Satan's Whip (2006) User Reviews

Horrific... But not in a good way...

[terrible2 · 4/10 · 3 January 2009]

Sometimes you just have to have patients when watching indie horror. If you can just toe-tap your way through the slow-paced early scenes, sometimes a real gem will present itself... This (unfortunately) was not the case with "Satan's Whip".

Written and directed by Jason Maran, "Satan's Whip" attempts to drag us along on a boring snore-fest of a film, with no real pay off at the end. I'm guessing that the black & white (and blue) cinematography must have been for a reason, however it is never explained why the majority of the blood is blue, and I found this increasingly annoying as the film went on. The story in itself is not that bad, and actually had some originality and decent content but the acting is simply pathetic. This, combined with the slow-pacing and lack of any real (red) gore made "Satan's Whip" one to forget quite quickly. I will give it a "4" rating for some witty dialog that made me chuckle, but alas that could not save this boring waste of my time.

Disappointing

[gaius-octavius · 3/10 · 11 December 2009]

This is a little slow-moving for a horror movie, but the quality is better than you might expect for a director's only effort on IMDb. The camera work and lighting were both surprisingly good, and the acting – although variable – is better than is often found in Indie genre flicks.

As the lead, Robert Field is rather stiff, which is especially unfortunate given that his character, Claude, is the film's narrator as well as the centre of its action. However, it was the entry of Christopher (Brandon deSpain) that I considered the turning point of this film – and not in a good way. A twist is introduced in a clumsy fashion, and slow-moving becomes drawn out and overly wordy.

On the up side, Pete Barker is consistently entertaining as Father William. He's the easy stand-out in what is a fairly ordinary offering. While the first half hour caught my interest, I ended up feeling quite disappointed in the way things played out.

Id rate it lower if I could (Yes its that bad)

[aridale · 1/10 · 25 March 2008]

No idea how this is rated as high as it is (5.8 at the time of writing) but this movie was absolutely horrible. The acting wasn't entirely bad but it really had no point whatsoever and the overall quality was poor. Its obviously a B movie (or a C if such a thing exists) and it looks like it was made over a weekend at a friends house or something. Im all for low budget movies and I generally watch any I come across but this one is really really bad. I mean like "The Fanglys" bad. I don't know what else to say but trust in this as I have indeed sat thru this horrible horrible movie and I can save you the effort... Don't bother. Seriously... Just don't.

Wow

[deafgoat · 1/10 · 2 April 2008]

Just saw this movie yesterday night and I almost cried. No, it wasn't because it got me utterly petrified, no. It was absolutely HORRENDOUS! Sometimes, you see movies that make you wonder what will become of the human race in the near future - this movie is one of those. It's as though the writer, actors, director, et al, just came together and copied and pasted scenes of their favorite horror flicks, zipped it all together and said "hey, here's Satan's whip!!!" After seeing this movie, I could not help but be tormented by the sight of people whom call themselves "actors"; waltzing around like they're some kind of talented artistic interpreters... do not be fooled they suck! Don't bother wasting your time or money!!!

Better than expected

[CorblimeyGuvnors · 5/10 · 14 January 2015]

An inexperienced priest is sent to find Father Williams. He finds him protecting sisters, one of whom is pregnant. They say that they have an evil brother, who is stalking them and that he has an evil, satanic plan for the unborn child. As the plot unfolds all is not what it seems.

I watched this as part of the Catacomb of creepshows box set. This film was obviously shot on a very low budget. However I would recommend this as it kept my interest through out. For an obvious amateur production I found the overall look and composition of the shots more than expectable. Admittedly, there is very little action and the whole thing is quite wordy. but I found the story engaged me and there are a few twists, that I did not expect. I did find the character of Father Williams odd and really not very priest like at all, swearing and cussing, rather like a character from an old spaghetti western !! It's good to have a film that relies on it's story rather than gore to sustain it's running time.

Holy crap

[thorn105 · 1/10 · 5 November 2008]

This was without a doubt the WORST movie I have ever see, yet once I started, it was just like the really bad car wreck on the side of the road - you can't help yourself, you just have to look. My EYES !!! The acting was awful, the production was awful, the filming was awful, awful, awful, awful. I was glad the priest got chopped, would have loved to have done it myself because of his POOR acting. I mean suck-ful acting to the tenth power. I would have cheered if Chris had just axed the lot of them before turning it on himself. And what was WITH that freaking wig from hell on his head?! I sincerely hope no one got paid, I mean if getting paid were to be considered here, they should be paid to never attempt another film project again, everyone that was involved, never, never again. That was just a huge piece of garbage that I am embarrassed to say I just had to keep watching until the very end. Don't watch it, it's about an hour and a half of your life you will never get back, and then you'll have to spend time registering on this website so you can write a comment like I am doing now, which you must do as a catharsis in order to survive the aftershocks of having viewed this film (and I use the term "film" loosely here).

loved it

[right_then · 9/10 · 16 June 2008]

I read the comments about this movie before watching it and wasn't expecting much, but as a B movie it's a curiosity. I guess you have to be a certain type of person to enjoy this kind of thing, but I seriously thought it was awesome. People should watch it just for the experience because it's totally one of a kind. Don't expect much of it. The acting is poor, transitions were obviously done on a PC, etc. Definitely a B movie, but nonetheless really worth checking out. Very funny. Mild gore, and some questionable themes, so probably not something to show your Gran, but for the more adventurous viewer I'd say it's a must see.

Catacomb of Creepshows #8 (of 50) or does Satan whip his hair back and forth?

[movieman_kev · 6/10 · 25 September 2012]

A young, inexperienced aspiring priest handcuffed to a writing desk writes down his bizarre story of how he was tasked by three elder fathers to find one of their own, Father William, with the promise of being inducted into the Brotherhood after he succeeds in this low-budget dark comedy.

Reasonably well-acted, the absurdities and eccentricities all the characters tickled my fancy for some reason and I found myself enjoying the film. I also liked that i had no clue where the movie was going. So now, 8 films in, The number of good movies contained in the Catacomb of Creepshows box-set has now risen to 2 (this and "Addiction")

Eye Candy: Hannah Friedman gets topless

Impressive for a $15,000 movie

[shadowfever · 6/10 · 3 November 2010]

A little slow moving perhaps but certainly better written than most no budget movies. Jason Maran did a more than competent job of directing, especially on this kind of budget. Music was very good but then we expect that from J.S. Bach. I was impressed that they chose to go with the classics rather than another raunchy homemade death metal wannabe soundtrack. Acting was hit or miss, though Claude was pretty good and Father William was a hoot. Maria and Marisa were a little deadpan but perhaps that was intentional. Christopher was over the top, but again, perhaps that was intentional as well. It was well photographed for the most part though I wasn't especially impressed with the washed out look of the exterior daylight scenes. The sound had a couple of areas where it sounded like it was from an on camera mic but for the most part it was not bad. Editing was decent. As I mentioned, it was a little slow paced, but kudos for length. Most micro budget filmmakers seem to think that more is better and refuse to cut anything out of their masterpiece but this came in at under 100 minutes. Yes, a few more minutes could have disappeared but overall not a bad effort at all.