Lets see, where do I start with the movie Scarred ....hmm the plot is pretty straight forward, lovely young models go a photo shoot in a beautiful country setting. The only problem with the shoot's locations is that it is near the abandoned land of the Kandie family. The Kandie family story is one of a murderous and cruel father who disfigures his son, Jonah, and then kills his wife and himself. According the the Kandie tale, all were assumed dead, but the body of Jonah was never found.

Now you are up to speed on the backstory.

This movie may be considered a slow starter, but at least you have some pretty models to look at until the gore train kicks in. At around the 40 minute mark things start to pick up and the killing begins. The gore is pretty good and should satisfy most of the gore hounds. There are a few gore scenes that are pretty cringe worthy.  It seems that now grown Jonah Kandie has grew to hate pretty people and feels the need to ugly them up. His weapon of choice is a hammer but he also welds the ol' chainsaw a few times, along with other items.

At times the acting is pretty good and at other times totally terrible. The movie fits well into the 80's slasher flick genre. Of course, just like many 80's horror movies, there is nothing ground breaking here. But if you like pretty girls and slasher type movies, it is a decent watch.

What I find funny about this film is that it has grew on me. When I first watched it this morning, I was like "it's decent I guess", but as the day wore on I got to thinking more about some of the scenes and the movie in general and started to think "yeah, it was alright."

There is something else that might appeal to true horror fans. We all remember the original Friday the 13th, and we remember at the end a young Jason Voorhees splashes up out of the water and grabs the girl in the canoe. The actor who played that very first young Jason (Ari Lehman) is in Scarred. I didn't realize who it was at the time but his character was one that stood out to me, so it was cool to discovery who he was.

In the end, the movie is nothing new but it should have some appeal to those who like 80's style horror flicks. Make sure to check out the movie website - scarredthemovie.com

 Rating: 2 out of 5 Stars

Thanks
~Tom~
PS - Yes, I know this has nothing to do with Bigfoot and whatnot but it is another hobby of mine. :)





This post by Thomas Marcum, Thomas is the founder/leader of the cryptozoology and paranormal research organization known as The Crypto Crew. Over 20 years experience with research and investigation of unexplained activity, working with video and websites. A trained wild land firefighter and a published photographer, and poet



This post sponsored in part by

Read More

I've had this movie sitting on my shelve for several months now, I've been somewhat reluctant to watch it. That reluctance changed after all our local services, including TV, went out and stayed out for several hours. 
The movie is based on Seth Grahame-Smith's book of the same title and Tim Burton was one of the producers of the film.

The movie combines the historical figure Abraham Lincoln and the legend of Vampires. The film portrays Lincoln as having a secret life as a vampire hunter driven by revenge. This revenge factor starts when Lincoln, as a young boy, witnesses a man kill his mother. The film also deals with historical events that took place during Lincoln's lifetime, namely slavery and the civil war. It manages to blend all these elements together and tie them to the vampire hunting plot.

While watching the film I was really impressed with the fight scenes and the overall telling of the story. In my opinion the movie was very well written and  thought out. Even though the vampires are central to the film, you still get a lot of Lincoln and his political raise to becoming president. There is also some romantically elements in the film that add value to the story.

As for the vampires, there is plenty of blood and frightening scenes to make the horror buffs happy. Action fans will find the fight scenes with Lincoln wielding his silver coated ax a blast. Chopping off heads and limbs of his vampire opponents. The over head shots of the civil war battles are great as well, with cannon balls blowing up earth and men.

I had a good time watching this movie, it was a pleasant surprise. It was nice to follow Lincoln from a young child all the way up to being President. The movie is probably unlike anything you have seen before, but don't let that keep you from giving it a try.

Rating: 5 out of 5 Stars - Watch it!

Thanks
~Tom~






This post sponsored in part by

Read More

Roger Patterson's Film - Under the Gun

By TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher
Professional Writer, a nature and wildlife enthusiast who has written for many magazines. Get Dorraine's book The Book Of Blackthorne!




I’m a bigfoot believer. So when I was recently given a copy of "Hoax Of The Century – The Movie by a friend who is also a bigfoot believer, I thought seriously about NOT watching it. This movie attempts to refute the validity of the famous Patterson-Gimlin film. How ridiculous is that, I thought? Everyone knows that film is real. Right? But then I had to ask myself why I didn’t want to watch the documentary.

The Patterson-Gimlin film, the one bigfoot film that nearly everyone is familiar with, is the considered The Holy Grail of bigfoot evidence. It’s the one most in the bigfoot community believe to be the real and true film footage. It sets the standard for the appearance of this creature that nearly every bigfoot researcher uses to determine the validity of sightings reports and other video footage to this day. How many times have we heard a report and asked the storyteller, "Did it look like Patty? Did it look like the creature in the Patterson-Gimlin film?" Patty, as she is well-known, is considered the one real bigfoot that we use for our frame of reference. She’s been analyzed by National Geographic. She had to be real. Right?

This documentary, not currently available on Amazon, and now sold almost exclusively on Tom Biscardi’s website, a product of Grendel Films is about an hour long, written by Tom Biscardi, and produced by Tom Biscardi and videographer, John L. Johnsen, and goes about the task of following the investigation of Greg Long, author of The Making of Bigfoot, in a very detailed account of how they believe the film was hoaxed.

It asks the question rarely asked before. Why has so much emphasis been placed on this film and none on the maker of the film? It attacks the less-than-stellar reputation of Roger Patterson himself, a man who was described by many around him as often unemployed, often broke, and looking for ways to make a fast buck. A man who was once arrested for failing to return a camera he had borrowed from a local camera shop; a man who was known to have associated with Ray Wallace, the famous Washington State footprint hoaxer.

It claims that Patterson borrowed money from several individuals to make the film, including a lady named Vilma Radford, interviewed in the movie and now deceased, that loaned him $700.00 with the promise that profits from the film would pay her interest above and beyond that amount. Even though Radford typed up a legal contract for both parties to sign, (a document that was revealed in the documentary) and after she was warned by others not to loan Patterson the money. And incidentally, she attested to the fact that she was never repaid.

But there were a couple of things in the film that were very interesting to me personally.

A man named Bob Heironimus claims to have worn the suit that Philip Morris, a Hollywood costume designer, claimed to have designed as a gorilla suit and claimed was modified by Patterson. Heironimus claims he did the "performance" for Patterson for $1000.00, and tells his account of how the events unfolded that day in 1967. But the most interesting part of his story is his demonstration of the "Patty walk." Heironimus is seen in the documentary walking across his yard to a shed, and his normal walk is strikingly similar to Patty’s walk in the film. Striking enough to make you go "Hmmm!"

And the second thing is that I’ve always questioned why, if it was a hoax, would Patterson choose to make this creature a female? And, as the movie claims, Roger had early associations with famous pioneering researcher/author John Green from Canada. Green had collected a lot of information about bigfoot to which Patterson would have had access. This would include the very detailed, historic account of William Roe with a female bigfoot back in 1955 near Jasper, Alberta, Canada. After his encounter, Roe presented a drawing that bears an eerie resemblance to subject in the PG film. Did Patterson use Roe’s drawing to fashion a female bigfoot costume? Or was Patty real because she resembled Roe’s description? The documentary claims that Roe’s visual account could have easily been used by Patterson to refashion his gorilla suit into something more realistic.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg of what this documentary has to say. Every other argument we’ve ever made about the film being real is challenged here. Right down to the last detail. From the walk, to the elbow break, to the eye movement, etc. And it claims the PG film was embraced by the big name researchers at the time who knew that this "proof" of bigfoot could strengthen their own claims about the subject. It claims that the main motivating factor of all these key players in the bigfoot world choosing to believe Patterson’s claims was to make money.

John L. Johnsen’s collaboration with Tom Biscardi, a reputed hoaxer, would drive many to dismiss the film altogether. Could it be a complete fabrication by one accused of hoaxing himself? Absolutely. But, to be fair, it has an equal chance of being accurate and real based on the real witness interviews that are very detailed and backed up by others in Patterson’s hometown of Yakima, Washington.

But everything else aside, this documentary is well presented and thought provoking, and very thorough in the case it makes, whether you believe it or not. And it warrants a watch from any and all skeptics or anyone wanting to be well-rounded and objective about the subject of bigfoot.

And as I hesitated to watch it, and I didn’t like the story it had to tell, I knew I needed to keep some things in mind.

If the PG film was actually faked, what impact does that have on the community, and on bigfoot? What film evidence do we really have if not that? I have to admit it shook me a little to think about it. I felt for a minute like the very foundation of my beliefs was being stolen. But it’s important to remember that if the PG film is proved to be fake beyond a shadow of a doubt, that doesn’t prove in any way that bigfoot doesn’t exist. Far from it, because it doesn’t negate all the evidence that’s been collected by researchers over all these years and all their hard work in trying to find proof. All that work is completely relevant and important and it still stands up. Nothing can take that away.

But if you have a natural curiosity about this subject and you want to be very thorough in your bigfoot research, I recommend this film highly. You don’t have to like it. And you don’t have to agree with it. It’s just another side of the story. And, no matter what you end up thinking, it’s always good to hear the other side.
Rating: 5 out of 5
********DF
[ DF's Interview with Videographer John L. Johnsen can be found HERE ]





This post sponsored in part by

Read More

This movie dives into the phenomenon of SUNDS (Sudden Unexplained Nocturnal Death Syndrome), which many blame on Shadow People. The movie stars Dallas Roberts from the AMC hit TV show The Walking Dead. Mr. Roberts plays the part of a somewhat down on his luck radio personality just hoping to keep his show on the air. What he gets is a life changing call from a young man named Jeff, who talks about seeing "Shadow People".  Once Charlie Crowe, Roberts character, gets his mind opened to the shadow people and more mysterious deaths occur, a spooky glimpse into the unseen world takes place. The plot thickens again once a CDC agent joins the hunt for a cause of death.

As the movie progresses, Charlie becomes more frazzled and fearful of the shadow people. I found this movie very entertaining and it does a good job creating a creepy atmosphere. According to the storyline Shadow People is based on true events that took place in my corner of the world, Eastern Kentucky. The movie does a excellent job of blending in News footage and what appears to be real world interviews with the real people involved.

While this movie may not appeal to everyone, it does a fine job of  with the subject material. I would suggest you give it a view if you're looking for a creepy supernatural thriller base on some true events.

Watching this movie it brought back a childhood memory of something my dad told. I was about 10-12 years old and early one morning I heard my dad tell my mother how a large dark shadow had came over top of him during the night while sleeping. How it felt like he was smothering and how he said "oh Lord, please No" and the Dark Shadow moved on through the room. He called it "A Death Angle" and later that morning we seen an ambulance at our neighbors house and later found out their
new born, healthy baby had passed away. This was in the same direction the death angle had gone.

So in closing I would just like to say the movie is well done all the way around and well worth watching.
So are Shadow People real? Watch the movie before you answer.
Rating: 3 out of 5

Thanks
~Tom~

This post sponsored in part by

Read More