Jennifer C. (gabbiesboutique) from FENTON, MO Reviewed on 11/3/2013...
The was just ...bad. There is virtually no character development, meaning you don't care who dies. You actually start rooting for the killer to kill everyone. Could have been so much more than it was.
Bad acting, worse remake. The score was cheesy, the one liners were cheesier. As a fan of Mystery Science Theater and B (and even C) budget horror flicks...this was a waste of time.
2 of 2 member(s) found this review helpful.
Dill W. (Dill) from LITCHFIELD, ME Reviewed on 9/1/2013...
Very Cheesy of a storyline, but the graphics in blood are great and very gruesome. It has some great actors in it though, but other than that is ver unoriginal.
1 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.
Chad B. (abrnt1) from CABERY, IL Reviewed on 4/28/2010...
The original is a classic. The remake ignored all but the basic story and is just a run of the mill slasher film. Fails to be at all entertaining.
3 of 3 member(s) found this review helpful.
Worst. Remake. Ever.
pizowell | 01/06/2007
(1 out of 5 stars)
"Surely no one sets out to make a bad movie. But in the case of the Black Christmas remake, it's hard to imagine writer/director Glen Morgan honestly thinking that this was the best he could do. The orginal Black Christmas is a classic, a forerunner to the modern slasher movie - stylish and eery and unsettling. But most importantly, simple and straight foward. A slasher and a murder mystery, deftly directed by Bob Clark. The remake (WHY!?) is, to be blunt, absolutely dreadful. From the first frame to the pitiful end, Black Christmas (2006) puts its viewer through the ringer, from the absurd and outlandish to the just plain dull and stupid. Giving the killer an elaborate (and ridiculous) backstory is beside the point, meaningless, mere filler. We get lame attempts at humor and gross out moments that are bad camp. The inclusion of Billy's sister, Agnes, is so out-of-left-field that it feels like Morgan was simply trying to throw in a few extra kills and pad out the movie's already spare running time. The movie isn't even 90 minutes, but you feel every second, particularly with the completely unnecessary hospital finale dragging things out to an asinine, but blessed close. Fans of the original Black Christmas should feel insulted. Horror fans should feel taken advantage of. The human race as a whole should shudder knowing this slag of trash came from one of its own. We can only hope this movie will end the careers of all involved."
Ho, Ho, Horrible
Mark Eremite | Seoul, South Korea | 02/05/2007
(1 out of 5 stars)
"NOTE: THE FOLLOWING REVIEW CONTAINS THINGS THAT ARE NORMALLY CALLED "SPOILERS." HOWEVER, THE WORD "SPOILERS" INSINUATES THAT SOMETHING IS FRESH OR NEW TO BEGIN WITH. SINCE THIS MOVIE IS NEITHER OF THOSE THINGS, LET'S JUST SAY THAT THE FOLLOWING REVIEW CONTAINS "RE-SPOILERS."
If there's one thing wrong with "Black Christmas" (and, trust me, there's a lot more than one), it's that it hardly feels like a movie at all. The movie is as hollow as a shiny, Christmas tree ball, all shiny gleaming glass with absolutely nothing underneath.
We have the requisites for some mindless horror here: a sorority house full of girls, a road-blocking blizzard, and an escaped mental patient, but, amazingly, this trite little flick fails to do anything even remotely interesting, creative, or suspenseful with these paint-by-numbers elements. Instead, what we are given is a rushed, uninspired mess, something that plays out like the bare outline of a horror movie script. I felt like I was watching a treatment of a film idea, and not the actual movie itself.
For instance, character development is virtually nonexistent (according to this movie, not only are sorority girls indistinguishable from each other, but they are also all very crabby and self-centered). This makes it much harder (much, much, so much harder) to care when they are hastily and unceremoniously dispatched by the Killer On The Loose. The murders themselves never come as a surprise; the movie takes great pains to let you know what's coming. It's okay for a horror film to be mindless (by all means), but not if it is also lazy and predictable.
This movie is both. It is barely seventy minutes long, but each second scrapes by, relying on token effects (eerie Santa decorations, blood red Christmas lights, lethal Christmas presents) to convey a mood and urgency that the script itself can't be bothered to provide. Likewise, the heavy lifting of the plot (near misses, motives, and twists) is handled laughably with an improbable story and the eye-rolling inconsistencies.
For example, a normally easy fear-builder -- the Call From Inside The House -- is so overdone with vocal effects that you'll be wondering less about the fate of the characters and more about how the killer manages to make himself sound like five different people ... at the same time ... while adding in spooky static hisses and screams ... without alerting anyone to his presence inside the house. Perhaps he is a demon, calling from another dimension? No, I'm sorry, he is not. That would've been too interesting. Another question: what kind of EMT bags a person who is not dead? You'll find out! Are icicles heavy enough to fall straight through a person's skull from a ten foot drop? Sure! Some of them!
So, what is this movie then? It's quite simple. It's an excuse to watch the dull and dumb deaths of roughly a dozen people, most of them young, trash-talking bimbos. If you want suspense, atmosphere, uncertainty or even just creative gore, you are looking in the wrong place. If you want goofy exposition, fifth grade dialogue, and an ending that will make you scream, "Finish already!" and "What? That's it?" at almost the exact same time, then this movie is your cup of eggnog."
One of the worst...
Krystal | El Paso, TX | 02/25/2007
(1 out of 5 stars)
"What an incredibly horrible movie. It looks as if it was made over the weekend with a blank tape just laying around.
Horrible acting to begin with. If you can even call it acting. The scenes were just so pointless that you can't even have proper dialogue.
The plot was about a man who lived a horrible childhood and got his own mom pregnant (disgusting and wrong or what?) and then goes into killing people by tearing out their eyes and eating them. His daughter/sister is some pyscho woman who comes out of nowhere to start killing a bunch of sorority girls.
The plot was just not elaborated at all. The movie seemed to be jumping all over the place. It was just plain dumb.
Given the plot, it could have been average, but with this type of acting and directing, it wasnt even mediocre.
I do not recommend it at all. A waste of time."
J. Bolen | Agoura Hills CA | 12/27/2006
(1 out of 5 stars)
You will regret it if you do.
No, no, this is not the tagline, this is the review.
The cast is squandered, the effects low budget... this was an ill conceived, poorly executed idea, one of the worst remakes ever. See the original if you must.
Christmas in Black
Patrick T. Grady | Palatine, IL | 07/20/2007
(3 out of 5 stars)
"The original "Black Christmas" is considered a cult classic, but unlike other horror cult classics that have been subject to Hollywood's remake craze ("Texas Chainsaw Massacre", "Dawn Of The Dead", "The Hills Have Eyes", "Halloween"), it's not known outside of horror circles. Few have seen the original, but then again, as this was a box-office bust, few have seen the remake, either. In the original, an unknown and unseen psychopath breaks into a sorority house at Christmas break, hides in the attic, makes some of the lewdest, most demented obscene phone calls ever, and picks the house's occupants off one by one. It's only at the end that the "Final Girl" realizes that something is wrong.
The remake takes a different approach. The killers (there are 2 in this movie) are known immediately. The sorority sisters realize something is wrong right away. The audience is treated to a whole back story on the house and killers' connection to it. The problem is that most of this barely works, if it works at all. Admittedly, the killers are a bit creepy, but the whole back story is completely ludacris and non-sensical. Actually, I think if they had written that better and did away with the dumbest parts (the incest element is the worst part; a mother completely despises her son's very existence, and yet has sex with him? oh please...) the film could have been much better. The obscene calls are treated as an after-thought and aren't very disturbing at all. The sorority sisters are faceless. Honestly, I couldn't even keep their names straight. Katie Cassidy emerges as the film's heroine only because she's the last one left. Early on, there is nothing that stands out about her, unlike Olivia Hussey's character in the original. Crystal Lowe, the sorority's drunken cynic, sounds unconvincing as she rattles off reasons why Christmas is a farce. The other girls range from bland to utterly forgettable. Also, anyone expecting a movie about sorority sisters to contain a lot of T&A will also be disappointed. In short, the viewer will not be emotionally invested in any of the characters. To the contrary, you might be cheering on their deaths.
So what's to like? Well, remember that this is a slasher flick. The basic point of slasher films is to feed victims to a killer. And the movie accomplishes that fairly well. There's a lot of violence, which is what fans of these types of movie really want, so maybe they overlook most of the film's flaws. Think about it, are the "Friday the 13th" movies that much more well-made? I don't think so, but people love them (myself included). So, if you are looking for a cheesy dumb horror flick to rent one weekend, this might be one you enjoy."