Alicia I love this movie so much

TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Mehdi Hoffman There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

carley anne What the f*ck did I just watch? Evil Dead, The Shining, and The Exorcist all mashed into one horrible movie probably filmed by 7th grade children. Almost as bad as Skeleton Man. I just... I... Please don't watch this. Help me dear lord. How come every time one of them screamed, it was like, 10 seconds after something 'bad' happened to them? O_o I suppose I should've realized how bad this movie would be when they show an extreme and painfully silent close up of a wandering-eyed man in the beginning... After that, it seemed like the darn actors themselves could barely hold back laughter at how poorly the script was.

charlytully Okay, apologies to Chuck. The "killer" in WAGES OF SIN--styled variously as "The Preacher," "Grandpa," "Reverend Walker"--has simplified the basic tenets of salvation per Martin Luther or John Calvin. All one must do to be "saved" is to let the holy man hack you to pieces with an ax and then eat your remains (minus Hannibal Lector's "fava beans and chianti"). This film is so low-budget that the Preacher would be hard-pressed to come up with even Hamburger Helper or Velveeta.One must wonder about the commentators raving over the merits of this lame flick. When a Billy Graham-clone is exhorting his nine-year-old daughter to eat Mommy for dinner while "Jesus Loves Me This I Know" plays in the background, at least make the sacrilege as eye-popping as DOGMA--or even STIGMATA! Why be damned for 30 pieces of lead?

jezmo_uk Don't tackle a subject or genre such as this with no budget...a valiant effort maybe, but to expect people to watch it? Nah. Would love to know how many drafts the script went through...my guess is none, its shocking. But the director DOES have a pretty good (if very slow) eye, and my guess is some of the actors sensed a weak story and over acted in a bid to compensate. It is VERY difficult to make a convincing horror when you have absolutely no funds to pull it off. Mike Watt does, but he doesn't take himself, or his movies, too seriously, and thats why people love him. As a result, the make ups are lousy, the script is SUPER lousy, and you can tell they had no choice but to cop out of some key scenes which would have made the movie a lot better. I agree with one reviewer, Ashlie Clark is beautiful,can scream her ass off, and is the ONLY reason I give it as much as three stars.

zootie I normally don’t comment, and leave movies be. As bad as some movies are, they at least deserve points for being done, for achieving existence.Since no one else has commented, I thought it deserved some words (if only to warn other visitors). This movie does achieve existence, but it seems little more than an acting class project, and these students have a long way to go. Acting is bad, and in the few instances when the story might actually go somewhere, the moment is spoiled by the actors’ reaction. The story starts OK (a bit slow), and looked interesting enough (for when in the mood for a a young-adults thriller/supernatural/slasher), but from there it just goes everywhere. It jumps from psychosis to psychopath to zombie/possession, supernatural thriller, bible fanaticism, and ghost story without building up much suspense or sympathy for the characters, just a stream of scenes w/o enough coherence to tell a complete story (continuity gets worse over time, spoiling the dream/clairvoyant sequences all packed together). Photography and production seemed adequate (professional enough) for most of the film, it just fails to tell a story, and gets lost in all the formulas and clichés it uses. Acting and production get progressively worse, and it falls apart at the end.