Reviews

1 Review
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
I've seen worse
14 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I have to agree with the person who said this film is really bad, but strangely watchable. My first impressions were that the characters were far too good-looking/beautiful. The women had flawless complexions complete with mascara and frosted lip-gloss. The costumes far too glamorous for a wilderness colony. Their hair looked like an ad for Laboratoire Garnier. Also, one of my but-bears is using a doll in scenes where there should be a real baby. I hate that! The natives didn't look anything like American Indians (grey eyes??) and how could they speak such perfect English? And how did the main character know Old Norse? I am a stickler for continuity in any movie, good or bad, and this one didn't quite hit the mark. The scary bits weren't as scary as they could have been, and there is no real suspense or feeling of terror amongst the settlers. But I guess they stuck pretty much to the legend/story of Roanoke. That is about the only good thing going for this low-budget TV movie. But I did watch it to the end, hoping against hope it was going to improve. Ah well... I've seen worse.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed

 
\n \n \n\n\n