Survivors of the IMDb Apocalypse
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Dan's Rewatch Reviews

Go down 
AuthorMessage
A-Supreme
Admin
avatar

Posts : 616
Join date : 2017-02-07
Age : 31
Location : Funkytown, USA

PostSubject: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:35 am

This will sort of be the sister thread for my movie reviews thread, which I admit is in dire need of updating but one step at a time. Instead, I want a thread where I can devote to movies I see again. I'll probably be posting these reviews one at a time, as I have more to say about them given that I took the time to watch them again.

Long ago when I first got Amazon Prime, I watched a few subpar horror films that I recently got the chance to see in much, much better quality. So, I want to talk about one of them. I have another film that I might post about later on.

The Forest (1982)



I can't even go into just how awful the quality of this film was when I first saw it on Amazon Prime a few years ago, but let's just say that the Code Red DVD while not the best out there in Horror Digital Land still does the film a lot of good.

This seemingly routine 80s slasher may check a lot of the clichés to start out with, but this tea was brewed from a different pot. Sure, you have the typical opening kill, with the madman offing a couple in the woods. Then, you meet our soon-to-be victims planning a vacation to the same woods, though they oddly decide to go separately (boys vs. girls and all) though they all plan to meet at the same destination by the next night. Don't forget about the sherriff warning two of the victims that people have disappeared without a trace after venturing in these said woods, which is meant to set the tone. All of these qualities can be found in any good slasher of its time.

Then, things get weird when they all enter the woods. It soon becomes clear that this is no longer your average, by-the-numbers slasher. Sure, there's the madman in the woods killing anything that walks, but soon you discover there are ghosts of children whose voices have been altered so that they sound like possessed aliens, and they like to hide from their evil ghost mamma. Their mamma has a habit of making her presence known to our victims, saying that she's looking for her children and if they see them to send them home because they just have to be punished. And the madman has a tie to them (wait until the exposition scene). This is ALL bizarre as fuck, and you can't decide if your watching something trying to be played straight or for laughs. Maybe I need to watch the extras to get some insight on the creator's intentions.

The better quality reveals the forest to be a character all in itself - beautiful scenery, and the atmosphere is actually pretty good with the screeching bobcats and the POV shots of the killer spying on our victims. The victims are likeable enough and the entire thing almost plays like a romantic comedy to start out. One couple is on the brink of divorce and neither one are really unlikeable, so you're hoping for their reconciliation. And the other couple has a cocky man and a wife who has something to prove by going camping with her girl friend alone without the boys. There's a little bit of arguing between the boys at times (being lost does that to people, I'd imagine), but overall you get the sense that this is a real group of friends who don't spend most of the film being bitches to each other. It's annoying when that happens and this movie averts that for the most part. Hell, even the killer is painted with a tinge of humanity so you kind of feel sorry for him despite his horrific acts.

Yet, none of this really helps. The Forest, despite its likeability, is still technically a bad slasher. You go in expecting carnage, but despite the couple of decent death scenes, this isn't really scary and there aren't enough of them. Rather, it's a puzzling slasher/ghost story hybrid with a hefty dose of cheesiness to boot. And I think this will turn off a lot of viewers. I had originally given it a 4/10, but some of the stalking sequences and the better sense of the woods with a better-quality view has me bumping it up to 5/10.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.imdb.com/user/ur55248812/
A-Supreme
Admin
avatar

Posts : 616
Join date : 2017-02-07
Age : 31
Location : Funkytown, USA

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:05 pm

Silent Night Bloody Night (1972)



Before I get sass about talking about a Christmas movie in April, let me preface this by saying that Christmas was merely used as a backdrop to a very dark murder mystery. This story easily could've been plucked from this time on the calendar and planted somewhere else, and it would've worked just as well. Aside from the dark, snowy setting and the occasional Christmas tree or ornamental lights on the wall, Christmas has no bearing on this story. In truth, I wasn't really going to talk much about this one, mostly because I don't think I have much of an audience who enjoys these obscure 70s films quite the same way that I do. Laughing At least not on this forum. Have you ever seen it, Shred? Tyler? I know you guys like 80s stuff, but I don't hear much about 70s stuff. Still, I do know that you guys enjoy slasher flicks and this one is as proto-slasher as they come so maybe you guys could still find value in a review of this. I want to record my thoughts anyway, so here they are.

It's Christmas Eve in a weird, remote 70s town and some unknown assailant is butchering people who dare venture into this old weird, remote house. The movie originally follows a lawyer and his lover there at the house on business, until it pulls a Psycho and kills them off in a no-doubt brutal death scene for its time. Then, the action cuts to a mysterious man (possible killer? maybe....) who shows up in town and immediately makes acquaintance with our attractive heroine, who serves as our investigative final girl and grown daughter of the town sheriff. More murders ensure, until everyone eventually makes their way to the house of doom and the big reveal occurs, followed by the final showdown.

I think this movie was doomed to the public-domain shelf for much of its lifetime, so the version I first saw it in was absolutely dreadful. Though I wasn't the biggest fan of it upon first watching it, I did remember that it was a film with a lot of character and an interesting setting, and the restored DVD sat on Amazon for a mere $5.00 bucks (very cheap compared to most restored copies) so I couldn't pass it up the chance to give this one a second chance. Mostly because it felt wrong to dislike this one not because of the story, but because of how bad it looked. It just didn't seem fair.

And, like I said, it was one of the first slasher films ever. You can't take that away from it. It barely came before The Texas Chain Saw Massacre and Black Christmas, both often credited for inventing the genre that would later be popularized by films like Halloween and Friday the 13th. However, Silent Night Bloody Night like those other early 70s slashers didn't emphasize on gore, but rather atmosphere and the raging sense of doom associated with its setting. The occasional townsfolk who got killed off wasn't the focus of the story, but just part of the overall mystery that was unfolding.

The problem with this one, unfortunately, is how slow it is. It's only like a 85-minute film, but it's slow as hell. Aside from the lawyer and his lover (wife? girlfriend? mistress? I can't remember) getting cut while doing the nasty, the other death scenes were no where near as good. There's a lot of extra character scenes added that felt like filler, easily cut like fat from ham and the story still wouldn't have felt incomplete. Though our final girl wasn't quite as helpless as her counterparts in films like Psycho (sorry Lila) or Torso, her final confrontation with the killer was no where near as memorable as Sally Hardesty or Jess Bradford's in the aforementioned seminal slashers that followed. And the twist ending, though interesting, was revealed in such a lame, too-long exposition scene which zaps it of any impact or excitement. Not to mention that Don't Look in the Basement which came later revealed a similar twist so much better.

I've already let this go on for a bit too long for a film I'm pretty confident no one here has ever seen (or ever will), but it's interesting going back in time and seeing one of the roots of one of my favorite subgenres of horror. I had originally rated this one at being 5/10 and while the restoration on the affordable FilmChest DVD was a revelation, the movie still was a bit too boring for me to even give it a generous 6/10. So, I kept my rating the same.

In closing, I hear that there is a sequel out now. Might be checking it out soon... though I've also been meaning to check out the sequel to Don't Look in the Basement as well and that's going on like two years now. Long watch list and all, you know how it goes.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.imdb.com/user/ur55248812/
A-Supreme
Admin
avatar

Posts : 616
Join date : 2017-02-07
Age : 31
Location : Funkytown, USA

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Fri Apr 27, 2018 5:05 pm

The Funhouse (1981)



Of all those Golden-year slashers, this is one that always seems to fall off my radar. I don't think I'd even put in my top ten favorites from that year, which is unfortunate because the movie is atmospheric enough and does follow the slasher formula rather loyally. Still, there were very few things I remembered about this one having seen it before. Going into this rewatch, the only real things I remember about this movie is that:
1. It was director by Tobe Hooper (more on that later)
2. The final girl was shown butt-naked 5 minutes into the film
and
3. The killer was freaky looking.
Oh, and that it was set at a carnival. But that's kind of obvious, given its title so really it doesn't count.

Pertaining to the first point, I do like a few Tobe Hooper things. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (the original), Poltergeist, and even The Mangler are all pretty awesome. However, it's not out of the ordinary for me to feel a bit lukewarm to some of his stuff as well. I still don't a clue why, either. Much like his remake Toolbox Murders, this one just isn't a favorite of mine and I can't pinpoint what it is about Tobe Hooper's style that leaves me feeling this way, but I do know that it's not the first time I've come to feel this way after viewing a film of his. Hell, I don't even love The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 or Spontaneous Combustion to talk them up much. When he's good, he's great, but unfortunately, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, this is not.

One interesting thing to note about The Funhouse is that it seemed to be fairly ahead of the game in terms of subverting the genre before the clichés wore themselves thin over the countless slasher ripoffs that occurred after the success of Friday the 13th. The good girl, Amy, was shown taking a shower, in a scene that would have us thinking she would be the opening victim. But, surprise! It's just the brother playing a prank on her, and this is truly our final girl for the film. Even Sidney Prescott never showed her tits as she was having sex and living in Scream, but then again no one ever showed their tits in that franchise. Back to this flick though, this was probably done to be an homage to Psycho rather than an outright subversion to that slasher convention (there's a few of them in this movie), but it's still an interesting aspect that sort of sets this movie apart from others from the golden year. Amy showed us that the good girls who survive in horror movies don't actually shower in their granny sweaters and tights. They actually, you know, get naked like everyone else.

Normally I would blame bland characters for indifference about a film, but oddly with this one, I enjoyed the first half way of character building way more than when the shit starts hitting the fan. Amy is on a first date with Buzz, who comes across as a tool when she wants to obey her dad's order to stay away from the seedy carnival in town and he balks at the idea of going to see a movie instead. I'm not always a fan of movie couples, but I kind of liked how their relationship sort of develops nicely throughout the movie. Their double-dates, Liz and Richie, are even kind of likeable too, though moronic.

After all, it is Richie who has the ~brilliant~ idea to stay at the funhouse all night to make out and do other naughty stuff, which you know is a death sentence for at least three of them because this is a slasher film and only two deaths are just not enough in slasher world. They witness a guy in a Frankenstein mask murdering the weird fortune teller after she jerked him off for pay (ew!), and then they just can't seem to make a hasty escape before having this masked killer and his papa stalking them throughout the funhouse. The best part of the second half is when the killer is unmasked... he's downright terrifying! This deformed thing isn't the evil clown that's on cover, that's for damn sure. Surprised I don't know what disturbed me more, the fact that he looked so monstrous despite having human parents or the fact that I saw an old-lady fortune teller jack him off for pay. Again, ew to both!

All of Amy's friends meet their demise, but sadly too much does seem to happen off-screen to really discuss their killings. The worst part is, I don't even think Amy did much to defend herself in the final moments of the confrontation. She just screamed until the killer accidentally killed himself. lol. I admit I was fighting sleep by this point. I don't even know why they bothered to have Amy's little brother follow the gang to the carnival in the first place. It's not like she got to stick it to him for playing the cruel shower prank on her at the start of the film. The kid simply gets caught by a carny and has his parents called on him to pick him up, but maybe it was meant to show how hopeless our heroine's situation was when she cried for her parents help through the fan but they couldn't hear her...? I was reading some old discussions about this back on the old IMDb boards and someone said that there was some pedophilia subtext here between the carny and the kid? I didn't pick up on that (thank god) but given some of the trashy stuff that transpired before, it's possible. pale

When I first saw this a few years back, I really must have enjoyed it because I had given it a 7/10. Aside from the decent first half, I wasn't getting into it very much on the second half. So, I knocked this down a rating which is a shame because I have so many titles rated 6/10. Average is average, however, and that's how I felt this time around so I'm sticking with it. Maybe I'll recoup more enjoyment for it next time to move the rating back up.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.imdb.com/user/ur55248812/
Shred

avatar

Posts : 338
Join date : 2017-02-03
Age : 30

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Sat Apr 28, 2018 5:31 am

I like the Funhouse more every time I see it. Back in the day it played on UPN, USA, TBS etc all the time (probably because it's so tame) and always seemed slow and boring because of commercials and the bad print. Ten or eleven years ago I rediscovered it on DVD and have watched it numerous times and now think it's a classic. Tobe Hooper had an inconsistent filmography even way back though. I don't believe for a second he was behind most of Poltergeist (that has Steven Spielberg all over it) and I would give The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 a three or four at most.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
A-Supreme
Admin
avatar

Posts : 616
Join date : 2017-02-07
Age : 31
Location : Funkytown, USA

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Sun Apr 29, 2018 10:19 pm

The characters were pretty likeable. It's just as you said, a fairly tame slasher with some pretty sick underpinnings. It's very similar to Texas Chain Saw Massacre in that aspect, but it's not as memorable as TCM. TCM is remembered as being one of the most gory films ever made, but there really wasn't much gore in it at all. Most of the violence is implied, but it was effective to stick in people's minds to make them queasy. The Funhouse is meant to be the same way, only not as well done. It knows that it's a horror movie and throws a lot of shout-outs in for good measure... more of a movie meant for fun than for legit scares. And that's all good.

I agree with you about Poltergeist. Family horror seems like something Steven Spielberg would think up of.

Another interesting Tobe Hooper movie was Lifeforce, which was actually surprisingly well-made for being a mid-80s sci-fi horror/disaster flick.

Have you seen his 2000 film Crocodile? It sounds like a creature slasher, but I plan to see it soon along with its sequel which sounds like good fun. It has a pretty scathing IMDb rating, along with a few of his other movies like Mortuary and Night Terrors (haven't seen them either).
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.imdb.com/user/ur55248812/
A-Supreme
Admin
avatar

Posts : 616
Join date : 2017-02-07
Age : 31
Location : Funkytown, USA

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Mon Apr 30, 2018 11:27 pm

See No Evil (2006)



I'm not sure what compelled me to rewatch See No Evil of all movies, except maybe I wanted to see something a bit more contemporary compared to the oldies that I have been watching. WWE's wrestler Kane is the crazed killer in this one and gets the job done.

This one easily fits in with the times. The slasher/splatter films of last decade were so ugly looking. Laughing More than likely if you're watching a movie from the mid-to-the-late 2000s, you're in for a trashy gorefest. Unless you're watching something like Venom (2005 - yet seems to fit in more with the 90s ilk) or anything with Asian origins... those look classy by comparison even though they are remakes.  The most memorable titles though? Saw, Hostel, Wrong Turn, oh boy. All of these are just so gory and grungy, and this title fits in well with that crop.

A group of obnoxious criminals get sent to what, restore?, a rundown building that probably should've been demolished years ago with a brand new Holiday Inn put in its place. We get all the introductions to see that absolutely no one is remotely likeable except our obvious final girl Christine (how gorgeous is Christina Vidal btw?), but immediately after they get dropped off to their locale to work, the two adult supervisors start drinking and flirting and the groups of juvies are left screwing around the building, while Kane (named Jacob Goodnight here) looms the building to knock them off one by one in rather clever death fashion, following by hollowing their skulls for eyeballs, which he collects in jars. O_O

The most disturbing death, besides the normal(!) eye-gouging, involved one poor unfortunate soul being hung up by her feet only to be munched on by a bunch of hungry strays. Jacob Goodnight, however, may have had one of the most memorable of the bunch, but his doesn't count considering that See No Evil 2 was released four years ago and he was back with a vengeance. And I can't even believe it's been that long... seems like just yesterday that that one came out.

Anyway, Jacob Goodnight is a pretty imposing presence, and we get plenty of glimpses with the several flashbacks on why he's so screwed up: His mother. His mother is pure evil and even channels Mrs. Bates for a few, but I don't think she ever kept Norman in a cage so she's even more of a bitch than Mama Bates was. Heaven help any ~ pick one, any one ~ poor cute, young chick with a good personality and a nice set of perky breasts, because no matter what, she a whore in mama's eyes.

How hilarious was it to see alpha bitch Zoe practically throw herself at chief bad boy Michael pretty much the whole movie, until he offers to fuck her, only for her to turn him down flat saying he wasn't good enough for her? Laughing Laughing Laughing

I know I joked around a lot in this review about this movie. Yes, it's ugly looking, the characters aren't very likeable, it's cliché up and down. Yet, it's still a pretty fun slasher overall. Some of the cast members are pretty hot. The villain is pretty scary. I definitely wouldn't want to cross paths with him in an alleyway somewhere. There's some good deaths, too. Oh, and there's also the sequel that follows the events immediate after the first one... and stars Danielle Harris as the likeable lead character. I Love You I had this rated 6/10 originally, and I kept the rating the same.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.imdb.com/user/ur55248812/
Shred

avatar

Posts : 338
Join date : 2017-02-03
Age : 30

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Sun May 13, 2018 6:23 am

I rewatched the undervalued Disturbing Behavior. Thought it was great (it's had to have been 15 years), especially enjoyed the cast and the score by Mark Snow. I forgot how mean-spirited (especially the opening) and gloomy it was. It's too bad the studio interfered so heavily though (causing heavy edits). Almost all of Ethan Embry's scenes were cut! How could you remove Mark from Empire Records from a movie? Anyways, I think it was Roger Ebert who said the movie was too murky and disorganized to be as successful as Scream, Scream 2 etc and he was right.

And yeah, I have seen Crocodile. If you've seen Blood Surf or like those cheesy creature features from the Scfy channel, than you'll enjoy it. I also own Mortuary on some 4 movie set. I'd go in with low expectations because it's instantly forgettable.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
EnnJaySee

avatar

Posts : 2096
Join date : 2017-02-03

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Sun May 13, 2018 7:31 am

Lol at Dan's pic. Handsome guy Laughing
Back to top Go down
View user profile
A-Supreme
Admin
avatar

Posts : 616
Join date : 2017-02-07
Age : 31
Location : Funkytown, USA

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Sun May 13, 2018 4:44 pm

#BestZombieEver - I should probably update my photo and get more active on here. I've been sort of avoiding online things lately. I haven't even checked my Facebook direct messages lately... :\ But that zombie was my facebook photo for a while during the Halloween season. Laughing

Kevin and I had an awesome movie night last Friday, so I should talk about how it went. It was his first watch, my rewatch... and to my delight, he liked it and it was one that I recommended to him. I won't spoil the surprise. Stay tuned for tonight, or tomorrow.

Disturbing Behavior was okay, but maybe a bit forgettable? I can't remember much and I gave it a 5/10 originally, even though I like Katie Holmes and James Marsden usually. I've only ever seen it once. It's so UTR compared to most of those flicks that came out in 1998, but I should get around to seeing it again. Ethan Embry was fantastic in Sweet Home Alabama. It's not horror obviously, but he played one of the earliest gay characters I remember from movies, at least outside the teen movie scene, and he was great and relatable. He was RIPPED in The Devil's Candy, the last thing I've seen him in.


I didn't even realize he was in Disturbing Behavior... how many scenes does he have in it, if any? I see he was also in They, but that too was also a bit forgettable for me. I remember Garrett calling me rude for not being a fan of that one. lol

Off topic (kind of, at least not Ethan Embry related)... I think they edited out a character in Sweet Home Alabama too because test audiences thought the character had an affair with Patrick Dempsey's character when that wasn't the intent. I even remember her name - Erin Vanderbilt, which is such an "other woman" kind of name that they should've known better. Not to mention that all her scenes she was crushing on Patrick. Laughing
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.imdb.com/user/ur55248812/
A-Supreme
Admin
avatar

Posts : 616
Join date : 2017-02-07
Age : 31
Location : Funkytown, USA

PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   Mon May 14, 2018 10:53 am

See No Evil 2 (2014)



Since I watched the first one, I decided to take some time on the second one as well. You've got a sequel here that takes place immediately after the first film's events and those sequels are always the best. Halloween II is the gold standard here even though it was far from perfect, and Cold Prey 2 proved that sequels taking place in a hospital can still be awesome. Add to the recipe a cast that consists of Danielle Harris, Katharine Isabelle, and Michael Eklund, all regulars in the horror genre, and you should be guaranteed a fun slasher at least.

Jacob Goodnight has just killed everyone in See No Evil, and then got a brutal takedown himself. He suffered injuries that surely would've killed anyone, but for a man who had maggots crawling out of his scalp in the original, you just know that this bulldog wasn't going to stay put down. All the bodies are transferred to the city morgue to be examined. In true Halloween 2 tradition, the killer rises and starts slicing and dicing his victims in the dark halls of a facility that really shouldn't be this abandoned. Such a huge building, yet only three people are working? That's not even mentioning that one of those employees has the option to leave so she could celebrate her birthday with her friends at the bars. Forget the nightly custodial crew, or even guards. I guess that Michael Eklund's character was somewhat of a nightly man-in-charge (not sure what his true role was tbh), but he's in a wheelchair so you can imagine how that works out. Still, for a news headline as huge as a mass murderer making mincemeat of nine victims at a defunct building, I imagine this would be pretty huge news that would warrant more guards, staffing, and reporters to make their presence known. Yet, I don't even think there was a single cop present the whole movie and no one existed in this movie beyond Danielle Harris and her friends. These young adults have no problem partying at a morgue which has to be breaking a few rules, but none of them turn a blind eye to locking up their cell phones so no one can call for help when the shit hits the fan. Umm...

I don't dislike clichés much, but they seem oddly out of place as well for a slasher film. You've got your nice guy with glasses who can't bring himself to ask his hot co-worker out, and while she crushes on him, she's focused on her work to the degree that she's willing to give up her birthday celebration to spend it with him and dead bodies. Not because of the urgence of analyzing these dead bodies or anything, but rather because she likes him. Then her friends decide to bring her birthday party to the morgue, and then they proceed to drink and have sex in all the wrong places. The characterization would be fitting for a Hallmark special if it wasn't for the fact that it was taking place in a slasher film, so it feels weird and lazy in all reality. I can't believe someone would ever have friends who would love them this much to celebrate a birthday in a creepy morgue, but that's what we have to work with here.

I am a fan of Michael Eklund. He was one of the best parts of The Divide and The Call, yet unfortunately he was fairly wasted here and nothing more than a mere body count number. Katharine Isabelle pretty much steals the show with her slutty airheaded character - I compare her character most to Jennifer Jolie in Scream 3 and she's definitely a highlight here just as Jennifer was a highlight in her movie. Danielle Harris isn't particularly choosy in her roles (most horror alums aren't really), but she does the final girl role well when she's in the right movie. She was great as Marybeth in Hatchet 2 and Hatchet 3 (especially the former). Even though I somewhat dreaded the predictability of her being the last one left to take down the killer, I was looking forward to her rising to badass status again especially since this film took place in the years following kickass Erin in You're Next.

Spoiler:
 

I think even the gore factor was fairly light here, which is sort of a catch-22. On one hand, the 2000s had such nasty gore that it sort of took away from the suspense. See No Evil's contribution to the ultra gory 2000s decade was the constant eye-gouging, which wasn't pleasant but at least it made the deaths memorable. The machete to the guts, slashed throats, and head crushings just feel so light here by comparison, but these are the kind of deaths that feel throwback to the 80s. But keep in mind that this movie takes place after the first movie (same night), so why the sudden change in Jacob Goodnight's M.O.? People who don't watch these films back to back the way I do probably wouldn't notice things like this, but I'm a stickler for details. Jacob shouldn't have felt like he was growing lazy in his old age here... again, same night and all. Consistency is important. Hell, I even noticed that the eye he lost in the first one switched from time to time depending on the scene.

I've talked enough about this one, and I feel bad for complaining so much about it because it is a glossy little flick with a promising cast, but I would be a liar if I said that this wasn't one of my biggest disappointments for 2015, mostly because it should've been SO much better. It's not like See No Evil was the best thing ever, but it was a slice of mean-spirited fun that was a product of its time that sort of set the ground rules for its killer. This one tried too hard to follow-up while reinventing the rules to suit its needs. Unfortunately, it threw logic and consistency out the window and banked too much on for its *shocking* twist that is not really surprising for any true slasher enthusiast. Still, it's worth watching to see Katharine Isabelle's floozy performance. 5/10
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.imdb.com/user/ur55248812/
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Dan's Rewatch Reviews   

Back to top Go down
 
Dan's Rewatch Reviews
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Doctor Who 5" Figure Reviews
» Cox Engine Tests/reviews ONLY
» Original Reviews: London (1986); Broadway (1988)
» New Author Book Reviews
» I Had Amazon Remove 2 Malicious Reviews

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Forum for the IMDb Games community :: Other :: Horror-
Jump to: