reviews (a to z)# a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

home :: latest reviews :: reviewer profiles :: statistics :: diary :: links

The Evil Within (2004)

Directed by: Matthew Peters
Written by: Matthew Peters
Links: Official site, Salesian College
Genre: Short

This movie gets: 3.00 (1 rating) Ranking: not yet ranked (awaiting 2 ratings)

The Evil Within (2004) is also mentioned in em_fiction's review of Crazy Whist (2004).

"Frightening, and it has nothing to do with the evil" - a review by em_fiction

(see Nerd Boy (2004) for Top screen introduction)

The evil within - Matthew Peters
10 minutes
Salesian College, Chadstone

"An innocent trip to the library leads to an extraordinary afternoon for three children. CGI special effects are used with assurance in a piece where the child actors have been carefully directed."

A girl goes to her local library and finds a hidden section. There, she finds a creepy looking book. She borrows it. She takes it home and shows her friend. They go play Monopoly. The book starts to talk. Shit happens.

Like Couch Potato (2004), it's obvious why this film made it through: special effects. I'll admit, the face in the book, the electrocuting effects, and some other stuff were all pretty impressive. Unfortunately, Peters cared a lot more about that than plot, acting and pretty much everything else. Everything that wasn't the face in the book, the electrocuting effects and the other stuff.

Firstly, the casting of whiny little five-six-seven-ish year-olds was not a wise move. They were fucking atrocious, and James Cameron CGI wouldn't be able to save this film. Secondly, the plot. Dumb, clichéd, and predictable from about the second frame. Come on, Matthew! If you put in the effort to do all these sick effects, why couldn't you have at least put in some more effort to write a plot that hasn't already been done (much better) on ABC Kids about a kajillion times?

The top screen program synopsis reckons that this is "a piece where the child actors have been carefully directed". Uh, yeah. The person who wrote that ought to be shot. Apart from the above points, which count for about 90% of my criteria, I could say that it was okay.

em_fiction gives this movie 3 out of 10.
Review created on Sat 12 Jun 2004

Movie review statistics

Number of reviews: 1
Rating Percentage

Reader comments

No-one has commented on this movie yet.

Add a comment

Your name:
Email address:
Make public?
Anti-Spam question:To prove you're not a horrible spam-leaving robot, please answer the following question (use numbers):
If I have 9 Best Adapted Screenplay Oscars and win 2 more Best Adapted Screenplay Oscars, how many Best Adapted Screenplay Oscars do I have?
Rate this movie:

You may use the <em>emphasis</em> and <strong>strong emphasis</strong> HTML tags. URLs beginning with ‘http://’ will be turned into links. Line breaks will display as entered.