Lizzie Reviews

  • Apr 20, 2019

    One of the worst movies I've seen in a while. I had no idea what was going on until I looked up what it was supposed to be about, the same 3 things happened the entire movie: a lot of drinking, a lot of strange noises, and Lizzie calling out her boyfriend's name. There was no sense of pacing and my favorite part was probably the 2 second, unprompted smash cut of Lizzie's boyfriend cheating on her for absolutely no reason. I have a lot of questions and truly feel like this was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Save yourself the time and watch It, or something.

    One of the worst movies I've seen in a while. I had no idea what was going on until I looked up what it was supposed to be about, the same 3 things happened the entire movie: a lot of drinking, a lot of strange noises, and Lizzie calling out her boyfriend's name. There was no sense of pacing and my favorite part was probably the 2 second, unprompted smash cut of Lizzie's boyfriend cheating on her for absolutely no reason. I have a lot of questions and truly feel like this was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Save yourself the time and watch It, or something.

  • Nov 10, 2014

    Not even the dad from Psych could save this movie. Thanks for a crummy suggestion Max from Netflix.

    Not even the dad from Psych could save this movie. Thanks for a crummy suggestion Max from Netflix.

  • Jul 23, 2014

    Hmmmm... What can you say about this? I fast forwarded through most of it.... I think this was some high school kid's video project.

    Hmmmm... What can you say about this? I fast forwarded through most of it.... I think this was some high school kid's video project.

  • Feb 04, 2014

    Not really much to say about this movie. The acting was terrible enough said there. The story was interesting and the horror part I guess was good? The "girl in little amount of clothing" thing is kind of unnecessary. Just your normal trashy horrid horror film. D

    Not really much to say about this movie. The acting was terrible enough said there. The story was interesting and the horror part I guess was good? The "girl in little amount of clothing" thing is kind of unnecessary. Just your normal trashy horrid horror film. D

  • Jan 29, 2014

    didnt make sense was poor on portraying the actual history. Not scary.

    didnt make sense was poor on portraying the actual history. Not scary.

  • Jan 25, 2014

    only because there is no -1!

    only because there is no -1!

  • Dec 10, 2013

    it has a Stupid Plot, Based on something Famous for Popularity I guess, bad acting, and it was just terrible I got through about 15 minutes of it and got so bored I had to stop watching.

    it has a Stupid Plot, Based on something Famous for Popularity I guess, bad acting, and it was just terrible I got through about 15 minutes of it and got so bored I had to stop watching.

  • Dec 06, 2013

    One line summary: Retelling of the Lizzie Borden story is incoherent and badly assembled. --------------------------------- The film starts with back story told in voice over narration with period 1892 articles such as newspapers and photographs. It then shifts to the present, say 2013, with what is going on with Lizzie Allen, both now and when she was much younger, say six years old. She has a therapist, Dr Fredericks, who uses hypnosis, not always with good results. Lizzie lives again in the house where she lived when she was a child. Dr Fredericks thinks something traumatic happened there when she was young. She's seeing daydreams and night dreams that are rather horrible. She has trouble remembering her childhood clearly. Ah, she used to have tea parties with a doll that survived the original Lizzie Borden era. She drinks a lot of wine and watches scary movies with the boy friend, and does not seem able to get her meds right. Then she sees (hallucinates) herself introducing the doll, Lucy, to her. Even worse, she sees the Lizzie Borden figure use an axe to kill her younger self. Dr Fredericks of course associates this with childhood memories and an attempt to resolve them in adulthood. The next day she goes off on the cable guy, has trouble shaving her legs safely, and hears things go bump in the night. Jason comes in as a masked burglar, and Lizzie does not take it well. Who would? Jason starts hearing the bump in the night; he gets out his stashed pistol and barely hides it in the living room. Maggie is Lizzie's new neighbor. She tries to help Lizzie break into part of the basement that the cable guy could not get to. They fail, but it gets Lizzie more comfortable swinging the axe that Maggie picked out. Jason manages to get into the basement, where he experiences more bump in the night phenomena. Dr Fredericks drops Lizzie as a patient, since she demands stronger meds, but will not confront her childhood issues. Maggie turns out not to be what she first said she was. Jason takes a turn for the worse, and Lizzie feels more and more alone. That is not the worst of it all. Will Lizze resolve her issues? Is there something supernatural going on here? --------Scores---------- Cinematography: 5/10 Dark, generally with low contrast, or slightly out of focus. There's a bit of camera jump as well. SFX were laughable. Sound: 9/10 Fine. Acting: 2/10 Most of the minutes of the show have Amanda Baker alone or in frame. So the movie sinks or swims with her, and I don't believe her performance. Leif Holt is pretty bad as well. Corbin Bernson was fine, but he was not onscreen all that much. Gary Busey has done much better in other movies. Screenplay: 0/10 The past and the present did not blend well here. For the movie to work, they did need to resolve clearly and effectively. The retelling of the 1892 story was not put together well either. The absurd ending was just too much.

    One line summary: Retelling of the Lizzie Borden story is incoherent and badly assembled. --------------------------------- The film starts with back story told in voice over narration with period 1892 articles such as newspapers and photographs. It then shifts to the present, say 2013, with what is going on with Lizzie Allen, both now and when she was much younger, say six years old. She has a therapist, Dr Fredericks, who uses hypnosis, not always with good results. Lizzie lives again in the house where she lived when she was a child. Dr Fredericks thinks something traumatic happened there when she was young. She's seeing daydreams and night dreams that are rather horrible. She has trouble remembering her childhood clearly. Ah, she used to have tea parties with a doll that survived the original Lizzie Borden era. She drinks a lot of wine and watches scary movies with the boy friend, and does not seem able to get her meds right. Then she sees (hallucinates) herself introducing the doll, Lucy, to her. Even worse, she sees the Lizzie Borden figure use an axe to kill her younger self. Dr Fredericks of course associates this with childhood memories and an attempt to resolve them in adulthood. The next day she goes off on the cable guy, has trouble shaving her legs safely, and hears things go bump in the night. Jason comes in as a masked burglar, and Lizzie does not take it well. Who would? Jason starts hearing the bump in the night; he gets out his stashed pistol and barely hides it in the living room. Maggie is Lizzie's new neighbor. She tries to help Lizzie break into part of the basement that the cable guy could not get to. They fail, but it gets Lizzie more comfortable swinging the axe that Maggie picked out. Jason manages to get into the basement, where he experiences more bump in the night phenomena. Dr Fredericks drops Lizzie as a patient, since she demands stronger meds, but will not confront her childhood issues. Maggie turns out not to be what she first said she was. Jason takes a turn for the worse, and Lizzie feels more and more alone. That is not the worst of it all. Will Lizze resolve her issues? Is there something supernatural going on here? --------Scores---------- Cinematography: 5/10 Dark, generally with low contrast, or slightly out of focus. There's a bit of camera jump as well. SFX were laughable. Sound: 9/10 Fine. Acting: 2/10 Most of the minutes of the show have Amanda Baker alone or in frame. So the movie sinks or swims with her, and I don't believe her performance. Leif Holt is pretty bad as well. Corbin Bernson was fine, but he was not onscreen all that much. Gary Busey has done much better in other movies. Screenplay: 0/10 The past and the present did not blend well here. For the movie to work, they did need to resolve clearly and effectively. The retelling of the 1892 story was not put together well either. The absurd ending was just too much.

  • Nov 25, 2013

    Not the best story based off of Lizzie Borden.

    Not the best story based off of Lizzie Borden.

  • Nov 24, 2013

    This was a truly awful movie. Poor acting. Nonsensical story line. It is shocking what will get funded

    This was a truly awful movie. Poor acting. Nonsensical story line. It is shocking what will get funded