Watch The Maze For Free

good back-story, and good acting

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Five friends drive out to visit a legendary corn maze but get lost on the way, so when they arrive they decide to go explore it anyway instead of getting into the car and driving back to the city. Uh, that would have been the world's shortest movie so forget that.Once in the maze they split up and play an elaborate game of tag, not knowing that they aren't alone.And this is where the problems set in. The protagonists- two women (one of whom will, of course, be The Final Girl) and three men- just aren't too interesting. Shalaina Castle is Jordan, The Final Girl, and while she's a competent actress there's no reason for us to root for her. Her appeal to me was how she resembles Barbara Steele, the British actress who reigned in Italian horror movies like Mario Bava's BLACK Sunday in the 1960's.A mysterious figure wearing a red jacket with a hood- the better to hide his/her face and to stir fond memories of Nicholas Roeg's DON'T LOOK NOW- begins thinning out the cast until Jordan escapes at the end of the second act. Then director Stephen Shimek shifts the scene of the action to various spots around a totally generic nearby town.Several new characters are introduced, including the highly unlikely killer. We keep expecting that there's going to be a major reveal and we'll find out why this person is doing these completely out of character things. Nope. The script said the figure in red chases down this or that character and dispatches them, so that's what happens. What's good about THE MAZE:Honestly, for $200,000 I'll say that Shimek did a great job. Even though there are a lot of elements that come out of left field- I saw this on Chiller, and have no idea what their editors did to change the film's structure- he got it made. It's something I've dreamed of doing all my life, so hats off to Stephen and his crew.Shimek does know what a movie looks like. And he does direct the actors: I've got enough experience on stage to see that someone is in there pitching.And, oddly enough, it has a tremendous musical score. That was what kept my hand off the fast forward button throughout the film. The score is credited to Lance Montgomery, a name totally unfamiliar to me. Yes, it's influenced by the scores for VERTIGO and PSYCHO, but at least it's influenced by brilliant work. Whether it's "real" instruments or Mr. Montgomery sweating bullets over a keyboard could matter less to me. It creates atmosphere and builds suspense, and kept me watching.And there are two excellent performances. Whoever the actor is playing the man who gave the killer a ride into town was natural and comfortable in front of the camera. Good work, and sorry I didn't catch the character's name. And Richard Dutcher as Sheriff Ben also delivers fine work.The big problem is the screenplay. It just doesn't deliver. And the third act is a shambles (although it does finally gel somewhat better toward the very atypical finish).Honestly, I think the author would have been happier working outside the horror genre and doing something more character driven; you've gotta dance with who brung you, though.If you watch this, think of it like seeing a community theater performance while visiting Utah and appreciate the hard work that these dedicated amateurs put forth on both sides of the camera.

This movie has to be shown in film schools as an example of "How to make a really bad slasher, and make the audience hate every minute of it." You think I'm being a little harsh? Fair enough. Read on and let me know.I really liked the opening scene. It was promising at first but it only took five minutes to change my mind. Five teenagers play a tagging game in the middle of a corn field and they run into a serial killer on the loose, who then starts stabbing his victims one by one. Teenagers? Who did the casting I wonder, because they all are at least 25, some even look mid 30's.What makes a slasher enjoyable is, the killing scenes. The more original and gory they are, the more we get excited. This is the whole point of making a slasher. Making memorable, epic killing scenes, not creating a super skinny, girly killer who stabs people to death with a thing that looks like a swiss army pocket knife.I mean, really? That's how creative you guys were? The killer just stabs them in the stomach or whatever and they die. That's it. It looks more like a high school acting project rather than a slasher movie. I'm dead serious.Because of no character development, we never care when these 35 year old teenagers get killed. These writers have never read a book about scriptwriting before? You have to make the audience feel something about the characters before you start killing them. Otherwise it has no effect.I don't like the excuse of the movie having a super low budget. People on youtube make amazing videos with much less budget than that. Originality and creativity don't cost a penny, but be lazy and it will cost you a career.Too many logical mistakes, plot holes and poor execution, makes this movie unwatchable. The killer gets stabbed several times including his stomach but he heals all those wounds with a car lighter and no stitches! Really? I'm not here to give you a lecture on how to make a good movie, but you should not get mad at people who didn't enjoy watching it. We are right because your movie sucks. Plain and simple. We are the audience and if you are making a movie for us to watch, then we have every right to criticize it, because you are the one who claims that you can make a watchable movie, not us. You are wasting our time and we are bashing your movie. It's a fair deal. Either accept that and make a better one next time or just quit and do something else. It's obvious that you can't accept objective criticism but at least stop writing fake comments because you are bad at that too and they suck as much as your movie does.All in all, I strongly suggest you to skip this movie and do something more productive instead. Believe me, you will be glad you did.1/10 for writing fake comments. You little evil bunnies, you.

I'm a huge fan of low budge horrors and found this one didn't disappoint. It's been a while since I have seen a horror film take place in a corn maze (probably due to logistical problems with the story as some have mentioned. One would think you could just run in any single direction and eventually be out but that is beside the point). For being a low budget film I really enjoyed the music. Thats the one thing that seemed superior to other horror movies with low budgets. Most everything else was on par with what I expected.If you like low budget horrors then you won't be disappointed. If you have issues with low budget films then you probably wont enjoy this film (as you can see from some of the other reviews). Overall I would probably give it a 4.5 to 5 except that I enjoyed the music so much that it bumped it up to a 6.

I don't know what the worst part of this movie is. The acting, the story, or the dragging pace.The ending, though not typical, is unsatisfying and it comes after what can only be described as 10 minutes of stupid. Though, that seemed to be the main theme of this film.Five friends in a corn maze at night, one psycho and a bumbling country police force. All the elements of a b-grade slasher flick, but without the charm of one.There is very little lead in, and, after an inexplicable opening sequence which is not explained at all, the action starts withing a few minutes. There is no character development whatsoever before the characters start getting picked off.There is the typical lone-survivor-faces-killer-in-one-on-one-showdown, before escaping. That happens with 30 minutes to go. Then comes the "twist" which is less of a twist and more of an eye-roll.Cue weird and unnecessary flashback reminding the audience of what they just saw - you know - in case your short term memory prevents you from remembering more than 10 minutes of your life at any one time.It's not scary, it's not tense. Despite the opening scene, which is rather good, it is never explained and the rest of the movie is very poor by comparison.Of all the movies I've seen this year, this ranks as the worst. Look for it soon in the ex-rental bargain bin of your local video store.