Memorable, crazy movie

best movie i've ever seen.

It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Whilst George A. Romero might forever be pigeonholed as a filmmaker of living dead movies, and perhaps quite rightly, as some of his best work has been centred around the zombie genre, I did have have a notion in thinking that his son, Cameron might just be a chip of the old block.Needless to say, such is not the case! Would it be folly to just place the blame soley at the hands of Romero Jr? Let's just say partly, as a lions share of the blame should also head straight in the direction of scriptwriter and bum actor David Rountree.Not content with taking on one of the roles within the movie, Mr Rountree somehow managed to persuade the producers and Cameron Romero to get involved in this ultra slow moving Southern Fried Mash up! Granted, having read the synopsis on the back of the DVD cover, I did reserve judgement, however such hoped were soon slapped in the face, as many other reviewers have quite rightly noted, that nothing of major note happens for the first forty-five minutes.And even in saying that when something does occur, it's all done in a very slow fashion, such was the lethargy for me, I had to reach for the fast forward button just to ward of the tedium. Of course I know I could've just turned it off and forgot all about it, but having watched many a horror movie both good and atrocious down through the years I wanted to persevere.The net result was ultimately, a lack of pacing, a god-awful script courtesy of you know you, and although some of the acting was okay, it was the actions in the script that left much to the imagination, and as for the direction, whilst Cameron Romero might have a decent visual eye, he has a long way to go before he emulates the achievements of his father.Keeping in mind the tag line, In God's Name They Prey! We should all pray that we never have to sit through another Texas Chainsaw themed rip off.

The year is 1969 (supposedly). A group of friends traveling to a rally in Washington, D.C. hitch a ride with a nice enough fellow they meet up with at a run down gas station. However, a few miles along their journey, the fellow's car breaks down, causing the group to have to hike through the hills in search of shelter and help. They happen upon an isolated farmhouse, which at first seems abandoned. They take it upon themselves to camp out in the barn for the night, only to be greeted by the Stauton family in the morning. This odd bunch consists of the the mother, grandmother, and a mentally challenged adult boy. At first, the family is nice (except the boy, who takes a hammer to one of the traveler's face for saying HI to him). It doesn't take long before the true intentions of the Staunton family is exposed and they friends begin getting brutally butchered and dismembered one by one.The Good: The acting in "Staunton Hill" is actually pretty good. The setting is creepy and used to full effect. However, what the film has going for it is a few inspired moments of gore and how the killer casually goes about brutally disposing of his victims. It is rather disturbing, though the motive behind the killings is confusing and not fully elaborated on.The Bad: The plot is EXTREMELY clichéd. This is the same old "friends venture upon a isolated house and are slaughtered by a disturbed family" formula that we have seen many, many times before. Worse yet, director Cameron Romero (horror icon George Romero's son) does absolutely nothing new with the formula. It is business as usual as characters do the exact things we expect them to do and the film ends the exact way we expect it to end. The film is also suppose to be set in 1969; however, it is painfully obvious from the clothing, hair styles, and some set pieces that it is modern day. This is troubling because there is absolutely no reason mentioned for WHY the film has to be set in 1969. It would have been the exact same film had it been set in 79, 89, or 09. Romero's direction shows some inspired moments, yet is still pretty run-of-the-mill. When your last name is Romero and you are directing a horror film, you should probably take painstaking steps to make sure your film stands out among the countless others like it; this does not happen here. Maybe it us unfair to hold Cameron Romero to a higher standard, but with the Romero name plastered numerous times of the DVD cover, I think it is fair game. Does he show potential? Yes, but hopefully with his next project he makes an interesting movie that is not steeped in your typical horror clichés.Overall: While "Staunton Hill" isn't the worst movie of its kind, it certainly has very few redeeming qualities. It's clichéd, rather boring in parts, and offers nothing new to the genre. Rewatching "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" would be time better spent if you are dying to see a deranged family kill of innocent victims who stumble upon their residence.My Grade: D

I know the pressure on Cameron Romero must be massive. I mean...he went into directing horror movies as the son of a legend. That's got to be like being the kid of Lance Armstrong and picking up a bicycle for the first time. That being said, I'm willing to cut him some slack, but sometimes I feel like I'm giving him just enough rope to hang himself with.Staunton Hill is definitely not something you want in your portfolio if you're trying to make a name as a horror director. Nothing about this film feels original at all and even though you've seen it done a million times, you've seen it done much better. I won't place the blame solely on Romero because the whole thing was pretty bad...acting, directing, writing, the theme...pretty much everything.One of my major gripes with this film is the end. I'm not going to give anything away, but I think the end of the movie is supposed to be a surprise reveal. The problem? The movie very clearly addresses this about half way through. Why anyone thought the ending would be a surprise is beyond me, and it's almost insulting. I still have hopes for the younger Romero, but this is just beating a dead horse with another dead horse.

What a blatant act of misinformation to leave out that its "Cameron Romero's" movie. Honestly I don't care for his fathers movie either so its just a hopeless way of selling a movie anyway. But i hate when they sell movies on such points... most of the time you know they are bad. And "Staunton Hill is a bad movie too. The plot is a regurgitation of the never ending "Backwoods horror" theme with and inbred family, cannibalism and torture. You get your car full of kids in the woods, a fat dumb slayer... everything was there a million times before. The acting is often very bad. When the black guy watches his girlfriend being dismembered I was laughing.What is done pretty well in the movie are the gore effects but I have rarely seen a movie where these felt as displaced as in "Staunton Hill". The movie is incredibly boring for most of the time. The male characters get killed in a most uninspired and uninteresting fashion while suddenly female characters get a boost in their on screen time when they squeeze in a 10 minute dismemberment scene which shows every detail. What the hell were they thinking... its all a cash off. Put a misleading name in front of the title, include some gratuitous violence and then just end the movie when you don't know where to go with it.Ignore!