Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

ryan-10075 Murders start happening in a small Texas town where the heads of the victims are taken. The cops are investigating and Charlie turns out to be suspect # 1. I know that might sound interesting, but this amateurish early 90s horror flick isn't as good as it sounds. As well the sub-par acting brings this down. Not worth your time seeking out this rare horror movie.

katmeer The only way I could ever imagine this thing being finance it by the cast working for free food and board . The acting was the worst and from beginning to the very end there was absolutely not one attractive woman. I mean that's what these movies are famous for right? All was horrible , acting, stunts , such as the spastic in the fire suit. The women looked like waitresses after a double shift and not one could act their way out of a paper bag.The one who probably really paid a high cost was the writer. I have no doubt his career went nowhere poor guy, but that's what happens when you take money you don't deserve. I wonder where all these people are now? With the exception of Larry Sullivan I am sure its not Hollywood .

counterrevolutionary I'm not a big fan of slasher flicks as a genre, but even by the standards of low-low-budget exploitation, this one is really lame. Even on a nudity-and-gore level, it's incredibly boring (there is some of both, but it's all sort of...meh). Before the home video revolution, it might not even have been released theatrically (though it might have; after all, *Plan 9 From Outer Space* played in theaters). There is precisely one good (and competently-delivered) line in the entire movie; I assume they stole it from somewhere.The acting is among the worst I have ever seen. I mean, even Ed Wood had a couple of competent actors, and the rest tended to be ludicrously hammy, which can be fun to watch. Anyway, most of his actors could pretty much pass as literate. Here, those who don't read their lines like cigar-store Indians sound like they learned them phonetically. And this film does have one distinction: it manages to be badly underplotted for most of the movie, then laughably overplotted for the ending.(Update: I should have singled out the actress playing the receptionist as an exception. She is by no means wooden. Not that she's good, but she certainly isn't wooden.)Even the worst slasher flicks are generally good for a few Puritan meditations on their grotesque offensiveness, but with this one, there doesn't even seem to be anything there to work up a moral outrage about.And you know the funniest thing? They clearly expected to make a sequel!It's so bad and boring that it actually becomes fascinating in a weird way. I sat enrapt through much of the video wondering why anyone would go to the bother of making it.

HumanoidOfFlesh I really like slasher movies,but this one is truly awful.The acting is lame,the script is bad,and the atmosphere is non-existent.The plot is as follows:a deformed gardener Charlie Puckett slaughters people in a small American town.That's right-this is the plot.Very original,eh!"The Night Brings Charlie" isn't even gory enough-if the film ain't gonna be scary,at least they should make it bloody.Avoid this cheap piece of trash at all costs.If you want to see some good slasher flicks check out "Madman","The Burning","The Prowler","Just Before Dawn" or "Humongous"- just don't waste your precious time with this worthless piece of garbage.