Halloweed

2016

Comedy / Horror / Thriller

3
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 36%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled 36%
IMDb Rating 3.7/10 10 763 763

Director

LazRael Lison Photo
LazRael Lison

Top cast

Jim O'Heir Photo
Jim O'Heir as Mayor Price
Danny Trejo Photo
Danny Trejo as Patch
Vince Corazza Photo
Vince Corazza as Zach
Robert Craighead Photo
Robert Craighead as Lloyd
720p.WEB 1080p.WEB
934.08 MB
1280*538
English 2.0
NR
Subtitles us  
23.976 fps
1 hr 41 min
Seeds 1
1.69 GB
1920*808
English 2.0
NR
Subtitles us  
23.976 fps
1 hr 41 min
Seeds 1

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by joeycanto 5 / 10

Decent pass at a 80s horror spoof with a couple of glaring flaws

I went into this film thinking it was a horror film mainly because of the poster which is misleading and a very poor choice for this type of film. Real horror fans will not like this film. This is a Halloween comedic horror spoof film, like something from the 80s which is actually pretty cool. There are definitely some issues with this movie but I'm gonna start with the positives. The writing seems solid, although I don't know that the director properly executed it. Some of the jokes really land and some seem a bit dated. The editor didn't do the script any favors either, some of the scenes seem rushed and others seem to drag on and the opening animation is way too long. The cast, for the most part, is the highlight of this film. The story follows the two leads, half brothers Trent and Joey. The main lead (Shannon Brown) is a sad, kinda pathetic everyday regular type of guy, Trent, who just can't seem to catch a break. Brown has emerged over the last couple of years, this is actually the 4th film that I've seen him in. There is a genuine, honest and raw component to his acting, which is very appealing. I've seen him play a variety of different characters in other projects, he's certainly someone to keep an eye on. With that said, I think he would have been smart to pass on this one. His comedic timing is certainly sharp and he does a fine job of carrying the film, but I don't think his character was really all that challenging, especially compared to other roles I've seen him nail in the past. The other lead, Joey, is Trent's half wit, half brother played by Simon Rex. It has been quite a while since I've seen Rex in a film and it was worth the wait. This role was perfect for him and he really did a bang up job of bringing his character to life in a unique twisted way. The penis jokes, closet homosexual humor and overall goofball antics were embraced and flawlessly executed by Rex. The chemistry between the two brothers as leads was definitely on point, it was the highlight of the entire movie. I look forward to seeing both of these guys in their upcoming work. The supporting cast was strong, very strong for the most part. My main reason for picking up this film is my obsession with the genius that is Ray Wise. I've seen everything he's ever done and was not about to make this film the exception. Although I wish his role was bigger, Mr. Wise was great to no one's surprise I'm sure. The casting director really hit a home run on this one, the leads were great and so was the supporting cast, for the most part. Tom Sizemore, Jason Mewes, Wise, Jim O'Heir, Robert Craighead were all perfectly cast. Even Danny Trejo was great, although it seems like he is in every indie film out right now. I don't know if he owes some money or if his agent has incriminating black mail junk on him, but the poor guy has to learn the phrase "No thanks, I'll pass". The two hapless cops played by Lester Speight and Deja Dee were fantastic, perhaps my favorites among this strong supporting cast.Unfortunately there were a couple of "wtf happened here" moments regarding the supporting cast. Connor, played by Jason Bernard, is just bad. Imagine if E did a "Where are they now" on a Ken doll 30 years later and those 30 years were not kind at all. An overweight, plastic looking blob, with a horrible dye job that sounds like he is talking with a mouth full of marbles. I was a bit perplexed by this mis step by an otherwise brilliant casting director. So I did a little digging on IMDb and figured it out rather quickly. Bernard is the owner of the production company responsible for this film, so he clearly just cast himself in this role and the director and casting director had no choice. Digging a little more I noticed his "known for" on IMDb, a crappy webseries, Family Values, that appears to have been shot on a VHS camcorder. Another self funded project by his production company, JR productions. This misfortune of a project also stars his friend, Michelle Mueller who just happens to play the hero's love interest in Halloweed. Then it all clicked, we've seen this tactic before. Bernard is attempting to buy an acting resume for him and his friend, Mueller, as both of their resumes consist of self funded garbage. This has been tried many, many times before and it never, ever works. When we see these two on screen we are instantly taken out of the story and the film goes off the rails. Mueller is simply not attractive enough to play the lead's love interest that allegedly motivates him to move to a whole new town. Although her acting is not nearly as horrible as Bernard's, it's still not strong enough to compensate for her run of the mill, bland look. Normally I would never be so shallow in my criticism, but the type of genre of film that Halloweed represents requires a little more eye candy, especially if the actress is playing your hero's love interest. You are not doing yourself a favor as a producer and funder when you force yourself and your underwhelming friend into the supporting cast of your own movie, a great way to burn a few hundred thousand. Sorry for the rant, but that type of crap drives me nuts, it's a slap in the face to real, hardworking talented actors and filmmakers. Halloweed would have greatly benefited from a more experienced comedic director/post team, as well as a producer that wasn't trying to buy an acting career for himself and his friend.
Reviewed by pdlussier1 4 / 10

Halloweed: Love or Hate - It's a Whole Bunch of Things

A film marketed as a comedy by putting so much focus on its pot-headedness usually screams out the type of audience it targets: most teens and perpetual adolescents, spilling out to include the non-artistically-driven permanent potheads. This one's no exception, while it also tries to rope in none-of-the-above slasher fans who've come to accept that comedy is as agreeable as blood to the genre, it's attitude and the kills that define a slasher. So, that title, "Halloweed", and the cover art… Thinking "Halloween" spoof is normal, just dead wrong. If you're part of the first group: It's set up to please from the get go; just a question of taste whether or not you love it. For the potheads: Depends on what you're smoking, I suppose, but know that pot is hardly a part of the story the marketing leads on. You won't find Cheech or Chong. If you're in the last group: Nothing to satisfy you here; nothing matching the intelligence of "Behind the mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon" or the slapstick silliness of "Tucker & Dale vs Evil" though it does match its crassness and actually has a musically-denoted Benny Hill moment. Murder is part of the story, and it's handled in classic slasher fashion, this time sporting a baby-head mask, but the scenes are few and killing is just one of those things, like too many, that float in the background but never really seem to be a part of the plot, much like a "Scary Movie" spoof but, again, not.No 80s nostalgia here, itself refreshing, and yet I was reminded of 80s fare by the generically unsophisticated absurd-is-normal plot developments, tropes, and resolution that were a hallmark of that period, right down to the caricatured baddies and the foul elderly semi- sidekick. If you were around, you'll know what I mean. The first ten seconds past the titles establishes the vulgar humour to come, and, certainly, the mindless jokes are there and even set the pace for much of the first third but, surprisingly, never delves close to the level of gross or childish one would expect, minus one anal-cavity search. Thankfully, it manages to rise above and out of the toilet crassness after a while, offering a more pleasant level of humour that arises out of the whole rather than isolated jokes, but which never really hits the gut for anyone hoping for mature humour. Nonetheless, you're starting to care.. And that's when it strikes you: it's more enjoyable because it focuses primarily on Shannon Brown's more sympathetic Trent Modine and it's been a while since the juvenile pot- & penis-obsessed Joey (played by Simon Rex) was on screen. A rewrite that excludes this character would be easy but I'm certain fans will disagree, for, after all, there's no "teen" or "pothead" humour without him. There's also a meta attempt that weakly rears its head at times but is so unbalanced and flat it stands out as lazy writing that adds nothing.From what I've mentioned you may have deduced its biggest problem: It's highly uneven. In tone, in comedic approach, in structure, in focus, techniques, sound integration, and the plot is a patchwork of divergent elements with minimal significance to the running narrative or interwoven conflicts that never peak to any importance. The bigger-name stars have no real screen significance, cast simply in minor roles that don't, arguably, qualify as cameos. And pot or Halloween are hardly prominent, same for the gang/turf-war aspect or the slasher element or the serial-killer-dad past or the mayoral race or the love hurdle or… and are brothers brothers or the bad guys such bad guys once you get to know them?Surprisingly, it all comes together; things happen and life is composed of a whole bunch of elements, some that matter more than others, sometimes not… such is life. In that sense, I honestly see no wrong with the story's direction as it is consistent throughout, often avoiding the expected in the process. However, albeit the palatable layer that emerges, it fails to satisfy fully since, through the fog of sporadic variation it thinly coats or lumps over it, it's all too clear, title & marketing included, that the makers were more focused on trying to please as many as possible, not trying to tell a good story in a unique way. An art-house exploration of "spoof" this ain't! That said, any reviews preaching either extreme says more about the reviewer than the film. Where in the spectrum of mediocrity you place it is up to you.
Reviewed by jackmeat 5 / 10

Toke 'em if you got 'em

My quick rating - 4,5/10. I cannot believe it took this long for this title to be used for a movie. Anyway, 2 stoners leave town and move so the main lead (name doesn't matter, you will never see him again) can escape living in the shadow of his serial killer father after his execution. The bright notion is after viewing an infomercial about the loneliest place around, they decide to move there. There is a romantic angle, and a mysterious killer on the loose as well to attempt a plot. The movie is much more comedy and never really bothers to focus on the murders. There is much saving to earn any points and this is easily done by the friend in the movie who is completely hilarious in his effort to convince people he is not gay. It is worth watching strictly for that and is the only reason I am keeping it. Oh, did I mention that these two morons have to mainline pot to survive? And the town they move to happens to survive by living on weed as well. The entire town seem to be potheads conveniently. Grab your 5 footer and toke up, I would assume the movie will be damn funny if you are high.
Read more IMDb reviews

No comments yet

Be the first to leave a comment