GamerTab That was an excellent one.

SteinMo What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

HottWwjdIam There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

filippaberry84 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.

Scarecrow-88 Not too bad 80s slasher homage with a wonderful Robert Patrick, cast in a supporting part as an uptight, military-vet Vice President. The formula doesn't stray in "Lost After Dark": high school teens flee the night dance for a trip to a cabin in a stolen school bus, running out of gas on some remote county road, soon encountering a bearded, cannibalistic psychopath with only one singular mission and that is to ruin their festivities through whatever weapon (whether it be in the barn or his ancestral home) is available to him. I think, if anything, "Lost After Dark" will perhaps be best known as a slasher that updates the pattern of who gets killed first (not what the 80s were known for with their slashers). Typically the worst of the lot get the ax or knife at the onset, but this goes a totally different route: those that are quite likable and honorable seem to be the first to go while the more cowardly and self-serving last a while longer. Make no bones about it: few leave this film alive among the young cast. As with other films in the genre it has the kids scattering apart, seemingly *always* running *back* to the Joad house where he never fails (well, almost never) to take advantage of their folly, capitalizing on false moves and errors in judgment. Patrick sees the kids drive off in the bus and makes it an effort to find them, soon squaring off with the killer…and not faring well despite talking a big game in one of the more amusing points in the film. Most shocking scene could be when the diva stuck-up blond of the group is so worried about her well being she snaps the neck of her whimpering dog! Would Paris Hilton do that??? Nastiest murder sequence might be the corkscrew twisted through the back of the letterman jacket jock as he tries to escape through a hall door where the confines are too tight with chains keeping exits unattainable. There's a barn—no surprise, right?—where some of the characters run *into* to hide (?!?!) with the expected pitchfork making its appearance once again impaling a victim. A car on a jack drops on a victim who decides to crawl underneath it (!) as the killer follows behind him. Memorable homage to Fulci's Zombie II has a victim pulled into a broken window where his eye is impaled on a piece of glass. Yep, the ax and animal ground trap surface (would you be disappointed if they didn't?) to disrupt efforts of either heroism or attempts to run away. Funniest scene could be where, as a group, they initially decide to confront the killer with weapons in hand, but as he draws closer to them, that idea changed in a hurry. There's a significant emphasis on the film's setting in the 80s, and those involved in the production go to great lengths to mimic clothes, mores, dialogue, etc. There's attempts to reflect age on film and even a "missing reel" tear midway as the killer is closing in on a victim caught in a bear trap. The dilapidated house on the hill, in ruins and rotting, makes for a fine place of doom where the fates of many will be snuffed out. There's always that one scene in the film that leaves me personally perplexed: one of the final teens has been able to get far away from the killer and even meets up with one of her pals who had been presumed dead only to stop and sit down beside a tree! I liked that this film didn't necessarily follow the rules of who lives and dies in the usual order, giving us a final girl I wasn't expecting. Those who made this know their slasher and make sure to feature the genre's usual suspects faithfully…which will certainly alienate those who aren't fans of the genre which this doesn't care to appeal to.

mark krijgsman A movie that doesn't seem to know what Era the 80's were. The movie is clearly trying to be a homage to the slasher movies of the 80's but some makes some mistakes with that. First of no the movie is not good, , the acting is ....acted. To me it was clear i was watching young actors saying their lines and doing their job, there was no real investment in it, but most actors i never heard of ( except for Kendra Leigh Timmins, who's presence made me give one more star to the movie) The Movie also seemed to start out with the cliché " victim checklist" and would made you check off all that would be killed. But then it switched it around some, and when you do a homage movie , trying to be not like the movies you pay homage to, pulls it out of the Era of the 80's and place it firmly in 2014, 30 years later then the movie is said to take place. Yet the movie started really out like an 80's movie but lost some of that feel the more the movie progressed. Although the fact the cliché checklist can be used but not in the sense you would expect is nice, just not for what this movie wanted to be. To me it felt more like " We put in a cassette recorder and take out the mobile phones , " tadaa, the eighties" The story is B sorry i cant put it any other way like that. The see a name and only after finding a scary altar thing in a room is one of the characters going " Yea i know that name , there is this story about the people with that name and what they were." It came out of no where and felt shoehorned in there. Why not have him remember that name before, and also the kids know the story , the sheriff at the end was there and so knows it, but the deputy was like " I never heard of that" that made the reveal of the story of the killers origin more shoehorned in, in a " Oh yes the killer needs to have an origin" Also the last shot of the movies was more a late 70's thing and not really an 80's thing , but that is nit picking.And still i gave the movie a 6 star ..... even after all this bad stuff i have been saying. And that is because i see Actors , especially the young ones having fun, In my mind i could see them goofing about when the camera's were off. And yes the acting might be bad, but in that the movie does succeeded in one type of movie from he 80's The, what i call " We wanna be like ......" Movies. a lot of slashers came out that were just not like the big ones of that era but did their best to be like, because they so wanted to be like the movie, and in that this movie succeeded.the movie is not even 90 minutes, and a great time to waste time, and I feel we should see more of Kendra Timmins on the "big" Screen

FlashCallahan A group of teens sneak out of their high school dance to cruise around and have some unsupervised fun. When their car runs out of gas on a deserted road, they discover an old farmhouse and the cannibal killer living inside.....With the 1996 horror gem Scream, Wes Craven reinvented the horror genre for a third time. Before that groundbreaking movie, the nineties horror market were stuffed with straight to video slasher movies that were trying to recapture the stalk and slash gold that graced the eighties blood splattered cinema screens.But with genius, there were also a slew of copycat style horror films, and it doesn't take a genius to know that they weren't very good, especially ones that knew the urban legend you told last summer. Simply because they were missing the irony.Just lately, the horror genre is beginning to wane again, and this movie doesn't do the genre any favours. Trying to homage the eighties style slasher, it misses the point of those films many times during its excruciating running time. The gang of teens are your atypical pack of gender, jock, fat comedian, your token ethnic person, and of course,the girl who's character is fleshed out just that little more than the rest (usually the heroine).And just as your guessing who will get killed first to try and soften the mundaity of this rubbish, the makers do something very daring, and make you take notice. But then, as expected,they lose their bottle and decide to play it safe......to play it boring.Robert Patrick turns up looking hideously old, putting in his best impression of the bald bloke from Back To The Future, but he's hardly in it, even though he's the best thing.So all in all, it's a real waste of an opportunity, in the right hands, it could have, should have kick started a new trend in slasher movies, but no, it just hammers another nail in its coffin.In fear that now Craven has left us, and Carpenter has gone AWOL, the horror genre will be just found footage movies.Which is a shame, because through my journey of trudging through such abhorrent rubbish like this, I do come across a few gems.Not many though.

Aykut Bozkurt I gotta say loved it.It one of its kind brought in recent years.Views can easily feel themselves back in 80s.The atmosphere is very well felt like the director is not capable of making this movie with all the bells and whistles he has to play with in 2014.I mean no unnecessary visual effects were used like its supposed to be.So it is a success.You have to let it all go in your mind before you watch the movie and watch it without any extreme expectations.Then you will find the great enjoyment which the director is giving to you.Straight movie in short.It should be unfair to compare to the other titles because of its uniqueness for recent years.Last words from me,I also really enjoyed the language and the script.