ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Jenni Devyn Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

gavin6942 Some crew members of a company shooting a horror film begin to suspect that the "killings" in the movie are real, and that they are actually making a "snuff" film.There are two things about this film that keep it interesting all these decades later. One is the abundance of George Romero-connected people involved: Tom Savini, John Harrison, Joseph Pilato, Pasquale Buba, Nancy Allen (but not THAT Nancy Allen) and others. Filming took place in 1978, around the time that "Dawn of the Dead" was made; it seems that many involved in "Dawn" were making their own film on the side.The other interesting historical note is how this film for many years just never existed. Although it was shot in 1978 and seems to be copyrighted in 1980, virtually no one saw it in the 1980s or 1990s. Due to a distributor bankruptcy problem, the film never received a theatrical or home video release. It never aired on television, or got passed around as bootlegs either. The October 2005 Synapse Films DVD was the film's first official release anywhere in the world. The American Genre Film Archive (AGFA) is now (2017) releasing a Blu-Ray of the film mastered from a rare 35mm print that was made before the distributor backed out, so it can be discovered by a new generation.Perhaps due to this film's misfortunes, Dusty Nelson did not return to directing until the "Tales From the Darkside" episode "The Unhappy Medium" (1986). Others involved (Savini and Harrison in particular) achieved great success in its wake. How such a movie went hidden for so long is something of a mystery. If its existence was known, it would be widely sought after. The film was such a secret, we never see it mentioned in interviews or even within in-depth books such as Joe Kane's "Night of the Living Dead".The most logical reason it would fade into obscurity would be if it was an awful film. But, on the contrary, it actually happens to be quite good. While not the era-defining classic that "Dawn of the Dead" is, it is far better than many other independent horror features of its time. Heck, it even blows away Romero's early works (especially "There's Always Vanilla"). The film-within-a-film is creepy and effective. Dusty Nelson could have been somebody! A historical footnote: The first known use of the term "snuff movie" is in the 1971 Ed Sanders book, "The Family: The Story of Charles Manson's Dune Buggy Attack Battalion". He alleges that the Manson Family was involved in making such a film in California to record their murders. His allegations were, for the record, false. The idea caught on, however, and we received the film "Snuff" in 1975, as well as this film. The most interesting thing about snuff films is not how they have captured the imagination of people who spread urban legends… it is that they don't exist. While it would be nearly impossible for such a thing to exist as an industry, it seems plausible that at least some killer would record their exploits and at least some of those tapes would get traded on a bootleg market. But apparently not.The AGFA Blu-ray comes out August 22, 2017, featuring a new 4K scan from the only surviving 35mm theatrical print. We get an archival commentary track with John Harrison, Dusty Nelson, and Pasquale Buba covering their memories of a bygone era. These should be enough, but wait… there is also a "Beastie" short film by Dusty Nelson and a "Ubu" short film by John Harrison. Heck, we even have the "After Effects" documentary with optional commentary track!

Coventry This movie seriously had me worried that I might be autistic! Forty-five minutes into the film and there still wasn't the slightest sign of plot development and/or essence. I don't know about you, but especially when dealing with early 80's low-budget horror flicks, I like to know if it's at least going somewhere. I was slowly starting to behave like Dustin Hoffman in "Rain Man"; continuously repeating 'I need a plot … I need a plot …. I badly need a plot". "Effects" is a long, slow-moving, incoherent and visually exhausting movie and I honestly regret to say that because I'm a devoted fan of the genre and usually I really, really, really support obscure horror titles like this. Sadly, however, "Effects" is amateurish nonsense with sequences that are endlessly stretched and a story that literally never shifts into gear in spite of its great rudimentary potential. The crew of a cheap horror film, well … actually just the effects guy and the lighting girl, notice that the director is behaving very suspicious on set. They're right, too, because that sleazy bastard is actually planning to turn his little film project into a genuine snuff movie with the cast and crew members as the unaware and probably very reluctant lead players/victims. Sublime idea for a bona fide 80's shock feature, if you ask me, but the execution of the film is horrible. All of a sudden, I'm not even surprised anymore to find out this film was apparently "lost" for 20+ years. Even with Tom Savini and Joe Pilato (the latter giving a terrific performance and totally unlike the role in "Day of the Dead" that made him famous) in the cast, this is an infuriatingly lame movie. There's actually very little gore in the film and if you were, by any chance, hoping to learn some "kitchen secrets" about the special effects industry, you'll be sorely disappointed as well. "Effects" only specializes in overlong and pointless padding footage – especially the chase through the woods seems endless – and oppressed slasher ideas. Another extremely disappointing snuff-themed thriller, joining the same list as Roberta Findley's "Snuff", "Live Feed", "Snuff-Movie", "Vacancy" and Larry Cohen's "Special Effects". For good snuffies, stick to the Spanish "Thesis", the massively underrated "Mute Witness" and the legendary classic "Peeping Tom".

jasempre-1 I bought this movie because I am a fan of Joe Pilato. When I bought it, I actually expected him to be a little like Capt. Rhodes (DAY OF THE DEAD). I was very wrong. This movie and his performance blew me away.Joe Pilato plays Dom, a very likable cameraman. He's basically an every day guy. He is even funny at times. And he falls in love with his gaffer, Celeste (Susan Chapek). He is just an average guy. He wasn't the ***hole he was in DAY OF THE DEAD. Instead, the ***hole of the movie is Nicky (Tom Savini).He is also the only one in this movie who is completely innocent.After watching a home-made murder movie from the director, Lacey (John Harrison), he suspects the murder was real. Even after Lacey tells him it isn't. He gets very suspicious. It turns out Lacey is directing two movies. The low-budget horror movie with the set of actors. And a real horror movie with real horror and murder. It is all up to Dom to make sure that it doesn't happen.

vjimw I am sure for some folks this movie is the cat's meow because of the cast and crew, but unfortunately, it's pretty boring. It's not a horror movie (although they are making one in the film) and it's certainly not a thriller because there is little to no suspense. It's the late 70s and they're doing coke in a farm house while making a movie. The concept is interesting (what's the difference between making a movie where it looks like the people are getting killed and a movie where the people are being murdered on screen?), but it gets dulled down watching them do coke and putzing around in general. It's kind of like some pre-cursor to a bizarre reality television concept. eh. kind of a waste.