Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

Spoonatects Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Michael_Elliott Jack-O (1995) * 1/2 (out of 4) An evil wizard is put to death but before that can happen he places a curse on the town. On Halloween that curse comes true with a Pumpkin Man showing up to take revenge.This movie apparently got made because Fred Olen Ray had footage of John Carradine and Cameron Mitchell that he wanted to be used in a film. Both men were already dead so he told director Steve Latshaw to build a story around that footage and the end result in JACK-O. This is pretty much what you'd expect from a direct-to-video release from the 1990s. There's certainly nothing ground-breaking here but if you're a fan of the slasher genre then you'll still want to check it out.Obviously they were working on a very low-budget here so you have to expect certain technical issues. If you're expecting some sort of high art then you're certainly going into the wrong sort of film. As I said, there's really nothing ground-breaking here and there's no question that this here is a bad movie but it does offer up a little entertainment. Linnea Quigley plays a babysitter here and she also has a wonderful shower sequence where she shows off her body. If you grew up watching these sorts of films then you know who Quigley is and you know what she does best.The film also manages to take unused footage of Carradine and Mitchell so fans of them will enjoy seeing the footage. Neither give Oscar-worthy performances but the footage being included here is what it is. The look of the monster certainly isn't scary but I actually liked the design and thought it was better than what you normally see from movies like this. Again, there's nothing great here so be prepared for what you're getting.

Steve Van Kooten Contains nudity (Linnea Quigley, yum), next to no blood, gratuitous John Carradine. A family curse that has been handed down through the generations targets the youngest of the bloodline when a demon is awoken by a group of delinquents. - - - Talk about cockeyed, this movie switches tones like it's bipolar. What starts out as a low budget, family friendly horror picture suddenly is spiced up with a hard bodied Linnea Quigley and numerous other dubious themes. I'm not really sure who the target audience was for this one, but what passes for entertainment comes from some terrible acting, terrible writing, and an especially cheesy pumpkin monster. There was ample territory to succeed as either a gory slasher or a horror themed kid-vid; however, there the mixture here doesn't work. There's some nice work behind the scenes including Latshaw's direction (it looks some what professional)and some solid effects, but that just makes it even more grating when you realize it all went into a movie that wasn't worth it.*1/2 out of 4

TheTallMan666 This thing, it shouldn't be called a film, is almost worse than "Manos", but you just have to see it it's hilarious. If you see it at video store rent it, if you see the 10th anniversary edition, yes there is a special edition, for under $10 buy it, if your friend has it borrow it, you just have to see this. The acting is so bad, and the gore is is so fake. After viewing this you'll be asking yourself why did they make this insult of the art of film? That's assuming your face doesn't melt off like the Nazis's in "Raiders" . If you manage to see this, be sure to vote this movie as 1 (awful) so it can make the bottom 100, it really deserves a spot there. I'm surprised it's not number 1, right now.

Lady-of-Rohan Am I being sacrilegious for watching such an awful movie on Easter weekend? This weekend is used to reflect and celebrate the joys of our lives with the spirit of rebirth. And believe me, this movie couldn't have killed that spirit more. To save you from being bored silly with the plot, let's just go straight to the check list:-Awful plot. Check! The story layout appeals to a Friday night flick fan but has about as much emotional depth as dinner theatre. The film is disastrously long and dull. About 30% of the film is designated to Sean Kelly's dream sequences (don't ask), 25% to introducing people who have no effect on the plot, 15% to Sean's dad's haunted mansion, 10% to trick-or-treating with kids no one knows who the heck they are, another 10% to some moron, his girlfriend, and his Harley, and a remaining grand total of 5% to Jack-o. The remaining 5% is reserved for shots of nudity, storm clouds, and people talking about food. -Totally non-frightening antagonist. Check! I've screamed more in an episode of Murphy Brown than this. Jack-o himself is about as lame as a duck with one leg in front of a pack of hungry wolves. He kills a few but there are absolutely no tense and heart racing chase sequences, no real climax. His overall presence lacks fright and bite, something that Freddy Krueger in "Elm Street", Jason Vorhees in "Friday the 13th", and Ben Affleck in "Gigli" all achieved. -Awful F/X. Check! Normally in a standard slasher flick, a victim to the creature's blade will be shown being gutted in all it's bloody, disgusting glory. But of course we don't see this happen. That would require effort, something the crew of this film wern't ready to commit. However, they were generous enough to buy fire crackers and glue them to a crucifix and set it alight. Somebody call the KKK. This self-lighting cross idea could really takeoff.-Awful acting. Check! The boy who plays Sean Kelly is horrendous. At times, it seems like the director slipped him a sleeping pill just before shooting. This kid just mumbles out his lines with no care in the world. The director obviously could not give a damn whether the boy's acting was up to any kind of par. Ironically, the young actor is the directors son! That's nepotism is it's purest form, folks!-Obligatory shower girl. Check! I think no further comment is necessary.-Various other scenes of obligatory nudity. Check! (see above)All in all, Jack-o deserves a few points for making such a disaster and fooling some poor film company into distributing it. Other than that, this film deserves to be dead and buried, much like Jack-o himself.