See No Evil (2006) Reviews

• Good for it's genre

  wrudd2006-05-22

  As far as mad stalker/Friday the 13th/Halloween type movies go I think it was effective. Kane makes a good "monster". The cast of unknowns seems to try reasonable hard. There were some gross-out gory parts, some effect atmosphere, some unexpected ways of getting killed, and for me anyway a surprise in some of the twists. It's a B-movie but in that context it works for me. The theater was full and the crowd seemed to get into it. If you want to see a "maniac versus a group of teen agers" movie this is a good one to see. The set up for the villain is effective and they actually did a good job in explaining how he got as messed up as he did. Actually by the end of the movie you get enough flash backs that you think he was twisted into shape and not just born evil ala Freddy or Jason.

  More

• Classic Slasher - Kane is Great!!

  gigioiaderosa2006-08-02

  When I heard about Kane being involved in an horror movie playing -surprise surprise- the "badass", I was extremely excited. I mean, he's huge and - let's say it- he's ugly. And also the character himself "Kane" is very dark and interesting (The athlete behind Kane-character is named Glen Jacobs). When I've seen, at the cinema, the logo "WWE" and Mr. MacMahon as the executive producer, I had my creeps. I said "these money freaks are messing with my movie genre". Fortunately, they aren't. This movie is pretty much a slasher, not so different from Friday 13, and it's about Jacob Goodnight, the killer, obsessed by sins and the eradication of them in the most radical way.This character is crafted in a very realistic way. All of his obsessions belong to his mother, which is obsessed as well by sins and by the holy scriptures. This mother creates, with a certain satisfaction, a monster, which has her same ideas and, more important, the proper physicality to "do his job". And he will "perform his opera" on a group of people, convicts working in an abandoned hotel, which reveals to be a trap for these "sinners". And, I'm afraid, the plot ends here. Should follow a description of some scenes, but, you know, I don't want to be boring; anyway, I trust you get what kind of movie this is. Now, the style is very modern, sometimes it resembles a video clip for a hip hop single. There are no boring points, but, being a slasher, there are a lot of strong violence scenes, and the whole movie it's a crescendo for the final challenge.Which is, like, 3 to 1, in terms of number, but Kane has the body he has. . . well it was some 3 vs 3, OK? The actors are "kinda" OK. There isn' t a lot to recite, except: a sex scene, a nude scene, and a lot of vulgarities, spoken and suggested. And the respective deaths, of course. Kane has been a surprise!! I expected a giant grunting all the time with an horrible expression (the same he has when he fights), and he actually was. But when talking to the "lovely mum" . . .more than a serial killer, seemed to be Forrest Gump! He has this mutable expression, at the end of the movie, which left me completely breathless. OK, he isn't Micheal Gambon, but . . . you see he's putting a lot more than his 6' 8 . . and that's something!! All in all, a movie that is entirely shot on the charisma of Kane, and that's why it works. This movie isn't "the next big thing" for the slashers, but it's way better than the latter 5 "Friday 13" and the latter 5 "A Nightmare on Elm Street" as well. Note for music lovers: the soundtrack SUCKS a load!! This movie has the same problem of all the slashers in the 90s. No evolution. It is what it is. If you like people being killed by a brutish guy with some serious mental problems, fine. If you don't. . . what are you doing here?

  More

• A decent gore flick

  mrtacoman2006-05-20

  I was expecting this movie to suck, but what I got was a pretty good slasher/gore film. Most of the death scenes are adequately brutal. The teens are decent, with Penny McNamee definitely the best of the bunch. Rachael Taylor looks like a young Christie Brinkley, but doesn't bring much to the movie other than that. Kane was good as the killer, and is totally believable as a fearsome juggernaut. I saw the "twist" coming from miles away, but I still enjoyed the movie. But what really stood out to me was the direction. Gregory Dark might actually have a career in legit film ahead of him. Aside from overusing the horror film "speed cam"(you know, where like the guy's face shakes all fast?), there's some good shots here. The camera angles and environments really emphasize Kane's size, making him look even bigger than he actually is. If you're looking for deep story or characters, this ain't it. But that's not what slasher films are about. If you're looking for some good violence, or if you're into gory films, go check this out!

  More

• I just saw it and...

  sandman332006-05-21

  I remember way back when I was a manager at Toys R Us I had to watch this sad, pathetic "Personnel Management" training video. It lectured that whenever you say a criticism, you should ALSO include a compliment. This movie reminded me of that principal. First off, it's not all that bad, actually. Kane makes a pretty good "Silent Psycho," and the character's back story is decently developed in a series of B&W flashbacks. His POV shots are nicely distorted, and, unlike the vast majority of psycho killers in film today, is not simply an "unstoppable force." Kane actually manages to find a character in there. (A very minimal character, to be sure, but there is a TINY bit there more than just a "Thing-That-Kills-People-For-No-Reason.") On the whole, however, the acting in the film is best described as "not-TOTALY-sucking." (I'm reminded of that Simpsons episode where Groundskeeper Willie sings a song that goes "Wouldn't it be adequate?" Yes, the acting here is, indeed, adequate, but only just. To be fair the actors aren't really being asked to act here, it's enough that they are clichéd stereotypes.) The art direction is generally good, if very, very derivative of other films like "Hostel" and the "Saw" series. It goes a bit over the top with the filth and grime at times, but for this kind of movie, that isn't really a problem from an aesthetic standpoint. It is a problem from a plot standpoint. The people are there (we learn this in the first 10 minutes, so don't worry, it isn't a spoiler) to do public service by cleaning an old, historic building. Unfortunately, the sheer SCALE of the mess at this building would take that guy from "Dirty Jobs" and a full hazmat crew a month to deal with. The place is practically a toxic waste dump. There are a few problems (which I will NOT detail in the interest of avoiding spoilers) with the set and set dressing that are later revealed as not problems at all, but rather plot points. Those I can forgive. The film delivers on what it promises: A creepy, disgusting setting with a creepy, violent psycho stalking creepy, dysfunctional people, with absolutely minimal story, plot, acting, direction, sense, or purpose to get in the way. It's almost Ed-Woodian in it's gleeful disregard of knowledge of it's own lack of ambition to greatness. (If I may be allowed to construct a sentence that convoluted without being arrested by the Language Police.) I had very few expectations from this film (Hell, after all, it IS a WWE film...), and the only thing that really disappointed me is the same thing I am disappointed by in most horror films. It was very, very predictable. At one point I was sitting there going, "...and now someone runs in and saves them," only to be rewarded by just that. In the end, if you can accept the idea that a correctional institute would send a co-ed group of mixed violent and non-violent offenders to do heavy-duty industrial cleanup in street clothes and sandals for a weekend with only 2 chaperons, then nothing else the film asks you to accept will be much of a problem for you.

  More

• Good, B-movie Fun

  Daelock2006-05-19

  This, ladies and gentlemen, is truly a modern B-movie. The dialog is stilted and delivered with wooden rigidity, the premise is predictable (there are a few decent twists) and characters remain 2D for most of it. And yet there is a certain...charm. WWE wrestler Kane brings to life the sick, twisted monster of a man with a lot of pathos (though it is somewhat like his character that he's been playing around ten years) and so I'll find it quite amusing when people say it's "not much of a reach for him," but Glen Jacobs is, apparently, quite the nice guy, so actually it is. In any event, he's cast perfectly as the hulking brute and the deaths are suitably over the top (Jason would be proud), but I heard at least four applause breaks for four different kills scenes. Frankly go into this movie thinking that you'll have some fun and a gorefest, oh it is QUITE the gorefest. The R-rating IS richly deserved and I actually got a little nauseous during some of the more graphic times. In any event, a very, very fun, but fairly bad, movie.

  More