the reporters visiting that they are so automated that they only need 24 people to run the entire platform. Even with that I don't think we see 24 people the entire movie. Couldn't they have done the old Beastmaster trick of having extras walk back and forth in front of the camera during some scenes? It's a move folks. Lets at least try to fake it. The movie is complimented heavily with CGI some of which is good (But that's the exception) but the sheer amount of it starts to take its toll. The oilrig is CGI; the helicopter at the beginning is CGI; All the underwater scenes are CGI; The shark is CGI; The snow outside on the ice flow is CGI; Many of the interior sets are either CGI or enhanced with CGI; The yacht at the end of the move is CGI; with all this couldn't we at least add some CGI actors??? With everything going against it there were some times when I was a little interested in the movie and wondered where it would go, but in the end I found myself just trying to guess which actors would die and how. I'll give it one star because it at least kept my attention long enough to finish the thing. I'm mainly disappointed because there was obviously some money involved in this move and even with all that, and some great computer talent, they couldn't save it in the end. Its called writing folks. Take a class. MKB

Horror Rises from the Tomb (1973)

Extremely good effects for a 1973 Film.

[2 September 2004]

I purchased Horror Rises from the Tomb as part of a four DVD zombie pack. This is defiantly a little gem and I recommend it to any who by chance come across a copy. The special effects are extremely good for a 1973 movie. The blood isn't pink like in many of the old Hammer films and every single woman in the movie takes her cloths off!!! How can you beat something like that? At least they're realistic about it. I mean, if your going to cut someone's heart out you might as least remove her shirt first. Makes sense to me. Overall it was a strong story, with great acting and effects. A review of the IMDb database shows that many of the lead actors and actresses are still alive and acting today and I am interested in seeing some more of Carlos Aured's films. His last film was the Charles Band film 'Eliminators' (1986).

Strongly recommended but only for lovers of old school horror. All in all I'd say this film was about five or six years ahead of it's time. I'll also go as far to say that Tom Savini was probably inspired for one of his effects from Dawn of the Dead by a gruesome effect from this movie but I won't give anything away