Scarred (2005 Video) User Reviews

people go on a camping trip and get tormented by a bitch with no face.

[mattga1 · 3/10 · 25 December 2011]

*MIGHT CONTAIN A SPOILER*

OK first of all, i know this film was a low budget horror film, but it was even worse than (prom night) with Jamie lee Curtis.its just really badly presented, ya know?

this film is set in the woods where a bunch of campers are confronted by a girl with no face, she will not killing until she finds a new face to cut off and wear as her own.

Now the thing is with this film, is that the plot is good, but the really poor things about this film, was how it was presented and directed. the acting was really awful and half the time, all that happens is that there is someone screaming: NO! this film also lacked the thrill, its boring, dull and plain. If the film was more creative and wasn't so poorly organized, it COULD have been a decent movie.

if you're into cheap, lame, exaggerated films, you will enjoy this one...

3/10

Not a bad movie, a better low budget then some studios pearls

[causeiwantto2001 · 5/10 · 28 July 2007]

Over the past couple months I have been a real horror junkie, and have watched 30 to 40 films. You quickly run out of studio productions in this genre, and get into those films with a small budget, and those with a hand held 1980's camera, that just sound and look like bad highschool productions. Scarred however is a very low budget movie, but was done much much better then some. The guys in the movie all played there parts well, and except for alittle over dramatic whining, the lead character played by Jonny Mack, far out did the rest of the cast! The women in the movie seemed like they'd be better suited to a psychic alliance phone line then to a Hollywood stage. The movie did right by the lead, and as I said he did a great job, but the 'hook up' with the friend, didn't suit him (if you catch my drift) Most of the time, with low budget films the cover art on the DVD is the best part, and has nothing to do with the actual movie, but this film did the cover justice, and was a real gem compared to most other films I've sat thru in the last 10 or 15 horrors I've seen. I guess the best test for a movie is if the viewer would see it again for a second time, and with this film I would!

A Tribute to Mediocrity

[tendaikudou · 3/10 · 10 December 2005]

Within the first fifteen minutes, it is fairly easy to tell just what Scarred is - a mediocre, formulaic horror movie. People having sex and getting drunk? At least one of them is going to die. Family goes camping? The pretty daughters are going to go camp a distance away from the rest. I'm sure you can guess what happens from there.

While the movie was slightly entertaining just for the schlock value, it isn't by any means a good horror film. The cinematography is dull and average, the plot is one that has been done before, and the acting is mediocre at best. The special effects, such as the trapper's lumpy face, are low-budget and fake-looking.

All in all, Scarred is a movie that you might enjoy for the pure badness of it all, but it probably isn't worth the rental fee for anyone who's really a fan of good horror movies.

Worth it just for the laughs.

[crimeofpassion · 2/10 · 17 December 2005]

A friend rented this for us to watch, saying that it was an independent horror film and should be hilarious. And boy, was he ever right. I was expecting a bad horror film, but not this bad.

It had the typical elements of any bad horror movie. Family goes camping out in the middle of nowhere. A park ranger tells them about a clichéd and completely impossible "legend around these parts." There's some drinking and then the son and two girls set up their own camps away from the unattractive father and pretty, young step-mother. And there you have it: the stage is set for, quite possibly, the worst horror film ever.

Naturally, there's plenty of "You stay here while I go {insert action that requires speaker to wander off alone into the forest}" and "There's a psycho killer out there, so let's split up!" And, as usual for most horror films, good or bad, the victims barely fight back once attacked, even though it's obvious that it would be rather easy to knock the knife away from the killer, whom my friend and I dubbed "The Skilled Huntress," due to the fact that her "sneaking up on people" involves being very obvious and making a lot of noise.

Horror films like these get their scares from the killer randomly leaping out at the helpless victims, but there was no leaping here. None. Nothing scary at all about this film. No shock value of any sort. Of course, the reason it didn't frighten my friend and me could have been because of the fact that we were laughing too hard about it to even think about being frightened.

I'd still recommend it to anyone just for the laughs, though.

Really bad, really cheap horror film.

[poolandrews · 2/10 · 11 September 2006]

Scarred starts as the Hansen family, Father Frank (George Williams) Step Mother Heather (Maxine Bahns), Son Ben (Johnny Mack) plus Daughter Kim (Julian Berlin) & her friend Alex (Charity Shea) all make their way out deep into a forest where they plan on having a nice family bonding camping trip. They set up their tents & are about to settle down for the night when local park ranger Jesse (David Austin) pulls up on his quad bike, he then proceeds to tell them a scary story about an abused child who supposedly had her face cut off by her abusive Father & who now roams the forests in search of a new face. The Hansen's don't believe a word of it, Jesse rides off & they prepare to go to sleep for the night. However, Heather decides she needs to take a dump & while out in the forest on her own is attacked, killed & has her face sliced off by a badly scarred & disfigured girl (Hannah Leigh), it's not long before the rest of the Hansen's are attacked as she continues her quest for a new face...

Written, produced & directed by Jon Hoffman & Dave Rock, who also edited the thing, Scarred is total crap. The script is as dull as dishwater, it takes itself very seriously, it's incredibly predictable & unoriginal. If your going to make a teen slasher & you have no talent or a decent script at your disposal at least give the audience what they want, blood & boobs. Is that really such a hard equation? The character's are poor, the dialogue is poor, the whole set-up is rubbish & there's absolutely no pay-off whatsoever for sitting through this crap. Scarred is just a mindless slasher with a poor killer, stupid situations that are designed solely to separate the character's so they can be killed, virtually no exploitation elements & a lack of anything exciting going on. This really is pretty bad stuff. Towards the end of the film Ben has his leg injured & for the remaining 15 minutes constantly screams & whines, add that to the fact that the killer can't talk & just screams & growls the last 15 minutes of the film are highly irritating & painful to listen too, in fact I actually pressed the mute button on my remote control as it was giving me a headache as if the film was doing that already. The predictable ending sucks as well.

Directors Hoffman & Rock are obviously part of the growing crowd of people who think just because they have a digital camera they can make a horror film. To give them credit where it's due Scarred is a reasonably well made film & better than I had expected although there's a real dullness throughout, the cinematography, lighting & locations just don't evoke any sort of atmosphere or tension that a slasher film such as this needs to be effective. There's no build up of tension or any scares. The gore is of the tomato ketchup variety with only a half decent scene at the end when someone has their face sliced off & the killer tries it on (shades of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) & Leatherface?). There is no nudity at all either.

With a supposed budget of a bout $200,000 Scarred is nowhere near as badly made as I was expecting & all things considered including it's lowly straight-to-video status it's fairly impressive, that still doesn't make up for the fact that it's complete crap though. The acting was OK although not brilliant.

Scarred brings nothing to a limited & already over crowed sub genre & there are far better examples out there, you really shouldn't be wasting good money on this.

classic horror, yet spoiled, group of people out in the woodlands, with a psycho killer, not scary in the least

[sarah_jay_88 · 1/10 · 1 August 2006]

I want to make my comment short like i wish this film was. Such a dragging film it's so predictable. As we wait for our killer to strike we have to go through the torture of watching unknown American actors mingle with each other, yawn! To set the tone we hear a story of the girl (killer) who has her face cut off. Unbelievably lame! We as the audience get to see the story, it's shown to us as we hear the voice over from the park ranger who tells it, it spoils the tone. Have you ever played with a camcorder, and spoofed a scary moment with your friends? It has the same dramatic effect as that. This films just continues to bore, we know what is going to happen, we just sit there and wait for it, hurry up, so we can say we've watched it. Maybe clear by now but i would NOT recommend this film,it's boring from start to finish. A horror? It nearer comedy!

Oh my God, this flick was poor

[angryyoungteddybears · 1/10 · 17 September 2006]

You browse the shelves for a good Saturday night in. You've decided to rent just the one movie because you don't have the time to watch two. It's got to be a good one. You're looking for some frights. Well, if this is the scenario you find yourself in of a weekend, then do not under any circumstances rent or buy this move. It is abysmal.

Even the basics like sound engineering is rancid. When the Park Ranger is in his cabin. You can hear mic echo and straggling sound that can only be brought on by utterly shocking engineering. Some scenes are literally repeated like a cheap porno so you actually see the chick in the white top gleefully strolling through the same part of the woods twice or the Park Ranger driving through the same part of the woods three times. And when he is driving and the camera is situated on the front of the bike, it looks like a bit of home movie shot on a mobile at best! These things bug me. Even if a movie has a low budget and is independent, the small details should be thoroughly checked. If the movie was any good you might let it off. But this sadly is not.

A family get-together in the woods. An urban myth told around the camp-fire. The lady with no face starts to kill them one by one. Then when you think she's dead, she really isn't. Again, and again, and again. The only cliché they left out was the classic topless young bimbo scenes but even these wouldn't have saved this rotten film.

If you are going out with someone who you want to get rid of then arrange a night in with the movie. He/She will run a mile!

Lamest movie I've ever seen

[skarockater · 1/10 · 20 December 2005]

I don't even know how to describe this movie. I mean, you think it's gonna be a scary movie, but no, it's more like a comedy. The quality of the movie was bad, bad, oh almost forgot, and BAD. The scary parts, or at least what was suppose to be the scary parts of the movie weren't scary at all, not even with the lights off. It's a waste of money, I mean, seriously, who in God's green earth came up with this movie, it's completely dull. I think the scariest part of the movie is when the guy was screaming. The faceless woman couldn't even move her mouth when she was screaming, how is she suppose to scare the audience when she could barely scream. I can't believe I've wasted 4 bucks watching this movie. It's the worst horror movie I've ever seen, don't spend your money renting this movie, buy candy or popcorn with that money, please.

Get a grip, people! This ain't so bad!

[it001k0306 · 7/10 · 26 October 2006]

Nothing irritates me more than people ripping apart a low budget movie, declaring it the most hilariously bad piece of film in history and insisting that it should be #1 worst rated movie on IMDb. Why? Because you can guarantee that the posters are talking garbage. Hey, I watch a lot of horror flicks and I know damn well what a truly bad film is. There's stuff out there that looks like it was shot as a home movie. There are actors out there that would make portraying a tree trunk seem too wooden. There are special effects that amount to a couple of squirts of unconvincing blood. Let me tell you, guys... 'Scarred' is none of those things. It might not pick up an award for cinematography but it's a professional job. The lighting and sound are fine and the editing is reasonably smooth. The acting is not so intense that it grabs you and makes you think that you've just discovered the next big Hollywood name but these actors are not wooden. they do a decent job and remain convincing. Some of the special effects are pretty gruesome and they're not overused. What irritates me most is that I avoided this film sometime because of the duff posts - then I eventually watched it...and enjoyed it. No way is it the worst film ever. It's actually pretty good. However, if no-one else wishes to be objective regarding this film then i will. I'll present both the good and the bad points:

BAD - 1. Clichéd to hell, can't deny that!

2. Some silly choices of action by certain characters.

3. The protagonist looks beatable so there should be more of a fightback at times.

GOOD - 1. A gruesome and reasonably original back story/purpose for the killer.

2. Some gruesome effects used sparingly enough to be effective.

3. A killer that can genuinely evoke pity at certain times.

4. Reasonable acting.

Summary? Less of the knee jerk reactions to low budget, please. It's easy to mock and often it's unfair. 'Scarred' is by no means a great film - but it's alright. Leave it alone unless you can objectively recognise it's good points.

Bad production, Bad film.

[declankeano · 3/10 · 23 December 2010]

I'v never reviewed a movie,but after seeing this i felt i had to. The story sounded promising, but due to the poor production and poor script, this film was a massive let down.

The acting wasn't up to scratch and the camera man couldn't control the camera and spent the whole movie concentrating on the female actors boobs. It was like something from the blair witch project watching the camera man struggle to move and focus the camera simultaneously. I often found my self questioning how serious this film was supposed to be. It was cheesy and predictable, the special effects were shoddy. It felt like i was watching a piece of college media coursework. Having said that, It is quite clearly a B-movie and all the downfalls were part of it's charm. I wouldn't recommend watching this on your own, and that's not because of how scary it is, but because you wouldn't enjoy it. But grab a few friends,grab a few beers and prepare to laugh because this film is worth the laughs.

my kind of horror movie: funny, suspenseful, entertaining, cheesy

[Jimmy91 · 8/10 · 5 March 2006]

The movie Scarred was the perfect choice for the mood I was in. It had all the elements of my favorite genre, the horror movie. Well, almost all. There was no sex or even any t and a shots! That's all right.

The family went into the woods. The park ranger tells them a 'legend' about this little girl who got her face cut off, who still lives out in the woods and who wants to be pretty. Haha there was all these ridiculous scenes of the cut off face girl (henceforth known as cofg) running through the woods like a wild animal. So there are these two hot babes: a family friend and a sister. The family friend likes the brother! It was awesome because it reminded me of fantasies I used to have where for some odd reason this really hot babe likes you and your camping and stuff. I grew up in the middle of nowhere in the woods, so maybe that's why it struck such a nerve as well. When there was a hottie at the local campground look out! Then the sister is horny too, so she goes to the rangers cabin and he's this totally normal young guy who is stoked that this babe is there and he's telling a story and she shuts him up by kissing him! Of course, havoc ensues when cofg starts terrorizing and they split up like 20 times like cliché morons. But about horror movie clichés.. I like most of them, so it was awesome. Then they make it through the night and think they're all right only to be sorely disappointed of course. There was this phenomenal scene of the cofg cutting off the face of one of the girls. I was all "NOOOOO!" because she was the girl I most related to and would want to hook up with if I lived in the woods. The hottie who liked the dorky brother! Haha there was a great scene they cut out of the movie (extras) of these 3 hiker dudes in the woods and one of em has to pee so he's peeing by this creek and he sees a hot babes back washing herself and he's all "yeah" because she's naked (but still no t or a!). He's all stoked and then she turns around and it's cofg! He's all "AHH!" Cofg doesn't talk or anything because she grew up in the woods with the animals. She does lots of growling and stuff though. Tons of growling! Overall the movie was very entertaining, and it had many moments of fright. I spent much of the movie looking around my house afraid of the dark. Besides the t and a missing, probably my only other complaint would be that the acting was really really bad. Not as bad as that movie Darkwatch, but bad enough to be occasionally distracting.

This is the kind of horror movie that can be hard to find for me. Basically, I rent by the cover because it seems no one else, or none I can find, knows what I look for in a horror movie. SUre, I love a quality high budget horror if it's done well, but I also love the movies that are cheesy and entertaining. I can't trust the ratings here on IMDb because the general public doesn't seem to like the cheesy movies I dig. Renting by cover alone is a risky affair. I do get some terrible movies ie: boring. I just rented Death Tunnel. Don't bother. Boring. Same with Cry Wolf. That one took itself too seriously.

Where are the lists of horror movies that have classics like Sleepaway Camp, Bleeders, and Troll 2? Now those are some masterpieces! Don't rent Scarred if you can't handle cheesy scripts and cheesy acting. Rent it if you like to laugh at the unintentional and are scared by old stand-bye techniques.

A Very Unique Horror Film

[DanH136662 · 7/10 · 1 August 2006]

This movie was very unique and horrific in its own way. It is truly one of the best independent horror films I have seen so far. The deranged, mutilated, gory killer in this film is nothing short of horrific. The director's use of camera angles and quick edits adds to the suspense and explicit gore. The last scene was very riveting and suspenseful. Although many might believe this is a terrible movie, it truly isn't. You must understand the motivation and drive of the director in order to contemplate his technique and film-making attributes. This is a fascinating and abstract film. It is one of the best independent horror films I have come across in years. It is worth seeing this film. You must be a true horror film fan in order to enjoy this film.

Laughed All The Way Through, But JUMPED At The End!

[CinemanBear · 2/10 · 3 February 2006]

I saw this movie sitting on the shelf while perusing the video store with a friend and rushed home right away to order it on Netflix. In anticipation of it's arrival, I came on to IMDb to find out anything I could about it. What I found out based on other reviews is that the movie I thought was going to be really creepy was really going to be a laugh riot. I thought about changing my mind and deleting it from my queue, but, then I thought, "How much fun is it going to be to laugh at this movie with my roommate?" Last night we watched it and had the biggest laugh we've had in a long time. Like a lot of horror movies, this movie has a great concept, but lacks proper execution and, of course, character development. The acting left a lot to be desired. The only seen I felt engrossed in was the park ranger telling the family the "legend" of the faceless girl, but I don't know if that was due to the scene as it was written or the actor delivering the dialog.

The movie, in general, was one big belly laugh, practically from beginning to end...until the final shot. I knew that the faceless girl was in the back seat because the entire movie had been predictable, but I didn't expect her to jump out at the screen. I have to admit, that made me jump and scream at 1:00am, which I'm sure my neighbors didn't appreciate.

To sum it up, I'd recommend this film if you really want to laugh at a horror film and if you want to jump and scream at it's ending!

This film sucks!

[Leveticus · 1/10 · 8 February 2006]

Horrible movie, avoid at all costs unless you want to waste $3. All the typical clichés of a horror movie were called by us before they happened and we never saw this movie prior! (No gas in vehicle, bullets run out in gun, splitting up rather than sticking together in bigger group). This movie just pisses you off the more you watch it because of the common mistakes idiot teenagers make in every single one of these films. The only good thing was the background story of how the killer came to be, but not worth the view. Such potential, but in the end, a true letdown for horror fans...as usual.

• Deon

Sea food filler.

[ansell-72879 · 3/10 · 1 December 2021]

Scarred really is a shocker, but not in a good way. The acting is consistently sub-par. The plot is predictable. The setting unwaveringly bright and sunny which is not conducive of anything scary. And on I could go.

Make-up is critical to a movie about facio-ectomies, face removal. It is appalling in this instance. It is sympathy inducing rather than scarry. The point where Juliane Berlin reaches out in friendship in a positive way to Hannah Lea, the monster only to see Lea attacked, turns the tables. The good guys are suddenly the callous baddies.

To the films credit it does reintroduces the scream queen in a fairly emphatic manner. For volume and hysteria, it's hard to beat. And that's just Jonny Mack! As well as many of the cast engaging in theatrical yelling it is worth noting that the pretty quotient is very high. Particularly amongst the female cast members. There are no normal looking cast members apart from one Hillbilly.

Technically, well, good enough seems to have been good enough. A tent flapping in the middle of the night and letting in daylight with every movement is only one of many glitches.

The movie looks as though it were shot on a mobile phone. The Cinematographer, Eliot Rockett does his best and there are some nice shots scattered throughout.

There are some feeble attempts at jump scares, but these are predictable and are generally lackluster.

It is easy to pick apart a bad film. I could go on and on. I'm certain that directors and writers Jon Hoffman and Dave Rock didn't set out to make a bad film but they must have had suspicions during production that Scarred would be a straight to video then discount store production.

Still, a steady diet of caviar desensitizers us to its delectable and rarefied taste. We need occasionally to sample some cheap seafood filler to help us appreciate caviar. Scarred is cheap sea food filler.