The Graveyard Reviews

  • Jun 25, 2020

    Passable but not memorable horror film with a few clever bits.

    Passable but not memorable horror film with a few clever bits.

  • Jan 25, 2012

    The Graveyard (Michael Feifer, 2006) There are many, many valid questions you could be asking youself in the course of watching this silly attempt at making a horror film. But the one that kept popping up for me was this: if there's a big hole in your graveyard's iron fence, with huge spikes bent in, upon which a teenager was killed, don't you think that five years after that death, someone would have fixed the hole, if only for liability insurance reasons? If that sort of illogical plot device drives youup the wall, I suggest you stay far, far away from this turkey. On the other hand, for a stupid direct-to-DVD horror flick, it's... actually not half bad. Well, okay, except for the bad parts. But you know what I mean. Plot: as we open, a bunch of drunk high school kids are playing a game in a graveyard. (Note: if I recall correctly, "drunk" is just an assumption based on "no high school kids you have ever seen in a movie are that uncoordinated".) Something goes horribly wrong, leading to one of them dying. Fast-forward five years to the present day, and the survivors-Jack (Leif Lillehaugen in his only feature appearance to date), Allie (Boo's Trish Coren), Sarah (Buried Alive's Erin Lokitz), Charlie (Month to Month's Christopher Stewart), Michelle (Mr. Woodcock's Lindsay Ballew), and Bobby (Zodiac's Patrick Scott Lewis), who has just been paroled from prison after his role in the death of Eric (Glee's Mark Salling)-converge, with various significant others, as well as Peter Bishop (Markus Potter, from the upcoming An American in Hollywood), the caretaker, at an off-season summer camp in order to try and gain some closure. All well and good until a slasher starts taking people out one by one. Naturally, Bobby is everyone's main suspect, but as time goes on and the body count rises, the would-be therapy group starts to wonder if it's not, in fact, Eric's ghost come back to claim revenge on his erstwhile buddies. There are more plot holes in this movie than it is possible to recount here (although oddly, every "plot hole" pointed out in the IMDB threads I've read was the result of someone not paying attention enough to have put certain pieces of the script together; I grant you, that could well be because screenwriter Michael Hurst, who has also been responsible for such timeless classics as Mansquito, is incompetent), Feifer is a somewhat lackadaisical director, the acting is, to be nice, horrific. So why am I rating this movie as high as I am? (And this is after revising it downward half a star while writing this review.) It's all relative; I saw a number of movies far worse than this within a week on either side of watching this monstrosity. The Graveyard > 100 Tears, therefore it must get a higher rating, right? But don't let that deceive you. Aside from a bit of prurient interest (which makes sense, given that I just read that the studio behind this film usually does softcore), there's nothing here worth your time unless you are the world's most hardcore Glee completist. * 1/2

    The Graveyard (Michael Feifer, 2006) There are many, many valid questions you could be asking youself in the course of watching this silly attempt at making a horror film. But the one that kept popping up for me was this: if there's a big hole in your graveyard's iron fence, with huge spikes bent in, upon which a teenager was killed, don't you think that five years after that death, someone would have fixed the hole, if only for liability insurance reasons? If that sort of illogical plot device drives youup the wall, I suggest you stay far, far away from this turkey. On the other hand, for a stupid direct-to-DVD horror flick, it's... actually not half bad. Well, okay, except for the bad parts. But you know what I mean. Plot: as we open, a bunch of drunk high school kids are playing a game in a graveyard. (Note: if I recall correctly, "drunk" is just an assumption based on "no high school kids you have ever seen in a movie are that uncoordinated".) Something goes horribly wrong, leading to one of them dying. Fast-forward five years to the present day, and the survivors-Jack (Leif Lillehaugen in his only feature appearance to date), Allie (Boo's Trish Coren), Sarah (Buried Alive's Erin Lokitz), Charlie (Month to Month's Christopher Stewart), Michelle (Mr. Woodcock's Lindsay Ballew), and Bobby (Zodiac's Patrick Scott Lewis), who has just been paroled from prison after his role in the death of Eric (Glee's Mark Salling)-converge, with various significant others, as well as Peter Bishop (Markus Potter, from the upcoming An American in Hollywood), the caretaker, at an off-season summer camp in order to try and gain some closure. All well and good until a slasher starts taking people out one by one. Naturally, Bobby is everyone's main suspect, but as time goes on and the body count rises, the would-be therapy group starts to wonder if it's not, in fact, Eric's ghost come back to claim revenge on his erstwhile buddies. There are more plot holes in this movie than it is possible to recount here (although oddly, every "plot hole" pointed out in the IMDB threads I've read was the result of someone not paying attention enough to have put certain pieces of the script together; I grant you, that could well be because screenwriter Michael Hurst, who has also been responsible for such timeless classics as Mansquito, is incompetent), Feifer is a somewhat lackadaisical director, the acting is, to be nice, horrific. So why am I rating this movie as high as I am? (And this is after revising it downward half a star while writing this review.) It's all relative; I saw a number of movies far worse than this within a week on either side of watching this monstrosity. The Graveyard > 100 Tears, therefore it must get a higher rating, right? But don't let that deceive you. Aside from a bit of prurient interest (which makes sense, given that I just read that the studio behind this film usually does softcore), there's nothing here worth your time unless you are the world's most hardcore Glee completist. * 1/2

  • Dec 20, 2011

    pretty predictible from the middle. a low budget slasher. its ok.

    pretty predictible from the middle. a low budget slasher. its ok.

  • Sep 11, 2011

    Unremarkable. Not good...not bad..just meh

    Unremarkable. Not good...not bad..just meh

  • Jan 10, 2011

    There was absolutely nothing about this movie that I liked. If someone had given me 20 bucks, a camcorder and some plastic body parts and ketchup when I was 12, I could have made this movie myself. I was very disappointed. And it's not even bad in a campy, fun sort of way- it's just bad.

    There was absolutely nothing about this movie that I liked. If someone had given me 20 bucks, a camcorder and some plastic body parts and ketchup when I was 12, I could have made this movie myself. I was very disappointed. And it's not even bad in a campy, fun sort of way- it's just bad.

  • Oct 27, 2010

    Yet another lame indie 'horror' flick. Not like the studio-made films are much better. Maybe it's time I find a new favorite genre...

    Yet another lame indie 'horror' flick. Not like the studio-made films are much better. Maybe it's time I find a new favorite genre...

  • May 22, 2010

    Had all the essentials of a classic slasher movie, but was just quite badly executed. The storyline was based on those that made the likes of 'Scream' and 'I Know What You Did Last Summer' famous, but the clear lack of budget made this one suffer. The moment the first person died, using very poor effects, you knew that this one wasn't going to be breaking any realism records. Would i watch it again? Probably not, unless feeling drunk and attempting to lure my friends into watching horoor films, using this mild viewing as a starter point.

    Had all the essentials of a classic slasher movie, but was just quite badly executed. The storyline was based on those that made the likes of 'Scream' and 'I Know What You Did Last Summer' famous, but the clear lack of budget made this one suffer. The moment the first person died, using very poor effects, you knew that this one wasn't going to be breaking any realism records. Would i watch it again? Probably not, unless feeling drunk and attempting to lure my friends into watching horoor films, using this mild viewing as a starter point.

  • Jan 31, 2010

    Such a horrible movie! Especially since I only got it cuz of Mark Salling and he dies right away.

    Such a horrible movie! Especially since I only got it cuz of Mark Salling and he dies right away.

  • Nov 30, 2009

    Not that scary. They did add the typical horror pieces though. A sex scene, gore a guy in a mask. A somewhat twisted movie with not a lot of good acting. This movie could of been a lot worse so I give them credit for trying at least.

    Not that scary. They did add the typical horror pieces though. A sex scene, gore a guy in a mask. A somewhat twisted movie with not a lot of good acting. This movie could of been a lot worse so I give them credit for trying at least.

  • Aug 31, 2009

    one of these days, i'm going to plan a really dangerous and elaborate prank...but in reality, i'm really planning for the accident that makes the dangerous and elaborate prank a dangerous and elaborate murder... mark my words.

    one of these days, i'm going to plan a really dangerous and elaborate prank...but in reality, i'm really planning for the accident that makes the dangerous and elaborate prank a dangerous and elaborate murder... mark my words.