Goblin (2010)

Caught this on The Horror Channel here in the UK, and was expecting another film that I'd switch off after the first 20 minutes,but no, within the first 5 minutes, I was hooked.It's not particularly original, but it's done with such gusto it feels fresh,and the actors seem to be having a blast which helps.Considering this was(apparently) a made for TV movie,it was pretty gory in places,with the effects being well done.I liked it that much, I ordered a Blu Ray of it from Germany for the ridiculous price of one euro! If you see it coming on TV, give it a go, you might be pleasantly surprised.

This is just a mediocre horror that has a CGI monster in it. Some parts did deliver the goods for horror buffs but the action was left out and there's no suspense to see anywhere.I won't go into any details about the story because that you have see a thousand times before. I was rather surprised about the use of low gore here and there. But it didn't work because there were some faults to see. When one's head is smashed by the monster or goblin you see indeed in a gory way that his face is crushed but the next shot when falling down his face is in tact. It's one of those movies that you will love or hate. you don't watch it for the acting you just watch it for the horror. I have see flicks about creatures that couldn't stand up against this one but still it's mediocre and just offers here and there a nice 'gory' shot. It's just sad that the goblin was full CGI all the time which shows a few times even as the CGI wasn't that bad after all. It will make teenagers frightened but buffs will have a big laughter with this one, you know what I mean.Gore 0,5/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 2/5 Story 2,5/5 Comedy 0/5

On 31 October 1831, in the Hollow Glen village, the locals sacrifice what they consider "unclean" in a bonfire to protect their village. When they throw a deformed baby in the bonfire, his mother, who is a witch, curses the babies of the dwellers and creates an evil creature from the bones of her son to take their souls in the Halloween. The story of the Goblin becomes a legend.In the present days, Neil Perkins (Gil Bellows) travels with his second wife Kate (Camille Sullivan); his rebel teenage daughter Nikki (Tracy Spiridakos); his baby son Nathan (Jordan Moore) and Nikki's best friend Cammy (Erin Boyes) to an isolated cabin in Hollow Glen expecting to start a business with his partner Owen (Colin Cunningham). The family is warned to leave the village before the Halloween by the drunkard Charlie (Donnelly Rhodes), but they do not give credit to his words. On 31 October, Neil, Kate and Owen have a meeting with Sheriff Milgreen (Kyle Andrew Wheeler) and they leave Nathan with Nikki and Cammy. The two girls are visited by three friends and Nikki leaves Nathan alone for less than one minute. When she returns, the baby is missing and the Goblin is killing her friends."Goblin" is a lame horror movie where it is hard to say what is the worst: the story, the direction, the acting or the edition. The plot is stupid and full of clichés and annoying characters. The performances are terrible, highlighting Colin Cunningham in a silly role. The edition is awful, with inadequate cuts. The direction is very poor. The result is a forgettable movie. My vote is two.Title (Brazil): "Goblin – O Sacrifício" ("Goblin – The Sacrifice")

I really wanted to like this film, and I did sit through all of it to give it the benefit of the doubt. But it just doesn't measure up.For a while I thought maybe it was best viewed as a horror-comedy, but it doesn't have enough comedy, and all of it seems to be actually unintentional, rather than sort of ironic.The cast is cute, so that's a plus. In particular, Brett Dier seems to be going for a young Ryan Phillippe look, which he carries off well. Unfortunately, Ryan at that age had an agent/manager who cared which films he appeared in, and Brett doesn't.For a horror-slasher type film, I think we're long past caring whether the writing makes any sense. It's the directing and special effects that torpedo this film. The monster looks and acts ridiculous, and could have been animated using 1990s technology. And if the "loud-noise-plus-sudden-close-up-repeat-twice" technique wasn't already cliché, it certainly was by the time this film was over.Why do British Columbia and Canada whore themselves out for these pathetic films? They are surely capable of quality work. Is film make-work welfare that important instead? When will people realize that if you're eager to put your name to garbage, you shouldn't expect anybody to ask you to make something worth making. Think long-term, guys.