The Roost (2005) User Reviews (48)

The Barn of Horror

[claudio_carvalho · 4/10 · 29 December 2007]

While driving to the wedding of their friend Mike, Trevor (Karl Jacob), Brian (Sean Reid), Allison (Vanessa Horneff) and her brother Elliot (Wil Horneff) leave the main road and have an accident, and their car falls in a ditch in a lonely road. The quartet seeks for help in an empty farm, but Elliot and Trevor decides to walk further, leaving Brian and Allison waiting for them in the farm. They meet the highway patrol Officer Mitchell (John Speredakos) that brings them back to meet Brian and Allison. Meanwhile Brian decides to go to the barn, where he is attacked by vampire bats. When the group seeks for him in the barn, they are trapped inside by the killer bats that turn people into zombies.

"The Roost" is not a totally bad low-budget movie, actually it is tense and has good acting of the unknown cast. However, it is a short story that is extended in low-pace to last 80 minutes running time, and becomes boring in a certain moment. The conclusion and the silly black and white insertions with The Horror Host are awful. I do not know if the intention of the director / writer Ti West was to extend the feature or try to make it cult with the insertions, but the fact is that it does not work. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Ataque dos Morcegos" ("Bats Attack")

Pretty Banal...

[the_golden_spike · 4/10 · 22 January 2006]

I found this pretty banal - I watched in it London's cosy ICA cinema 2 - it's an art cinema, but if you get the right crowd (as they recently did for 'Thundercrack!', the atmosphere in this 45-seater is excellent.

However, I had to step past a guy who'd fallen asleep when the movie ended - the build up was excellent at points, but there was no payoff. It was pretty senseless, and although the grain lent it a spooky low budget ambiance, I'm not certain that was the intention.

Acting was reasonable, but the characters were beyond paper-thin. It was seriously hard to care about them at all, yet at the same time I wished them no particularly ill-will. Neither of these is a good sign.

Not recommended - not appalling, but not great by any means.

Horror film-making for dummies; lesson one.

[Coventry · 6/10 · 22 March 2006]

With "The Roost", young writer/director Ti West (the guy's only one year older than me, damned!) proves that making your own horror movie doesn't necessarily has to be unrealizable dream! On the contrary, it's actually the easiest profession in the world just as long as your ambitions don't reach much further than telling a fun story and paying tribute to the B-movie industry of the 70's at the same time! And if that happens to be what you're expecting to see as a viewer, this really isn't such a bad little gem after all! The plot is incredibly basic, telling a story that features absolutely no surprises, no twists and no red herrings at all! Four adolescents on their way to a friend's wedding take the stupid decision to try a shortcut off the highway and face engine trouble in the middle of nowhere. When they arrive at the only farmhouse for miles around, the place is congested with bats that turn people into bloodthirsty zombies. The elderly couple and the helpful police officer are the first to die, but the kids will unquestionably follow next… That's it, nothing more!! There's no explanation given to the origin of the zombie-virus spread by the bats (or why it's specifically spread by bats in the first place), no attempt to find a solution and not even a reasonable ending! Not only the script but also the technical aspects of "The Roost" are as primitive as can be. The cinematography is monotonous, with loads of traditional pans and fixed camera angles, and the editing is handled like a routine job. The make-up effects are occasionally nasty, though, with a satisfying amount of blood and guts. The most remarkable aspect about the entire production is the 70's throwback narration style. Underrated actor Tom Noonan ("Robocop 2", "Manhunter") stars as the ghoulish host – a sort of Crypt Keeper, if you will – who briefly introduces the creature feature and simultaneously makes a couple of wit references towards classic cinema. This film certainly isn't meant for video game and/or CGI effects worshiping audiences, but fans of Hammer, Amicus or even the "The Twilight Zone" will definitely appreciate it!

Sleepy execution spoils potential

[Cujo108 · 11 August 2010]

Four people are on their way to a wedding when they decide to take a backroad due to traffic. A bat hits their windshield causing them to wreck the car, and now they're stuck in the middle of nowhere. After walking a good ways, they realize that there's a farm down the road. Too bad for them the rest of the bats have chosen the farm's barn to roost in. Worse, the people that the bats attack turn into zombies for whatever reason, and they already attacked the elderly owners of the farm.

This film takes a very threadbare plot and does nothing with it. Not that they could really do much with it to begin with, you might say, but anything can happen if you bring enough imagination and rugged ambition to the table. Alas, "The Roost" winds up being a relatively bland effort where not much happens. The bat attacks are underwhelming and sloppily handled. It's never explained why their victims become zombies. I love the unexplained, I love being left to wonder about certain things that aren't spelled out for you, but I just didn't care in this case. In fact, the film didn't give me a reason to care about much of anything. The characters are whiny too, so I couldn't really invest in them. Cult director Larry Fessenden appears very briefly as an ill-fated tow truck driver. He also served as producer. Seems like an odd fit since his films are the right kind of ambiguous, whereas this thing tries ambiguity just to be even more stripped down than it already is.

The whole film has a faux "Frightmare Theater" wraparound complete with horror host, but it was more annoying than it was effective at creating any type of nostalgia. At one point, the film is stopped dead in it's tracks due to the host's antics. Really, did we need this nonsense intruding on the main tale?

Even with the bare minimum of a plot, this could have been something. It seems like Mr. West just wasn't interested. There is one moment in the film that I really liked, that being when one of the teens gets into the farmhouse and looks over a bunch of pictures on the wall. The way in which West shoots this brief sequence made something so simple as looking at photos take on a certain level of uneasiness. The rest of the film was in desperate need of something like that. Excluding that one bit, this is weak stuff all around.

Dear Lord... This was a movie?

[Cuclean · 1/10 · 6 December 2005]

I was at the final day of the Horrorthon Festival in Dublin this year when I saw what was in my mind the worst film of all time. I always make an effort to stay until the end of a film to give it all the chances it can get. However, when I walked out of "The Roost", I felt completely certain that nothing that it could have done would have saved it from the train wreak that I had watched up to that point.

I am a huge fan of B-movie horror so it wasn't a case of me not getting the film... I got it... but it was the deep deep flaws that caused me to hate this film. The opening had potential, I liked the idea of the "old school" narrator and got a bit of a "Terrorvision"/"Fright Night" vibe from it. This is where my interest in the film stopped. The storyline was convoluted and had no actual purpose. The acting was some of the worst I have ever seen put onto film. I didn't give a damn what happened to the characters and if they had dropped dead at some point from some random disease, I would have left happy because I wouldn't have had another 30 minutes of my life taken from me. The direction in The Roost is laughable, the director must have literally just pointed at the actors and just said " just read the words on the page guys!". The editing is sloppy and sometimes continuity goes off to the land of Oz.

Having said this there was one redeemable feature to paying to see this film. I saw how not to make a film. Utterly terrible. Don't waste your time on this film unless you're some sort of masochist. I honest felt like getting a lobotomy to forget this film ever came near me. The stinker of Horror movies. Avoid at all costs.

Really bad

[roelscheijde-1 · 1/10 · 28 April 2006]

I saw this film a week ago at the AFFF (Amsterdam Fantastic Film Festival) and it was (understatment) a bit disappointing. About half the audience left before the end, I left about 15 minutes before the end.

The picture quality is really awful, half the time you can't see what is going on, the filmmakers might say they did it to get a real grainy and dirty look, i blame it on lousy lighting. The sound is even worse, half the time you can't understand what they saying, but to be honest when you can they usually say really stupid and dumb things so you really don't miss much. And the sound of the killer bats is so awful, the woman next to me covered her ears.

The story of killer bats that turn people into zombies sounds like a fun guilty pleasure but is so badly executed with characters that are so boring that you just don't care about who lives and who dies.

This film has the distinction of scoring the lowest points in the audience poll at the AFFF ever for a screening and it deserves it.

Simply Awful

[metallica1417 · 1/10 · 15 October 2006]

Where to begin...The Roost; a low budget independent film that could have been a great movie IF the entire plot had been rewritten so that it went somewhere and all the "actors" (I use that term loosely here) are replaced with people who can actually act. Instead we are presented with lifeless and somewhat whiny characters that you feel nothing for except contempt, and a complete lack of story development. The only thing worth watching is the short intro/intermission/outro late night horror show segments, but even they wear a little thin. The movie lacked any scare factor and to those who live and breathe horror movies a word of advice; have a nice comfy pillow handy as you're going to find yourself sitting there yawning trying to stay awake throughout the 80-minutes of bad acting, bad plot, bad attempts at suspense and mediocre gore.

Watch this movie if you enjoyed Satan's Playground.

It's not all that bad.......

[sanjr1 · 7/10 · 15 October 2006]

"The Roost" is a movie that was most assuredly made by lovers of "B" movies for lovers of "B" movies. Nothing more, Nothing less. And as a lover of this particular type of film I was stoked to see it. I have to admit though...It was a while before I could get into the movie. It starts out slooowly, With a intro/outro featuring a horror host that I found to be fairly interminable. As a matter of fact I didn't know what was going on for more than a few minutes of the film. Once the feature actually started I managed to get a hold of the concept & enjoy the film a little bit more. A lot of the film is grainy & dark. Not a good combo if you ask me but it 's not enough to hinder watching the film on your TV. It must have been rough to watch on a big screen though. The plot? Well let's just say that 4 People are stranded on an old country road in the middle of the night & seek shelter/help at an barn that they stumble upon. Unfortunately for them the barn is infested with killer bats that have the ability to turn you into a zombie if you are bitten by them. WTF? Yeah, It's a bit odd. As a matter of fact it doesn't make any sense at all. But I don't think they were looking to make a logical movie when they were filming this. Just a movie that makes you jump a few times & cover your eyes a bit. And in that sense they succeeded.....Barely. It's got plenty of atmosphere & the performances were pretty tight(When you can hear them, The sound is fairly bad. Subtitles help a lot). The ending was also pretty eerie. All in all a pretty good little movie to get you through a dark & stormy night with your significant other. And I believe that's what the filmmakers set out to do. They succeeded.

One point for Merlin Tuttle and bat conservation.... Zero for "The Roost"

[merklekranz · 2/10 · 22 August 2010]

Merlin Tuttle presents a feature on the DVD about the importance of bats to our ecosystem, that is both informative and entertaining. Unfortunately "The Roost" presents bats in stereotypical fashion as evil. The worst part of all this is that the movie is minimalist entertainment, minimal lighting, minimal logic, minimal storyline, minimal character development, minimal meaningful dialog, and minimal steady camera. All this adds up to not much more than one would expect from a zombie film. The bats get another bad reputation exposure, really for no reason, as "The Roost" relies on such minimalist material that it is barely watchable. - MERK

Creepy and Atmospheric

[leorican · 7/10 · 28 October 2006]

This little flick took me back to my childhood and all those creepy monster stories I use to hear. The basic plot is simple; A group of four friends, which include a brother and sister, are on their way late at night to another friends house to be in a wedding the following day. Of course the car breaks down and they end up at a creepy old farm where the inhabitants have...well I wont spoil that here. What happens next is a night of horror in what turns into a farm of horrors. What I liked about this is the creepy atmosphere that the director builds up and its cool 70's like vibe. If it weren't for the mention of and use of a cell phone, the setting could easily have taken place in 1975 or 76. The director makes you suspicious of every sound and shadow and all the actors do a fine job of acting scared. The way to describe this movie is that its somewhat of a cross between "BlairWitch Project meets Night of the living dead meets Nightwing meets Night Gallery". I enjoyed it and was creeped out through most of it. This is low budget horror fun and should be enjoyed that way. My only pet peeve was that none of the characters really questioned why what was happening was happening and the director didn't even try and explain the reasons behind what was happening. But thats minor and forgiven because I did enjoy the movie and sometimes not knowing the "why's" can leave things up for the imagination. God forbid we should try and use it every now and then. My advice...Make some popcorn, turn off the lights, and enjoy!!

Save your money

[broadwaycinema-1 · 2/10 · 11 October 2006]

I saw 'The Roost' the other day and my expectations weren't too high but I thought I give it a chance anyway since I'm interested in low budget horror film-making. To say that I was disappointed but not surprised is probably an understatement. Much of what some of the others said who commented on this film I agree with.

The cinematography, sound, and acting was not very good. You never really got to care much about any of the characters or what happened to them (really not a good thing for a film). After awhile I started cheering for the bats.

The cinematography and editing looked very amateurish. There were a lot of long two-shots that lasted WAY too long and revealed very little without cutting to close-ups or medium shots. The sound was so bad it was like they just used the on-camera Mic on a pro-sumer DV camera, which they may have because it looked like it was filmed in DV.

In addition, many of the shots were jerky or out of focus even when I didn't think it was the intent. The only encouragement that I got from this film is that, if something of this quality can sell, there is hope for some of us filmmakers breaking into indie films.

Fun Creature Feature

[monica-63 · 9/10 · 17 March 2005]

I just caught The Roost at SXSW--my friends and I had a great time with it. Reminded me of staying up and watching Night Flight and horror movies at sleep overs as a kid. Loved the vintage horror host framework and that it never became campy or self parody. It was also refreshing to see a scary movie that is a true monster movie rather than another slasher, bogeyman or demon flick--not that I don't like that type of horror, but a good monster movie seems to be a rarity. The theater was packed which meant that it was also rewarding to see a film that made people jump and squeal (the guy two seats down from me was hugging his knees at one point with his hands over his ears). It had great atmospheric music and a cool use of horror programs coming from all the radios that created an eerie effect. I'm totally impressed that this is a first time director who made this with next to nothing. Horror fans should love it!

For Die Hard Horror Fans Only

[thalassafischer · 6/10 · 29 July 2017]

I wondered how I had missed an effort by the usually brilliant Ti West for over a decade, especially since the intro, so humorously filled with spooky old Hollywood themes (including a tombstone in a 19th century graveyard that without a trace of subtlety says YOU lol) seemed like a promising horror comedy... It has all the tropes, including a distinct modernized Night of the Living Dead feel, which will appeal to those of us who have seen too many horror films, and a truly eerie soundtrack which reminded me of NASA Sounds of the Planets on YouTube. ..but for all of this somehow the film drags and you just don't care about any of the bitchy, whiny 20- something main characters at all. Fun background flick for Halloween season or a one time necessary viewing for die hard horror fans, but as a stand-alone film it seriously falls flat. Everything else I've seen of his is so good I wonder if this was his college film class project.

Slow moving tale bookended by failed Horror TV show antics.

[ApolloBoy109 · 3/10 · 24 November 2008]

Strange Title for my review. Strange movie. Four kids (with only one cell phone between them) break down in spooky rural area. Infected bats are about, one bite makes you a flesh eating zombie. Okay.

The premise has all the earmarks of being a slow to boil thrilling tale but like it's music, it's all screechy violin noises and no substance. The young people had no individual character traits, most of the dialogue seemed poorly improvised and though Director Ti West has several 'swelling' moments ultimately they lead nowhere. Again we have character who behave as though they've never seen a horror film.

Now let's get to the "Wait --What" moment. The film begins in a cheap 1950's studio where we are introduced to a Dr. Demento-type TV host of horror films. Tonight's movie is the Roost. Those sections are in black and white and suffer, purposely however, through tacky sets, props and that hokey dialog we have come to know from the Creature Features of our youth. It was completely incongruous and unnecessary to the plot of the four kids of the story. The styles didn't even match, the chemistry was wrong and pulled the viewer away from the intended tale. I cannot believe the film maker started out this project with that in the original script. It seems tacked on.

I kept it on because I was doing things around the house having given up after the first 30 minutes (during which time little happens. Not much happens at all.

I do think director/writer Ti West is talented and will be looking down the road for his next film.

Absolutely Awful on all levels

[krazykat29 · 18 June 2005]

I saw this at the L.A. Film Fest last night, and boy has my estimation of that fest's taste gone down. Somehow, Larry Fessenden (the exec producer) has gotten a 'star' like name. Beats me, because Wendigo isn't that great a movie either. This can be the only reason this tripe got into the festival.

Anyway - The Roost - was introduced as homage to the early "rent on VHS" low budget horror flicks of the 80's. Great. I'm ready.

What it is - is a boring, tale of four (or so) people that end up at a farm, and then go to the barn for no good reason, and then get attacked by bats. Somehow, I guess these bats can make you a zombie, because occasionally someone acts like a zombie, or doesn't die when they're shot. I think. Also, at one point, there's 'reverse reverb' type sound on a voice in the dark - - so maybe they also make you a ghost.

Now, if the set up for this had been the first 30 minutes, fine. Now they're trapped and they have to get out.

But they don't - it takes a torturous 60-70 minutes. It's essentially a one act movie - on Valium.

But it's not like they're really trapped. The barn door is wide open, and most of the time the only thing that seems like it's outside is the enormous amount of harsh light they're blasting at the Barn to light the scene. Eventually (this could be construed as a spoiler), the two remaining people decide to go out to the police SUV, which is still parked from much earlier in the torture, er movie. Of course, its lights are still on and flashing as they were left before.

The Director proudly mentioned how the movie was shot on film. Kodak would NEVER point to this as an example of what their stocks can look like. Much of the time, it looked like they had pushed the film two or more stops. The grain was beyond ridiculous. Also, FOCUS??? Who cares? Some shots, nay scenes - shots indicates editing, were so out of focus as to be pointless. The Lighting was essentially to get an exposure. There was no art (or semblance of realism) to it. I know budget is low, etc. but it's not an excuse to just flip the switch on 5000 watts of light and call it a day - not when it's supposed to be night.

The soundtrack - an incessant screeching of strings and 'found' type sound, would have worked better if it hadn't been so damn loud. Though the overall volume level at the theater was in the "I'll confess to anything" range, the mix of the movie itself was also not great.

A wrap around as if all of this was a 'creature feature' TV show with guest host Tom Noonan was - so what? At one point, the movie is interrupted by going back to the wrap around. Then, it "rewinds" or "forwards" a bit in the movie. I think it was done to cut through an especially bad scene, so -- Thank you -- good idea. On a cinematic level though - what were they thinking? Funny? Clever? Come on, SCTV did this twenty years ago.

If you want to watch a good bad 80's movie, watch "The Incredible Melting Man" or any other number of movies. If you want to torture yourself with boredom, grating sound, awful lighting, non existent pacing, and ultimately thoughts of - WHY WHY WHY?! -- or if you want to remind yourself of those bad 80's video rentals you shut off after four minutes - then, The Roost may be your bag.

Dull, dull, dull

[moonmonday · 1/10 · 11 August 2015]

It's amazing how many people have jumped on the Ti West bandwagon. Reminds me of the story about the emperor's new clothes. This is by no means a good movie, nor is it particularly watchable. The direction is lazy, the premise patently stupid, and it's basically the kind of film where nothing really happens. Ever. There's a predictably stupid ending too, and you'll expect it.

The framing show idea was cute, but it unfortunately also suffers from lasting far too long for what it is. It's like he's never seen a television show before; even in the 60s, those sequences did not take that long and did not drag that long.

The whole experience feels like someone who has tried to make a film despite never having seen one, only heard basically what it's supposed to be like. As a result, it feels like it goes on for hours at a time, because the pacing is terrible, the acting is unexceptional, the sound engineering is nonexistent -- actors mumble all the time, but the sound effects and music are top volume -- and overall it's something that can't even be enjoyed as a sort of homage. But it's not even that. It's basically just a terrible movie from the late 60s/early 70s, except it was made now. Kind of like House of the Devil.

The Innkeepers is so far the only Ti West anything that has been watchable, and it really wasn't that great. Certainly not excellent enough to justify the blind adoration so many seem to have for him in reviews and website comments. But this one? This was just boring. I couldn't even deal with having it on as background noise, it actually just bored the bejeezus out of me no matter what. And at the end of the day, if your horror movie is boring above all, you have pretty disastrously failed in that genre.

Filmaking at its worst

[Horrorible_Horror_Films · 1/10 · 2 January 2007]

The worst camera work I've ever seen on a film. The worst lighting I've ever seen - made in 2005 there is no excuse for such poor quality. Its obvious the filmmakers were total hacks that should find other lines of work. Only 81 minutes long, and much of that was padding - unexplained long shots of roads, barns, and characters just looking - very stupid! There was so little action, this is one of the very, very few movies I have ever stopped watching before the end.

When I read the synopsis on the back of the DVD for this "film" it sounded like a great concept for a horror movie (vampire bats bite people and turn them into zombies - very cool idea) Then, these people take this great idea and make the most boring worst movie ever from it. Really, really disappoiting. I cannot imagine a situation where one would actually like this movie. It SUCKED.

Worst Movie Ever!

[bill9340 · 1/10 · 21 January 2007]

How some of these reviews gave this two stars is beyond me & anyone who gave it higher than that obviously worked on the movie, or knew someone in it.

I love B horror movies, but this is truly bottom of the barrel. The acting is terrible, there are many times when the actors stand there silently & I swear they are trying to remember whose line it is. And hey, show some emotion every now and then, I started thinking the normal people were the zombies until the zombies showed up.

However the script & direction are far worse. Example: The kids see the cop fall from an upper part of the barn & die. Then bats fly out of the barn. Somehow from this the kids realize that something evil is going on and they need to hide in the barn. Wouldn't an average person assume the cop accidentally fell, possibly startled by the bats? There are a dozen more breaks in logic such as this.

If you haven't seen it, DON'T, even if you love B-horror.

An Average Horror Flick

[jamhorner · 6/10 · 3 January 2008]

I don't quite agree with Fangoria, that this film is an astonishing achievement of modern horror and that it is a horror gem. However, I will say that this film is an average horror movie. I thought it was going to be miserably horrible and a waste of an hour and 20 minutes, but it wasn't I enjoyed it. The basic premise is about a group of teenagers who get stranded at an abandoned farm where a vicious clan of vampire bats inhabit. The problem is that, when bit by one of these bats, the host turns into a zombie craving blood. I was very pleased in which this film was played off, the scares were very moderate with some pretty goon moments, but the technical aspects of this film were the real amazing part of it. The acting was moderate. Though, despite it's basic sense, I enjoyed watching film.

I want to first comment on the style that his movie was bases around. The style is that of a "Svengoolie Show," where a host greets and then introduced to the main feature, in this case, it's The Roost. However, as much I as I loved the introduction the whole lead up to the pre-show and presentations dragged on two much and started to bore me. Though, I did enjoy the Grindhouse feel that this movie presents, it involves intermission from the host, scratch marks, some cigarette burns and at one point the host rewinds the tape. I enjoyed I because it makes you feel like your watching it either on TV or during some outdoor horror fest. Accompanying the Grindhouse feel, the ending, not of the actual feature The Roost but the ending of the whole movie, is a surprise ending in itself.

The acting of this movie was average, with an average balance of both good and bad acting; however, I think that there was a slightly greater amount of good acting. There were great performances by Karl Jacob, Vanessa Horneff and Sean Reid, and you can't forget Tom Noonan as The Horror Host, whose performance as The Ripper in Last Action Hero was amazing. The actors and actresses seemed really dedicated to the role but there were points, mostly near the end of the movie, their performances started to dim down a bit. They seem dedicated, but they sometimes they don't really put that much effort into it. But I will comment on the good acting, when the actors and actresses did a good job of acting, they were very believable as real people with some very real emotions.

The scares were also very moderate in this film. Granted, some of the bat attacks, zombie attacks and creepy sounds were scary, I still have yet to be really scared by bats. I wasn't even a fan of the movie Bats. However, I think the only real effective horror was the zombie scenes and maybe on bat scene and that scene only had a chilling sound effect to it. There were some great "jump-out" scares as well as creature scares, but for the most part I wasn't really a fan of its overall scare-factor. Though, I will give them credit for being original in connecting vampire bats with zombies.

Now, for my favorite part of the whole movie, the technical aspects of this film were amazing, something that I don't see that much in independent movies. What I particularly enjoyed was the lighting; it had the feel of a Creepshow movie, with high contrast colors and some strong primary colors. It gave me the sense of being trapped in darkness and enhances the stylization of this film. I could compare the contrast to Sin City as they both have some really great shadow effects. Creepshow-wise, they utilize strong reds, yellows and natural lighting, mostly demonstrated through the beginning car scene and while in the barn. The cinematography was very well thought of, as it used some great ending shots and establishing shots as well as some okay transitional shots. The mostly focus with the scenery and the darkness of the movie. The editing was choppy, though I enjoyed it because it fit with all the other technicalities, and as a result of all of these aspects coming together, you get and unintentional devotion and tribute to comic book style film-making and art.

Overall, this film was very average in the way that most independent movies are; the acting was okay but for the most part there were some good performances, the movies storyline was unique but it was unique for using recycled material into something worth watching and scares were somewhat predictable, aside from some creepy sound effects. However, as far as indie films go, the technical portions of this film were amazing. I would recommend this film for horror fans, as well as those who enjoy Bat movie, but not for zombie lovers. There weren't that many zombie parts. If you enjoy indie movies, this is a movie that you must rent, but if you want something to really scare you; you may want to pass it up on the video rack. As for me, I thought it was a fun movie and I enjoyed watching it, I enjoy indie films whether they are bad or good.

Woefully Bad.........ah, to be scared again!

[raymond-x-jacobsen · 1/10 · 15 January 2007]

What could have been a great, low-budget shocker, is instead just a regular, boring movie. I appreciate low-budget films (heck, my 600+ attendances to "Evil Dead" probably funded Sam Raimi's house!), but this was just dreck. Actually, at the beginning of the film I had high hopes because I was very impressed with the dialog---these characters seemed believable, and the words they were saying were not clichéd (which is usually the downfall of most horror films). But, the film really never gains momentum, and never really pays off---definitely has a "made-for-TV" feel to it. If you want a schlocky killer bats movie, try "Bats"---much more entertaining!

Tense and original, but nonetheless flawed.

[s_osovick · 7/10 · 21 November 2006]

The Roost is a tense and original horror film that centers around a group of teens "trapped" on a creepy farm at night. This may sound like the plot line to a Scooby Doo cartoon, but thanks to clever cinematography by Eric Robbins and an incredible score by Jeff Grace, who, like David Kristian (Nacho Cerda's The Abandoned) is rescuing us from standard horror soundtracks, Ti West succeeds in creating a truly chilling horror film.

Even if I did enjoy the film's over-all atmosphere, I found the horror host segments unnecessary and distracting, as if they had been tacked on to give the film longer running time. At 80 minutes, it's already very short, and the lack of character development makes it feel as if the film was originally intended as a short. The acting leaves a lot to be desired, but no one in this low budget debut feature was as bad as Paris Hilton in the mega budget and not in the least scary House of Wax.

I really want to love this movie, but something is missing for it to be a great horror film. The Roost is still an impressive first feature, and it will be interesting to see what Ti West has to offer in the future.

not very good

[maria_swartling · 2/10 · 26 October 2006]

the program horror host in the beginning who presents the movie, is amusing, it reminds of old horror shows where they talked to the audience directly.

but the movie, argh... it was a long time ago i saw such a boring movie. the plot was not very exciting and you sometimes wondered what they were doing there.. and was there any conversation at all in the movie, otherwise from the old horror host? hm, not much... the worst thing i think was the awful violin music which came during the whole movie in "exciting" scenes... in the beginning i laughed at the thrilling hysterical violin music, but in the end i was only irritated. the actors played bad, and the camera recording was like a bad copy of The Blair witch project. Brrr...

the only thing i thought was good in this movie, was the music that was on during the end-titles when the movie was over.

if you want to have av movie in the background on, when you're doing something else, this movie is the thing for you, otherwise don't spend time watching the roost, because thats a waste of time.

Surprisingly fun throwback

[lovecraft231 · 8/10 · 7 September 2007]

Today, we get a lot of movies that are supposed to be throwbacks to the 70's and 80's era of horror and exploitation. Usually, they get this wrong ("Malevolence", "Satan's Playground", "The Hazing", etc.), but sometimes, a movie gets it right. Fortunately, "The Roost" gets it right.

Opening with the type of horror movie host that you saw in the old days, "Roost" is actually a movie-within-a movie. The actually movie is nothing original: A group of friends car breaks down, they get stranded, and run into a deadly force (here it's bats that turn victims into zombie-like killers) While the premise and movie in a way is nothing that original, it works because of how it is all done. There is gore, but it's not a gore fest, as the movie focuses more on atmosphere and suspense (which fails on a few occasions) than gory slapstick gags and homages that can grow tiresome. Also effective is the way director sets up several scenes, including a sequence where a cop is attacked by bats. Adding to it is a wonderfully creepy screeching violin score, and some effective (but never over used) CGI effects involving the bats.

"The Roost" won't change the face of horror. It's not too original and the acting is mediocre at best. However, it's still a blast, and will be a treat to those who grew up going to see Grindhouse movies or who watched creaky, faded videos of horror movies.

Surprisingly watchable chiller

[mwold · 6/10 · 30 November 2006]

Earnest acting, a few good scares, sufficient amounts of gore, and some really creative low budget flare help this little movie rise above the fold. The movie obviously doesn't take itself too seriously which in this case works in it's favor. It's also pretty apparent that the movie makers had a ball doing this film, there are plenty of touches here and there that added some flavuh in what otherwise might be construed as a hackneyed affair. Admittedly I generally avoid low budget cheapies, but considering the constraints involved, I found it entirely compelling. Highlights include a totally over the top score which is entirely suitable, and great font! Low points - it looked as if the ending was tacked on or something.

Boredom absolute...

[paul_haakonsen · 2/10 · 15 December 2015]

Where to begin? There were just so many things wrong in this movie. Well, let's start with the fact that I made it 40 minutes into the movie and nothing, absolutely nothing had happened to keep me interested. So I turned it off out of sheer and pure boredom.

And the quality of the movie just felt like it was shot on someone's personal digital video camera. It was gritty and dark, and very far from a proper movie production. When I buy a movie I expect a certain level quality.

In the 40 minutes I suffered through, two (possibly three) deaths had occurred, but we had seen nothing of it. So it was a borefest of epic proportions.

The acting in "The Roost" was mediocre at best. And it felt like some of the actors didn't fully buy into this movie themselves.

I will never make a return trip to finish this incredibly dull movie, and it will now stand to collect dust in my collection.