Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Cleveronix A different way of telling a story

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

dorotka24 It feels like I've seen way too many low budget horror movies of this one's ilk, and can without a doubt say that 90% of them are poor at best. Every once in a while one comes along that is better than most, and Ghost Lake fits that bill. The acting is acceptable, the story intriguing, and the atmosphere suitably creepy. Several of the subplots were unnecessary, although one in particular made the film much more depressing, which many times takes away from the "fear factor," if you will.The thought of what lies beneath the waters holds a certain mysterious and terrifying fascination, whether it be shipwrecks, predators, buildings, or bodies. In Ghost Lake, an entire town lies somewhere beneath the waters - a fairly unique concept. What's even more interesting is that the lake where filming takes place actually covers the remains of two towns, flooded by the construction of a dam in rural New York state.Unfortunately, this concept could not be capitalized upon by actually revealing some of the underwater town - at least some CGI glimpses might have been appreciated. I think viewing an underwater shipwreck in and of itself us especially creepy and terrifying - placing the supernatural in such a setting would amplify the feeling.Anyway, I did find myself entertained with this movie, and maybe it would be the same for you. There are certainly less appealing ways to kill and hour and a half.

Boba_Fett1138 Maybe a bit naive to think but I thought that amateur movies like this weren't made anymore in this era- and most certainly didn't received a global release.The movie really surprised me how incredible amateur looking this movie was. Not only with its acting and visual style but also with its technical aspect, such as the editing, camera-positioning. Especially the editing is extremely lacking at times. It makes some sequences come across as disjointed and confusing. Also the weak camera-positioning most certainly doesn't help all of the sequences. At times the movie really looks and feels as if it was being made by a couple of high school students who decided to pick up a camera and start shooting an horror movie.The movie just isn't ever tense, scary or mysterious, were also lies a big problem of the movie obviously. For a genre movie it just does basically everything wrong to reach a good enough and effective end result.The musical score is also quite horrendous. It's a very simple typical kind of movie score, that is too prominently present at times when nothing is happening in the movie and not present at all- or not good enough at the tense or scary moments of the movie. The music has some huge misses in the movie, it could had truly enhanced some of the scare moments and tension of the movie at times.Of course the story also doesn't help much. The movie doesn't have the most incredible pace and story-flow. The movie also tries to be more clever than it really is, by putting in many plot twists and making things seem different than they truly are. Without doubt they also did this to make the movie original. The result however isn't much good, since it makes the movie unnecessarily difficult to follow, especially toward the end, when twists and false twists follow each other rapidly. Through the many twists the movie also starts to make less and less sense. The movie is filled with some gaping holes and the more you actually start thinking about the story, the less sense it starts to make. Not only are there many improbabilities but also many things that just plain good old fashioned plot holes, mistakes and other things that don't make much sense.Judging by looking at this movie Mr. Woelfel (is that even a real name?) watched a bit too many Japanese horror and John Carpenter movies. In its style it mostly tries to impersonate Japanses movies and in its story, storytelling and characters it mostly tries to impersonate John Carpenter horror movies. Nothing wrong with impersonate different styles and applying them to your own style film-making but the style just doesn't work out, mainly due to its poor budget, weak editing and story-flow. It's perhaps even a bit sad to see at times how hard they tried, without a good result.I had no idea who Jay Woelfel was before this but looking at his filmography he seems like a regular B-horror movie maker, who just isn't the most talented or visionary person around, no matter how hard he ever tries. He is one of those typical persons who thinks he can write, direct, produce, edit and compose all of his own movies. And does he think he is Brian De Palma, with using all those redundant and completely pointless split-screen shots that don't add anything at all? Yep, I think I'm going to watch more Woelfel movies alright.Yes, it's true that the movie is so bad at times that it becomes good. It's unintentionally funny at times, due to how clumsy it is made and how bad the acting and dialog are. Who ever told those persons in this movie that they could act in movies? Granted that the script with its many weak and often pointless dialog also doesn't help them much but honestly, it's obvious as well that the actors just don't have the talent for the job.On a positive note, the make-up effects are quite good looking. Same goes for the simplistic but effective special-effects.With the same story material but more money and real professionals involved this movie possibly could had been a perfectly good genre movie to watch. But not now.2/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

BillMoseleyMan Sometimes it is not necessarily the budget, but what can be accomplished on a meager budget. Ghost Lake demonstrates that the filmmakers do not need a huge budget to pull off scares, chills, and atmosphere. While the overall film does somewhat suffer from the usual low budget deficiencies, its merits definitely shine through. From great camera work to excellent make-up effects, Ghost Lake is a fun filled ride that demonstrates to all independent filmmakers that ambition, creativity, and imagination certainly go a long, long way. Let's hope we see more of this type of caliber in the do it yourself independent world.

Daniel Barnes There are very few horror films in which I can find no redeeming quality - and "Ghost Lake" has the dubious honour of being one of them. Although it doesn't feature the same level of technical ineptitude as, say, "666: The Demon Child", its unspeakably annoying "actors", awful dialogue (which, I'm sorry to say, is perfectly audible at all times), and pitiful visual effects all add up to a thoroughly reprehensible waste of an hour and three quarters.Add to all that the fact that the plot was gaffed entirely from a Matthew Costello novel entitled "Beneath Still Waters" (which, as luck would have it, is being adapted by the lovely Brian Yuzna) and you have a film that you simply can't like for any reason at all. Really.Well, that's not completely true. In the picture's defence, the scenes involving forcible expulsion of water from the mouths of various people are awfully amusing... for entirely the wrong reasons, of course. Please avoid this dreadful thing.