Wordiezett
So much average
Teringer
An Exercise In Nonsense
MoPoshy
Absolutely brilliant
Michael O'Keefe
Another "found footage" movie with a couple of scares in it. Really not all that bad; just a little irritating. But there will be a couple of scenes that get a rise out of you; meaning you'll jump or flinch. A group of amateurish paranormal seekers just for a thrill get more than they ask for. They return to the scene of Richard Speck's heinous slaying of eight young women. Trying to rouse the ghost of the killer, they taunt him by comparing his body count to that of serial killers Dahmer and Gacy. Speck or not...one angry spirit is angered and no member of the investigators is safe.Cast includes: Hayley Derryberry, Tony Besson, Jennifer Robyn Jacobs, Clarence Harlem Jr., Mike Holley and Jackie Moore. Plus the voices of Steve Bencich and Nancy Leopardi.
kasperdyrendal
First off -> DO NOT trust the bad reviews!This is a perfectly good movie! (well, the story has been told so many times, but so what) The story is the usual stuff. The acting is good. The build up is good. The scares are good. The visuals are good. The whole scenery is good. I have no idea why people rate this as bad. Because I can assure you that that is NOT the case!I watch A LOT of movies. I know bad when I see it. I have been wanting to see this movie a lot of times but always ended up seeing one I knew was good because of the bad reviews, but now I just thought "Well - I'll just give it a go." And I am glad I did!The story reminds a lot of Grave Encounters. They lock themselves in a building hoping for to catch a glimpse of a ghost and/or multiple ghosts. I just had to write this review so that people would know that this movies deserves the chance to be watched!Overall I would give this movie 8/10 (they story should have been different since we all know it) but I rated it 10 because it's underrated on IMDb.
TheLittleSongbird
Next to no redeeming qualities at all 100 Ghost Street: The Return of Richard Speck apart from a decent setting and that it's short. The movie looks amateurish, the editing is so slipshod to the point of inducing nausea or a headache and it takes the ghost-story-in-a-haunted-setting to extremities with very dark lighting to the point of some of the goings-on verging on incomprehensible. The special effects at best are risible. The sound is muddied with the music over-bearing and the dialogue and its delivery not always easy to hear, while the writing is so awkwardly delivered with a sense of bad improvisation. With the story, don't expect a documentary-like movie profiling the life and crimes of one of the worst and most sickening mass murder cases there's ever been and the perpetrator Richard Speck, if you want that sort of programme/movie you're better off watching an episode of Deranged Killers. 100 Ghost Street made it clear that it wasn't going to be that kind of movie, even so though that gave the writers no excuse to foul up basic details and facts(like where the crimes happened), another one of countless examples of The Asylum not doing their research, which will confuse anybody who watches and decides to look the Richard Speck case up further. The storytelling is just lazy and predictable, starting off slow and staying slow with a lot of scenes falling into interminably dull category. 100 Ghost Street is short, but with the pace as tedious as it is and that the creepiness, thrill and tension levels are at numbers below zero it sure doesn't feel like it. As for the direction, what direction(?), the characters are completely personality-less and annoying(the antagonist nowhere near sinister enough) and constant shouting and static posing seems to be pretty much all that passes for acting here. All in all, just unwatchably bad and that is scarier than Richard Speck, one of those where human being is insulting to all other humans. 1/10 Bethany Cox
trivium105
The first rule of reviewing 'found footage' horror films is to take them for what they are. So, I review this in the context of the sub-genre only and not in the wider context of film generally.The found footage genre is massively over-saturated with poor quality films. When done right, these films are fantastically scary (Blair Witch etc). I have watched over 30 of these films and, bearing in mind this film is only a year old, my only reaction is 'why was this film even made?'. It offers absolutely nothing new whatsoever, and trots out the same clichés as most other of these films (scary abandoned property, investigated at night, shaky camera work, annoying characters etc etc). Although it is no worse than many other found footage films, those other films came first and so it is up to newer films to expand on and develop the genre - this film totally fails to do that. The one positive for me was that I thought the acting was a lot better than usual. I'm not talking about great acting as such, just appropriate acting for this type of film. Yet another poor addition to the pool, for die-hard found footage fans only, and even those people will wonder why they bothered watching.
