Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

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.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Scott_Mercer Others have commented upon the similarities between this and an Ed Wood film. I submit to you that these are more than mere similarities...First of all, the box copy on the DVD from Image states: "Producer-Director Ronnie Ashcroft's first feature film venture guided by his friend and mentor Edward D. Wood Jr., whose "uncredited" help gives this film that unmistakable "scent" of Wood." Quote by Wade Williams. The box also states: "Consultant: Edward D. Wood Jr. (uncredited)." Just what exactly are we trying to say here, Mr. Williams? Just come out with it! Could it have anything to do with the fact that Ed Wood stock player Kenne Duncan appears here? How about the film's writer, the alleged Frank Hall? He has no other credits at all on the IMDb. Could that be one Edward Wood under a pseudonym? Ed almost always put his own name on films he either directed or wrote, but he was known to use pseudonyms on many of the paperback novels he wrote in the 1960's and 70's.I have not checked Ed's biography for any possible information on this film, but could it be that this film was actually written by the Anti-Master himself? And what does Wade Williams have to say on this theory? Clearly, the matter needs further investigation.Anyway, this is a hilariously bad film. If Ed didn't write this film, it's right in his wheelhouse. Ridiculous dialog and lots of scenes with no dialog at all since they were shot with no sound. Lots of scenes that drag on (did I say drag? In a discussion about Ed Wood? That was a bad pun, I guess) and on and go nowhere. In other words: prime Badfilm. Ed Wood fans, be aware. You may want to give this one a spin in the old machine. Normal people will not enjoy it though. If you are normal, stay away.

march9hare A svelte alien space-babe with alarming eyebrows and a sprayed on silver body stocking threatens Robert Clarke, a bunch of gangsters, and a bimbo in this awful 1957 sci-fi clunker. Almost unbelievably cheap (the movie only has one set), loaded with pointless running around in the woods, pointless running in and out of Clarke's mountain cabin, and one not so special effect, this has got to be the longest 61-minute movie ever filmed, and makes Clarke's next film, "The Hideous Sun Demon", play like "The Tragedy of Hamlet". Stunningly bad. Even when I first saw this movie as a kid, I thought: "This movie is stupid". Chances are, you will, too.

lemon_magic One of the most amusing aspects of watching these low budget-to-no budget pieces of hackwork from the past is watching the director and the costume and set designers struggle to make their limited funds stretch far enough to make something palatable on screen. Plot, script, blocking, makeup, editing, special effects (or lack of them), performances, 2nd or 3rd takes...can all go through the most fantastic contortions to make up for lack of big bucks (or decent ideas) and to try to entice the viewer to accept the proceedings as a 'real' movie."Astounding She Monster" twists, bends and slithers like a Slinky going down a flight of stairs in an attempt to disguise the fact that it was shot with practically no budget, and absolutely no talent.ASM has exactly two classy elements done right: the movie poster (which looks as if it might have been done by Kelly Freas) and the double-exposure effect on the girl in the silver leotard, which is pretty cool for a film from that time. It's at LEAST as convincing as any special effects from a Republic Serial series or a K. Gordon Murray Mexican/English hybrid film like "Robot Vs. the Aztec Mummy".Unfortunately, you can't watch a movie poster, and the one little special effect can't carry a film for 62 minutes. And every other aspect of the film is hilariously, blitheringly incompetent.I suggest you play the following drinking game while watching ASM: 1)Take a drink every time the cast steps outside the one room shown in the movie in an attempt to leave the area, but then are forced to go back inside that room (for whatever reason); and 2)Take a drink whenever the She Monster crashes back into the room through the apparently unlock-able door, and attacks yet another cast member. You will be completely smashed by the time the film ends, and thus much more bemused by the astounding idiocy of what you are watching. In short, a classic piece of crap, worth watching to see just how stupid movies movies from this time could get.

preppy-3 Back in the late 70s a local TV station (in MA) used to show this constantly on Saturday afternoons. It's about a tall glowing woman from another world who wanders around aimlessly in the woods. She's photographed with lights on her and in sort of a "wavy" way--it's hard to describe. She runs into some gangsters, their "moll" and two people they're holding hostage. The rest of the film involves them running from her (bullets don't hurt her) and her touching them and (inadvertently) killing them (she's radioactive). It all leads up to a totally ridiculous finale--with a moronic "twist".I found this fascinating in high school...but not because it was good. It was LOUSY...but in a really interesting way. There's a narrator that sounds like he's drugged out, the special effects aren't special at all and the dialogue and story are predictable. The acting is as good as it can be (i.e. not very). Still, it IS interesting but I can only truthfully give it a 1. Still....try catching it. There's NOTHING like it.Also your only chance to see Shirley Stoler as the alien in her first movie (she's billed as Shirley Kilpatrick). She's tall, young and SLIM!!!