User reviews

There is no way in blue heIl that a single one of these "actors" have ever, EVER gone to one iota, one minute, one second of acting school. The acting is so embarrassing, that I have to turn away from the cringe for most of the movie and just rely on the audio. But sadly, that aspect is just as bad. The people stutter their lines, start to say the last line or the next line, and then remember the correct and stop and say that! The director doesn't cut the scene and start over. He just barrels right on through. My guess is that he thinks it sounds natural. Guess what? IT DOESN'T SOUND NATURAL AT ALL! It sounds like some goof forgetting his or her lines while attempting to act in a one-star movie. Who funds this junk? How was a sequel ever made for this nonsense? Please, for all that it is worth, DO NOT waste your time on this rubbish! I'm warning you!

Here are some positives and negatives to the film.

Positives: Director got Cathy Podewell to return to the silver screen. I thought she did very well as the mother, and she was the strongest actor in the film.

For a very low budget film, the practical effects and score were good.

Jeremiah Lee (Steinert), and Kharn (Cody) Alexander did pretty good performances, and were the other notable standouts in the movie.

I appreciated the moody sets and design that were used, considering the budget.

The plot was good. A killer lures the intended victim back home with a murder, and tortures him by killing his friends one by one. It's been used before, but it was a solid plot line.

Negatives: The script was not great. Character development was lacking with plenty of the actors. Dialogue was rough throughout the film.

While the overall plot was fine, there are pretty big plotholes throughout the film. Not sure if these plotholes were editing issues where story was left out, or if the script just didn't consider them, but it made the movie confusing in certain spots.

Quite a few performances were wooden, while Newman had wavering quality in performance in his portrayal of Riley. Since he was the main character and the bulk of the dialogue, it made the film weaker when Riley was just throwing tantrums rather than driving the plot forward.

Overall, I didn't hate the film. I gave it a 3.8, which rounds up to a 4. There are strong elements here that Newman improves on his second film. However, there are huge demerits that hurt this film that have nothing to do with the low budget. I do think Newman has some improvement to do in his scripts though, and I think that can elevate his films, and potentially his performances in them.

It's fair to say that in the 45 years since its release, John Carpenter's Halloween has spawned more than its fair share of knockoffs. Most of these aren't worth bothering with, but occasionally one comes along that's worth an audience's time: Reunion From Hell is one of these. It's rather cheesy and certainly won't change your life, but it still manages to be a fun and enjoyable watch that pays homage to Carpenter's original without ever feeling derivative of it.

Director Hayden Newman also stars as Riley Conner, a therapist who's estranged from his family and friends and who returns home when he receives news that an old friend has been killed in mysterious circumstances. Upon his return, more friends start dying, and Riley is forced to figure out what's going on.

On the surface, Reunion From Hell might not seem like much - but there's a whimsical charm to it that manages to make everything click. Yes, it's all rather silly, and the dialogue isn't all that great, and some of the acting is pretty hammy, but it somehow just... works.

Its main strength is the chemistry between its core cast members. Their chemistry feels authentic, and the film's conversational scenes are some of its best for exactly this reason.

The various kill scenes are also rather enjoyable - and pretty impressive given the film's meagre $35,000 budget (for context, Carpenter's original Halloween had ten times this budget). They're tenser than one might expect, and the blood and makeup effects are admirable, especially in light of monetary constraints and how much focus is given to them.

It's also surprisingly refreshing to see a horror film that doesn't treat its gay characters with complete disdain. The genre hasn't been particularly kind to the LGBTQ+ community in the past, but Reunion From Hell does its best to move gay representation forward in the genre. It goes without saying that one little indie film like this isn't going to change the world, but it's certainly a nice start.

Admirably, Reunion From Hell somehow comes together pretty nicely. It's not revolutionary by any means, but it certainly works as a love letter to the '80s slasher flicks that Carpenter first inspired well over forty years ago. Hollywood could certainly take notes from its representation of the gay community.

Disillusioned fans say slashers are dead. This one is very much alive. Reunion from Hell homages 1990s slashers and has that familiar structure. While it presents itself as something generic, it's nothing short of an anomaly. It's a gender-bending modern horror film with gay denotations and LGBTQ perspectives. It's not a masterpiece, but it has a loyal niche that it's dying to seduce.

The Cinematography is very good for the films budget. The night scenes look great. They're atmospheric. The title isn't alluding to a class reunion so much as a get-together around a campfire or a table. I could spend a night there. It looks cozy, and we tend to forget it'll eventually turn into a bloodbath.

The casting fascinates me. Hayden Newman, co-director and co-writer, gave himself the lead role. He's the best thing about this flick. The other fun parts were borrowed from Scream, Halloween, Pet Sematary, and Urban Legend, namely. Reunion from Hell is minimalist, lengthy, and chatty. What you see is what you get and there's no room for ambiguity. Or is there?