Watch Lost After Dark For Free

That was an excellent one.

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

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.

I've got to say, as someone who grew up in the 80's watching almost every horror movie that came out (BIIIG thank you to sharing a room with my sister, who was 7 years older...) when I saw that they were calling this an homage to those movies I was very leery. One hour in I decided to, after years of using IMDb, make an account just to review the movie!! From the cheesy cliché characters to the cliché plot line.. Totally brought me back to those awful movies my sister would force me to watch growing up. The only thing I didn't really like was the overly played 'Nam vet (yes, also an awesome cliché!!!) Mr.C played by the sadly underused Robert Patrick! All in all, actually not to bad of a movie

I thought that the film The Final Girls, which is an homage to 80's slasher flicks, embraced the genre almost perfectly, but played it too safe resulting in a mixed bag. Lost After Dark fares even worse, having zero comedy, zero fun and drags the viewer through complete boredom before the final credits rolls. The film is a chore to get through and rewards the viewer with absolutely nothing. At their high school dance a group of friends decide to steal a school bus and go up to a family cabin for some fun. Their bus breaks down in the middle of nowhere and the kids find themselves being picked off one by one from a crazed cannibal killer. Who will survive? What will be left of them? And every other 80's horror tagline you can think of. This film desperately needed to be played for laughs and the biggest mistake it makes is that it chooses to play everything seriously. It wants us to believe that this film could have actually been from the 80's. Yet it has none of the charm that those slasher films had, as bad as some of those movies were, they had a sense of charm. This film has zero, nada, nothing really going for it. Being intentionally retro does not equal a good film. It purposely inserts the classic "film grain" to make it feel authentic. It never works. It even lamely incorporates the "missing reel" gag that worked to hilarious results in Grindhouse. Here it's a pathetic attempt to try and feel more genuine. It fails, miserably. Aesthetic failures aside, the script fares even worse.It seems the only thing the writers know about are the clichéd horror stereotypes. We are given the jock, the token black guy, the nerd, slut, good-girl, etc. We are forced to listen to them spew inane dialogue back and forth in a sad attempt at building character. It never works and makes the film feel longer than it actually is. The entire first half of the film drags at a wickedly slow pace and the so-called pay off of kills doesn't ever reach its potential. I will give the film some credit though, it surprised me with the initial death. That one moment where they manage to fool the audience and pull the rug out from under our feet is the only interesting moment in the entire film.

I pretty much agree with the others here (4 so far) The director did a nice job of setting up the characters and the general feeling of the era pretty well, but ultimately and unfortunately there really just wasn't much of a story to go along with it.The ironic thing is that usually it is SPECIFICALLY the acting itself that is so atrocious in these low-budget Horror films and many times completely ruins what could have been a good story (please see my review of the recent Gawd-Awful 'HONEYMOON' for example) But... in this case, the characters and the acting itself were just fine for the type of film it is, BUT everything else just didn't really add up to much. So, in this case it turned out kind of backwards from the way many other films seem to go...As mentioned by others, Robert Patrick was good in his role and the girl's Dad was just about right. Too bad... because almost ALWAYS, it is precisely the terrible acting or characters that are so grating in films like this, but these ones here are actually fairly decent compared to most. So, it leaves you feeling that you really would have liked to see them in the context of a much better story, but that is just the way it seemed to turn out, in my lowly and wretched opinion.Heh... I kind of feel that my REVIEW is rather shallow too, but quite honestly, there just isn't much more to say. I gave it a '5' only because I thought the setting, characters, and actors were pretty decent, otherwise the story overall would have gotten less...So, basically.... move along home... nothing to see here...