Kill the Scream Queen

2004
2.1| 1h14m| en| More Info
Released: 01 October 2004 Released
Producted By: Rough Pictures
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

A sadist lures fledgeling actress to his den of horrors, promising them fame if they act in his "snuff film." They realize only after they are tied up that he really means to torture, rape, and kill them for all to see.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Rough Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Greenes Please don't spend money on this.
Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.
Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;
sugarnspiceh03 i love all horror movies, a list to d list....but this was horrible with a capital HORRIBLE! the same CRAP all the way through...no peak, nothing but a bunch of broads naked and this dumb dude "raping" and "humiliating them"...sucked! horrible acting, ugly women, a dude that wasn't nearly as intimidating as he should have been to play the part of a "snuff" movie maker. there was no point to this movie at all. i was super interested to watch this when i read the summary. it sounded good, even though the reviews all said it was horrible, i gave it a chance....it was just as bad and directed and shot the same as "slaughtered vomit dolls"...yet again, sounds gross and scary-my favorite type of scary movie...but it was nothing but a camera moving around an "actor" who had NO point or relevance...no story line what so ever. period. i would never in a million years recommend this to anyone...not even a blind,deaf,mute human would enjoy this movie. sorry folks.
Henry Tjernlund Could easily have been better. In fact maybe so much so that if the filmmaker hadn't tried even as hard as he did, it might have actually been better.On a good note. The lighting was reasonably okay. But pretty much everything else was lacking. Wobbly camera work. (Yeah, yeah, I know, that's supposed to be the style now.) Poorly recorded audio. And editing that looked like someone watched too many Ulli Lommel movies (which are some of the worst edited movies.) To sum it up, the movie seemed to be a rationalization for the director/writer/main-character to get some young women naked, put them in fake bondage, and grope them, while saying "menacing" things.
hocfocprod While I was watching this movie I never thought I'd be defending it. It's honest enough from the begininning about not having much of a plot. There's no real characters to latch onto except the killer. Some of the acting can be better, but most of it is capable.I know, a three out of ten isn't stellar, but there are reviews saying it was shot poorly and completely useless, etc. I think it set out to do what it's supposed to fairly well. The lighting is minimal at times, more natural than most audiences are used to, but it's supposed top look like a camcorder snuff film. In fact, at times the quality is probably still too high to be true to that, but nobody would make it through tne minutes of camera work that's truly that bad.It's not particularly scary, but it is disturbing at times. There are one or two characters who don't come across as believable at all and the soundtrack does get tiring at times, but overall it was put together cleaner than a lot of camcorder movies.
slake09 I'm a big fan of sleaze and horror movies, when you put them together that's my sweet spot: horrible sleaze. You're not going to get it in this film, though.There is certainly sleaze, in the form of girls being kidnapped and tortured, tied naked to various things. The sleaze isn't very sleazy, though. It didn't register very high on my sleaze meter, mainly because none of the girls were in the least attractive, nor did they attempt to act as if they were even threatened. They seemed to be thinking more about what was for lunch, or maybe when they could score some crack.Forget the effects, they were lame in the extreme. The lameness was contributed to by the bad acting; effects are harder to believe when even the actors and actresses aren't buying into them.Cinematography was pretty bad, they could have hired a couple cameramen from a porn movie and done better. In fact, that might have raised the sleaze factor enough to make it enjoyable. As it is, there are a lot of dark shots where you can't see very clearly, and what you can see isn't looking too good.The horror factor is nil. Null. Zero. Nada. Zip. Zilch. I've seen kids movies that were more frightening. There's no camp here, either. It's just a movie that attempts to be shockingly sleazy, but doesn't even come close.