Watch Wages of Sin For Free

Strong and Moving!

Fantastic!

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

What the f*ck did I just watch? Evil Dead, The Shining, and The Exorcist all mashed into one horrible movie probably filmed by 7th grade children. Almost as bad as Skeleton Man. I just... I... Please don't watch this. Help me dear lord. How come every time one of them screamed, it was like, 10 seconds after something 'bad' happened to them? O_o I suppose I should've realized how bad this movie would be when they show an extreme and painfully silent close up of a wandering-eyed man in the beginning... After that, it seemed like the darn actors themselves could barely hold back laughter at how poorly the script was.

Before I hand this review over to my friend who is surely going to rip this movie to shreds, let me just say:-the plot (until it got WAY too confusing to follow) was good. From an aspiring directors perspective, there were too many extreme close-ups, when really a couple medium or regular close shots would have sufficed. To add to that, there's also something called pace. Especially for the script-too much info in too short of a time. And too long for a scene to actually carry. Might I add I when it comes to creepiness, the moonlight of nature is usually the best answer. In the basement the light was "eerily" red. And there's a reason eerie is in quotations. Let nature (especially the night time) do it's thing for creepiness. But seriously, silhouettes with partial faces are better than faces with crappy eeriness. Nature is usually the best. There were a lot of high shots, and some low ones would have been nice. There were however AMAZING shots-like the ones that took place in the woods, panning (on a dolly I think) the branches-props to whoever did those. Ron, neglected to use his eyebrows which drove me NUTS throughout the entire film, his voice was very monotone as well. Basically the only characters that were even slightly believable were the two stone-rs. There were some scenes like after Sue puked outside the car door, before they even got into the house, she wipes her mouth and then Ron holds the hand. Ew. At least make it somewhat plausible and make her wipe he hands on her pants! Also after Sue coughs up blood, her chin isn't stained, nor are her teeth. or if they were she rinsed her mouth out with a glass of water before they shot the next scene, which makes it less believable. As well, I'm pretty sure it doesn't take all night to climb down an effing ladder, considering Ron was able to climb up one in order to help her kill the ONLY COOL GUY in the entire movie. Oh and destroy the body? did anyone hear of salting and burning the bones?!?! She should've at least smashed the skull in instead of letting it roll off the spine and onto the floor. Oh yeah, you sure showed him.Hi there, now that you've had a taste from the directors perspective, here's one from the horror genre admirer. First of all, I'd like to express how unbelievably BAD this movie was. I watched the first HOUR of it, took it out of my DVD player and whipped it across my bedroom. I was so angry! The story sounded great, it got my hopes up and then crashed and burned them. The only reason I even watched the rest of it was because the director buff made me, though I was glad because there were ten minutes of this movie that was actually worth watching. It started when Taylor gets possessed. While I'm at it, Prentice Reedy's acting was the only BELIEVABLE performance in the entire movie. It ended when the pulled "The Shining" trick with the axe scene. That irked me beyond belief. The GULL the writers had to have! To take something from one of the greatest horror movies ever created and put it into this piece of crap! The only saving grace, that Ron was killed. I was so sick of his bad soap-opera acting. Like my friend mentioned earlier, every time he needed facial expression, no eyebrow movement. It was like his face got a bad botox injection.Anyways, to wrap this movie-bashing up, bad acting (save Prentice Reedy's), bad plot, bad movie altogether. Want to see this movie? Don't. However, if you DO choose not to listen, have fun with this little gem.

I watched this film very closely and wondered what kind rating I could give it.To begin I thought it was fairly entertaining, the pace was slow moving yet it maintained a good character development {Not often seen in this line of film} the acting has a lack of depth, for example you don't often see a lot facial expressions during serious moments and the reactions at best are like extremely dull.At least the storyline is good, and the director created a not too bad look for the film.Overall, a relatively good choice for horror fans but don't expect Oscar winning performances.

With all due respect to zootie's comments I actually found a bit more positive in this movie. Perhaps it's because I've come off a recent run of really bad ones so by comparison this seemed much better than it really was..who knows. But it wasn't like it was putting me to sleep or anything...and truthfully I found the performances of Ashlie Clark (very nice looking!) and Brandon Michael to be palatable...certainly a notch above the rest of the cast. I do agree with zootie's estimation of the photography and production values...far superior to a lot of the "financially challenged" (politically correct term for low budget) horror flicks I've seen. With 2 fairly attractive females in the cast I was somewhat surprised that this film didn't take the usual "let's toss in some gratuitous nudity so more people will watch it" but I'm actually glad they didn't. Yes, the story tends to stumble over itself and the ending lacks a payoff but on the other hand I admire what the filmmakers tried to achieve and how they went about it. I assure you that although is not a great film, it is better than a lot of the other crap being released that I've had the misfortune of seeing.