Such a frustrating disappointment

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Don't listen to the negative reviews

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Michael Winslow, Tim Curry, Lance Henriksen, Brad Dourif...these were the names that piqued my interests to watch this movie. This movie is just your typical teen boy and girl run-in with monsters, of course, with the stereotypical jock bullies. Though, while I didn't care for the human characters, the monsters were quite hilarious -- I found myself laughing hysterically at the monsters' interactions with one another. For example, when Braineater and Stomacherumble are arguing was beautiful -- the farting, belching, and back-n-forth profanity and insults was just golden icing on the cake!I've read both the reviews and threads regarding "GingerClown," giving it low stars, and believing it's among the worst films watched. I have to simply disagree, for it's just a spoof the way I see it. I'm watching it for a second time on Xfinity Demand, and the similar movies are "Scary Movie" series, "This is the End," and "Chucky," movies that tend to bring much humor as opposed to horror. So if you're in for a good chuckle, I recommend this movie for you to watch. I've seen horrible movies, and this is not one of them. I've only given "GingerClown" an 9 out 10 stars, the reason being I wished for more people to have been killed/eaten, and the blood/gore was minimal, though that's just a small nitpick.

I do watch strange movies all the time and this ranks as one of them. Although it does have the added "value" of all those known actors (starting with Tim Curry to Lance Henriksen and some others), lending their talent to this. You might wonder how they got involved, but I reckon it might have been easy money for them.Clichés aside (Jocks bullying a nerd into going into a haunted place, GF of Jock turning against him and going with the shy "fella" and many more) this has some interesting choices in "monsters". I'm not sure how we're supposed to be scared of them, rather than mildly bemused and completely bewildered. Also completely annoyed ... A strange movie with more than just a clown, though no guarantee you'll have a good time ...

As harsh as that sounds Gingerclown really is that terrible, if not quite so much as to be down there with the worst films ever made. To be honest there wasn't much to expect considering how pretty bad the trailer looked, but when the likes of Brad Dourif, Lance Henriksen and Tim Curry are involved you couldn't help but want to see it for curiosity. As bad though the movie is there was effort put into it, but when the movie tries too hard in paying homage to 80s horror it doesn't look that way, instead of it actually trying too hard it looks like small glimpses of effort in a sea of inept schlock.The sets do give off some atmosphere and look very like what you would find for an 80s creature feature or horror, hardly house basement quality here. Unfortunately what effort went into the sets did not show in the rest of the production values. The lighting was far too dark a lot of the time(most of the time when the creatures appear you can't even tell which is which and have to rely on the voice to work out), even for an 80s-set horror film at night-time, and the photography and editing managed to look cheaper than the worst-looking 80s horror(it never did give off a nostalgic vibe, all it was was cheap), but it were the special effects and puppetry that were especially bad. The creatures look little more than Halloween costume decorations, exude little personality and move in a way that suggest that they would fall over any minute.With the music, there was one place where it was done very well and that was in the opening credits. That was some creepy scoring there and gave me the feeling that the movie would not be as bad as the trailer looked. The rest of the movie however was very generic, over-scored stuff with a number of the cues/music choices being wildly inappropriate and too stuck in the 80s. It was the script where Gingerclown falls down hardest on, it's just appalling and should never have been approved. You know that something is wrong when the still face palm-inducing "quack quack quacker..." is the most memorable line of the entire script and movie. The comedic lines and the slapstick are not funny in the slightest, if anything it's immaturity at its worst that was best flushed down the toilet(the big names were most likely secretly wishing they had). Every single one of the one-liners(childish and over-used), irrelevant ramblings and ridiculous over-load of cussing(some of it clearly there with no reason other than for the sake of it) were mind-numbingly annoying and enough to make anybody cringe.The story is pretty much the same, improving very little over the cringe-worthy plot synopsis. Quite a lot of it is uneventful and randomly structured actually with padded scenes, a lot of rambling and little if any exposition and also consists of all the characters constantly making decisions that don't make any sense and that it never explains the origins of the creatures. What hurts the story even more is the complete lack of atmosphere. The setting made for such a great idea and could have provoked thrills, scares and a glimpse of innocent fun but Gingerclown is not scary at all, the bad visuals are part of the problem but that the movie is never sure where and when to focus on comedy slapstick or on house of horrors. It's too padded out to be thrilling, as well as being so painfully predictable, and while this viewer likes to think themselves as very patient they found themselves looking at the clock before the halfway mark(which has not happened in some time). And it's too crude and structurally and tonally messy to be any fun.Gingerclown has terrible characters too, the lead trio are so annoying in personality and in their decision making that you wish they'd be done away with quickly. They're horrendously acted too, can't decide which is the worst of the three as they are as bad as each other. Erin Hayes seemed to mistake screaming her lines for acting, Ashley Lloyd whines and whimpers through his role and Michael Cannell-Griffiths' constant yelling is assault on the ears. Which brings us onto the celebrities(Tim Curry, Brad Dourif, Lance Henriksen, Michael Winslow and Sean Young) voicing the creatures. The good news is, their acting is undoubtedly far better than that of the lead trio and there is no problem recognising the voices. The bad news is, they are woefully under-used, no matter how hard all of them tried( the voice acting itself actually is not bad at all) their characters just aren't on screen anywhere near long enough and their material is too awful to properly do anything with it. The most memorable of them- and of the movie in fact- is by far Tim Curry, as the voice of Gingerclown he is genuinely creepy, he's also badly used and has worthless material but he does manage to make it come alive through his menacing delivery. While the script and story are the biggest failings in Gingerclown, it is the waste of these talented celebrities that angers me the most.Overall, terrible in almost every way apart from the sets, the music in the opening credits and Tim Curry. The script, story, characters, acting and puppetry are all of Z-grade quality, and you'd expect the big names to liven things up. Instead they're saddled with pretty insignificant characters and worthless dialogue which wastes them in what is most likely the worst film for all 5 of them(yes Henriksen's been in a fair few stinkers but at least they utilised him better). Waste of talent is a pet peeve of mine when it comes to films/movies, they deserved much better than this. 1/10 Bethany Cox

OK I just created an IMDb account for the sole purpose of giving you a warning:First, some info about my personal taste in movies. I actually never write reviews, and that is for one reason: I wont be good at it, because I practically like every movie I watch, and I could only write positive reviews all the time, suggesting that you watch it with an open mind. And really, who would be so damn interested in that? No one.OK, so I've seen many bad movies. I actually love most of the movies that people call bad. I love low budget slash horrors, they entertain the hell out of me. I cried laughing at all 6 Leprechaun movies. Yes I did. There is something hilarious to me about movies that are explicitly sh*t. I cant help it. BUT. This movie is something else. I'm actually one of the few (an I mean VERY few) people in the world who has seen it at this point, as I was at the world premiere about 3 and a half hours ago. My friend and I were alone in the whole theater (world premiere!) It should have been a sign, but we're both hardcore movie fans, and can't be discouraged so easily. Then it started: 20 minute long scene - slow, boring, trite. 450 ways to make this an interesting lead-in, none taken. This is the point where I should mention, that the whole thing is supposed to be a "fake 80's movie" - in style (some kind of retro American thing, realized mainly through costumes and hairstyles), and in production, meaning it lacks all modern computer-generated effects. In short: the monsters are ridiculous looking plastic dolls moved by actors. Now as I said, this wont be a bad thing necessarily, and actually these monster scenes are the high points of the movie - not because they are good, but because apart from the rest of the movie, they are SOMETHING. Yes, and we have arrived to the main problem: the NOTHING that this movie is. The 4 or 5 scenes with the monsters are the small pieces of floating material in the pond of pure boredom. This is what happens in between: They walk. Wander around in completely random places. Sometimes they run. They talk about completely irrelevant and uninteresting things. They look scared. Thats about it. It was around the 2/3 mark that I realized it wont get any better. In the beginning I thought OK it opens slow but it should get better any minute. Later I thought OK this is definitely not a good movie but they spin it around with some crazy sh*t and it'll be OK in the end. Nothing happened. I'm getting tired here and there's so many other things that are just inexcusably sh*t about this movie - like the complete lack of logic (again, not necessarily a problem, if its backed up with other interesting elements), the barely above 0 acting performance (I am convinced that the movie was shot during a single night, without ANY of the scenes being shot twice to make them better), the nonexistent visual world.... or anything, really. But I think you're getting the idea already. There was one joke I laughed out loud at. That is why the only imaginable category in which this movie gets 1/10 instead of 0/10 is humor. And these all are why I felt it was my sworn duty to warn you not to go to this film. I can hardly think of worse things you could do with that time and money. I warned you! OK, footnote: Sorry for any grammar mistakes. Feel free to correct them, if you find any!