User Reviews (57)

Add a Review

  • The first thing that hit me with The Orphan Killer was the arrogance behind it. This is a Matt Farnsworth movie from his production company which is basically his name, it also stars him and the cover art for the IMDB page has his signature on it. Really?

    It tells the story of a psychotic young man who grows up into a psychotic older man who *Shock horror* goes on a killing spree, aiming specifically for his sister.

    Our killer wears ordinary street clothes but has a mask that would be right at home on a Slipknot set, it looks rather a weird contrast.

    The film looks solid enough, money clearly went into it and it shows. In no way is the movie bad, it's just so incredibly unoriginal.

    We've seen this before, near enough literally. It's just yet another slasher flick with no real character or identity, methinks Mr Farnsworth needs to come down off his high horse.

    The Good:

    Fairly decent looking killer

    Okay soundtrack

    Looks better than you'd expect

    The Bad:

    Certain pretentiousness about the whole thing

    Devoid of originality

    Things I Learnt From This Movie:

    When bad things happen to you it's because God is out back having a cigarette
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Director Matt Farnsworth and his team have been very busy in the past few years trying to create some internet buzz around their latest picture The Orphan Killer (originally titled Sibling: Marcus Miller The Orphan Killer, a title they wisely abandoned). Through online blogs and Facebook presence, they tried to get genre fans excited for Marcus Miller and his murderous endeavors. Proclaiming their movie "a tour de force murder flick that defies classification, goes far beyond current trends in gore and breaks open a new suffering genre of horror", they set expectations pretty high.

    Audrey (Diane Foster) is a young ballet instructor at a very catholic high school. The building used to house an orphanage, were Audrey and her brother spent part of their childhood after seeing their parents brutally slain by a gang of thugs. This tragic event left Marcus with a few screws in his head severely loose, while Audrey remained an adorable little angel and thus easily adoptable. So while Audrey was quickly taken away towards a happy life of Barbie-dolls and tea parties, Marcus was left in the orphanage, where the good Lord's sisters tried to knock some sense into the disturbed little boy, Old Testament style. All grown up (and looking pretty hot), Audrey has forgotten all about her sibling, who over the years has turned into a gruesome urban legend. But now brother dearest is back with an impressive arsenal of sharp pointy objects and a chip on his shoulder the size of a small European country.

    Now here's a horror movie that could have been really, really good, but simply, well…isn't. Marcus Miller's back story is fleshed out very well, as are the long flashbacks that tell us his tragic tale. Farnsworth creates a great villain with tons of potential, but doesn't know where to go with him. For the first 45 minutes, Marcus Miller is a stumbling, mumbling, growling, snorting, speechless behemoth of the Jason Voorhees variety. In fact, this part of the movie plays out as a later Friday the 13th sequel, with Miller offing various insignificant characters in not that innovative but rather gory ways. We are never even introduced to most of these characters; they are merely there to up the body count while Miller chases Audrey through the halls and corridors of the school for what seems like forever. Around the half way mark, when Audrey and Marcus start interacting face to face, our killer suddenly turns into an intelligent, one-liner spouting sadist, that goes all Jigsaw on his sister and various others. This is where the movie shines (although it doesn't really fit in with Miller's back story (in the flashbacks, the creepy little boy doesn't utter a word)), but it is over too soon and makes way for a pretty cliché final sequence.

    While the kill scenes are all pretty okay, Farnsworth hasn't got a clue how the build any sense of dread or suspense, which makes the first part of the movie way overlong. It basically is just padding to stretch the movie into feature length. The same goes for some long but pointless birds-eye-view scenes of a city and a character driving a car, that serve no other purpose than broadcasting to the audience 'Look! Look how cool we are! We are filming from a friggin' Helicopter! How cool is that! Pretty darn cool, that's how cool!" Seems to me they could have better spent this budget on some of the special effects or set design, that is at points shaky at best. The same goes for some of the hand held camera-work. Viewers prone to seasickness need not apply.

    The soundtrack almost completely consists of snippets of metal and hardcore songs. Totally my kind of music, but at points this approach is really inappropriate, especially during the flashback scenes. A bloody victim crawling up a flight of stairs to Walls of Jericho's melodramatic power balled 'No Saving Me' is unintentionally hilarious. There are more pieces of small ridiculousness. A human head that gets stomped on does not act like a deflating rubber ball, folks. And Marcus walking away from a rather bloody kill with an immaculately clean shirt, fold creases still in it like it just came from the wrapper, is side splittingly funny and incredibly stupid at the same time.

    I've been pretty harsh on The Orphan Killer so far, when in fact I did have a pretty good time watching it. It's a decent little slasher, somewhat above average. More emphasis on the interaction between Marcus and Audrey would have helped a lot and I would have loved to have seen more of that awesome back story (where is Marcus' killing spree in the orphanage that made him a legend to begin with?). As it stands, a horror and gore fan could find less fun ways to spend 84 minutes than watching some dripping brains, dismemberment and pretty rad full frontal female nudity. However, "a tour de force murder flick that defies classification, goes far beyond current trends in gore and breaks open a new suffering genre of horror" this is not. Not by a long shot.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Wow! Where do I start!?

    I've given this movie three stars - one for trying, another for putting together a movie despite what I hope is a very low budget and the third for the girl, who we get to see naked.

    Besides that, the movie is a complete and ridiculous waste of time! There're SO many strange mistakes that it's hard not to laugh at the end.

    • When the boyfriend enters the apartment, we see him hang his belt and gun on the door. Seconds later, however, he is carrying it in his hands as he searches the apartment for Audrey!?


    • Despite having been hung from the ceiling in barbed wires around her wrists and ankles, Audreys feet are almost completely clean when she finally escapes!? This is not the only time when blood stains are moved or altered by miracle...


    • When trying to flee the basement, where she's been held captured, she has no problems walking - although slowly. However, at the end when she has to climb the stairs to the roof, she suddenly has to drag herself up the stairs!? Add to this that for some reason, this is also the place where the wound from the tool in her thigh suddenly starts leaking blood!?


    • Although she hits her brother several times in the head with the hammer in the basement, which results in blood pouring from the scull crazily, he's still able to wake up and catch up with her on the roof!?


    • What's up with the mask her brother is wearing!? Do it have a hole for the mouth or not!? Sometimes not - if so, how is he able to whistle when walking through the hallways!? Why does the mouth seldom move!? Why is the tone of his voice so deep - almost like a TV announcer!?


    Argh! This movie is just an utterly waste of time!
  • After reading the reviews about TOK on the IMDb board for a long time, it seemed to me that the movie splits the audience in two groups, lovers and haters. And because I'm a Horror-Movie fan, I decided to watch TOK and form my own opinion. OK, and here is my review:

    "The Orphan Killer" focuses only on depiction of diverse bloody and gory effects. This fact separates TOK from the big mass of mainstream movies, but on the other hand only through splatter effects a movie will never become a masterpiece. The director should have set more on the plot-quality than on the murder-quality. TOK would have indeed potential for a sequel but without a story there is nothing unique in TOK. I've seen this and that in endless slasher flicks in the past.

    There is no horror sound atmosphere in TOK. Every time Marcus grabs a "tool" the Metal Sound rushes in and kills the tense scenery. After a while the music starts to be annoying. In my opinion a creepy atmospheric score would do much better than this nerve killing Metal soundtrack. I felt never entertained throughout the movie. I was rather pushed from one kill to another, which was exhausting and boring. In the end I was glad the movie last scarcely over 80 minutes.

    Conclusion: If you've seen various horror flicks in your life and have something to compare with, in addition you're not related to anyone of the film crew so that you are unbiased; you will never rate TOK with ten out of ten stars. I'll give it three stars out of ten. Why three? First because I'm generous and second because I've seen worse in my life.
  • Everything about this awful excuse for a movie is trash: directing, acting, editing... you name it. Total nonsense. A truly and literally horror. Someone who knows how to make a movie (from the story, which has its moments up to a point) would make this film a least watchable. I still don't believe that I've endured until the end (even with fast forwarding). I was even trying to "connect the dots" but failed. Mr. Farnsworth should never again be allowed to waste someone's money and time in this business. Really, Ed Wood was a genius compared to this. On the other hand, maybe that was the point (or excuse) for letting this trash out in the open. Maybe this is a test of some kind. Who knows. Recommendation: avoid at all costs and whatever state of intoxication you may be. Don't insult your intelligence.
  • This "movie" which consists of just random scenes, almost no dialogue and horrible acting and horrible effects is a huge waste of time. Do not bother with this piece of trash, it is unbelievable that someone could think this would be worth watching. I have no idea what the director and the actors thought they were creating when they filmed this trash. HUGE WASTE OF TIME! WARNING YOU WILL REGRET WATCHING THIS PIECE OF CR%P! Wow just when you thought you had seen the worst movie in the world, you stumble upon trash like this. I am truly upset I wasted a few moments trying to watch this when I could have spent time doing something more fun like shoveling dog doo doo out of the yard or rolling naked in broken glass.
  • Matt Farnsworth is a hack. I haven't got a clue who finances his movies but my guess he has entered into a Faustian pact with Satan. Nobody in their right mind would give this guy money to make a film. If you think I'm being harsh then go check out "The Orphan Killer" then come back and tell me I'm wrong. It is incompetently written with a poorly defined story and no characterisation so ultimately we don't care about anything or anyone we see on the screen. Most of the ideas have been cribbed from far superior genre movies and the camera work is shambolic. We've all seen "Shaky-cam" is the "Bourne" movies, Farnsworth appears to have invented "unintentional shaky-cam" for the "Orphan Killer." It looks like it was filmed by someone on a home video-cam after they'd drunk 50 cups of espresso.

    I wouldn't have bothered commenting only there is nothing worse than a film maker who goes out of their way to pull the wool over their potential audience's eyes. This is what Farnsworth has done here. This IMDb page is littered with fake reviews and fake comments appertaining to what a great movie this is and most of them have been written by Farnsworth and his cronies. If you listen to this con-man then "The Orphan Killer" is the next "Halloween" or "Friday The Thirteenth" when in truth it's the next DVD straight to the bargain-bin @ $1.99 in Walmart.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    OK, I just felt compelled to write a review about this movie, mainly because I had high hopes. Clearly, my hopes were smashed to the ground, there is not a single element that make this film worth watching, not even the over the top gore scenes.

    To be honest the plot is so ridiculous it's not even worth mentioning, but you can imagine if you saw the trailer. A tortured orphan turns into a psycho killer that wears a mask and kills people, duh.

    The acting was so bad that I was actually wondering if it was bad on purpose (It's like some of the actors are not even trying). The gore scenes are well done but they are meaningless, you will never care about any of the characters.

    So, the bottom line is, you should avoid the "orphan killer". It's not scary, at all. It's not funny either. There is no plot, the acting is awful, and it's just a meaningless gore fest.
  • Lets be honest here. the acting in this movie is nonexistent. The storyline just doesn't hang together at all, some of the scenes are laughable, the sound quality is awful and the budget looks like it was £100.

    However despite that, it is extreme, deranged, fantastically gory and just off it's face! I really enjoyed it just for that. Reviewing this as a "proper" movie just doesn't make sense. Take it for what it is and enjoy the ride. It's just raw and brutal. Full prosthetic head crushing?!! Class.

    if you like this you should try A Day Of Violence. An equally bloodsoaked movie from the UK.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Movies like Prom night, and Friday the 13th were bad in the 70's because film, and lighting were hard to come by. This movie is just bad because they are trying so hard to look like a slasher from the 70's. The laurels all over the poster should mean that there is some great acting, or even just excellence in sound, or cinematography. The laurels lie as they tend to do these days only because every run down old movie house can give out an award with laurels on it , and it makes people think that there is quality associated to the work. This movie is a waste of time for anything more than a college level school project. You will not enjoy this even if you do want to.
  • So i finally get down to doing this. Reading some of my own and others words lately i found out that once we've seen a movie we tend to discuss it at the past tense. The thing is that this particular film is still alive and well so this will be my bloody review for THE ORPHAN KILLER. It is an indie horror film, slasher mostly and judging by the first time i watched the trailer i was like: "WOW!", immediately sure that i would be in for one hell of a ride with this film. And boy is this statement weak to describe the film! As soon as this film starts, without giving any sort of warning, THE ORPHAN KILLER got me in the stomach and embarked me as 2 new faces in the horror universe: Marcus Miller and his baby Sister Audrey (Diane Foster) were entangled in a fight, what is often the most fun and interesting about this type of film! From the start, the story itself holds its ground and is intriguing as there's already enough displayed for the viewer to know about the main characters backgrounds, but also realize that it would be possible to expand on their mythology.

    And with a team that has managed to do that much with the very little they had (Often proof that horror works somehow without the overuse of what a big budget could have provided.), what you see and what's told about, or by the Orphan Killer and/or his sister needed to stay somewhat intact Imo. In a way, i think that both characters made the film. From over the top murders to thrilling chase scenes, this one seems to have caught very well the most captivating essence of slashers. Add to this the really well made gore and other surprising make up effects? A haunting/Haunted murderer (Amazing work by Backus), able to both verbalize and demonstrate through his eyes and movements all of his intentions and you end up with a really fun ride through the whole thing.

    Some of Marcus' brutal attacks are awesomely original, still this originality manages to be depicted through Matt Farnsworth's ideas about filmmaking with really well thought out ideas about the filming. And i think that it all paid off, considering that it is, most often what can stand out of a film like that with so little compared to the amount of slasher remakes we see in big theaters nowadays. And with a devastating score to go along with Marcus' ruthless agressions, this film came at a very right time for horror fans, proving that there is room for new faces, masks and names in our horror collections.

    I just bloody enjoyed the film from start to finish despite very little flaws and Marcus seems to have done, like his peers in the universe, what Myers, Jason and Freddy for instance have manage to do. Only this time, one film seems to have been enough to captivate the audience for this aggressive and wounded, Christian-raised killer and he is just the antagonist part of this interesting new horror tale! The Orphan Killer has rallied a brutal family of horror fans and it still has the power to grow bigger from here on so this reviewer must thank and congrats Matt, Diane and the whole team behind the movie. Really thrilled, starving for more . Can't wait for what's to come! 8.5/10
  • Warning: Spoilers
    To start off, I'll give the film a 7 out of ten and explain why. This was in my opinion a great bit of guerrilla marketing at its finest. It had me hooked when I stumbled across it on face book and I could not wait to get my hands on it. That is honest although I can clearly say I did not go in looking for grade A acting or even above average gore.

    The acting seemed forced in my opinion until it came to the terror and pain. There was a lot of both. That being said even as a staunch horror advocate who will watch near anything, the sheer amount of screaming in this flick started to grate on even me. I was pretty much waiting for a gag simply for a brief respite. The sound needed a bit of work for Marcus, his lines were nearly inaudible due to the audio balancing. I cannot give him a proper review on acting because of it. For that, I would have recommended recording his audio separate like a musical number and adjust in post. Something to keep in mind for future endeavors from this crew.

    The music, I applaud the ballsy endeavor to go full out nonstop metal. Something I have been awaiting for years. That being said, the audio balancing makes it another problem, it's impossible to hear anyone over the awesome screaming guitars. Normally this would not be a complaint from me, this film however could go to a higher caliber from some fine tuning in the audio production. Most of my faults with this film are actually the audio.

    The gore in this movie, this is where I laud this film. Few films have ever made me wince. This movie did it twice. Some parts were incredibly over the top while others were very believably toned down, screwdriver being my main example. No explosive fountains of blood, merely a steady trickle when removed that really made me cringe. The barbed wire scene conflicts me though. On one hand it was the other part that really got me, that was some gruesome prosthetic work, on the other hand... She would be so very dead or severely crippled. The scenes following immediately after did not follow up with that injury very well. From obviously tearing off almost every strip of flesh from the bones in her hand to slightly bloody wrists, it killed the effectiveness of that scene. Overall though, the gore was handled extremely well and I rate this movie towards the top above a lot of competitors. I can't honestly think of one off the top of my head as brutal and unflinching as this one and I've been watching horror movies practically my entire life. I was watching Pumpkinhead when I was 7 for gods sake. Anyone that actually tries to argue Hostel or anything Eli Roth has done has no business in this thread...

    Finally the storyline as I wrap up this massive wall of text. The storyline was extremely thin, practically nonexistent. I expected roughly as much going in, although I will say to the makers of this film. While it's an admirable attempt to just go balls first at Mach five with nothing to fuel it but blood, guts and mayhem. I'd recommend crafting at least a bit of story into it. This was a concept piece pushed through to a feature length film and like my opinion of Laid to Rest, a film I would love to see remade and polished to perfection. I'm not talking about someone else pick up the slack and make the Orphan Killer or Chromeskull. Can't do it, no one should handle these films but the ones that made it in the first place. I would recommend however trying to put a little more intrigue or purpose behind the wonderful monsters you've made.

    The makers of this film, you've done an amazing job of crafting a hardcore concept, the film however needs a lot of work so instead of having a bunch of people on here shouting 10 out of 10 perfect!!! Or a bunch of a-holes trying to wipe their crack with it when they have no idea of what goes on behind a camera. I say 7/10, you made a bad ass attempt and one I hope you revisit to make this one a freaking grand slam.

    You've got a decent start, your ad campaign was brilliant albeit a bit overdone actually, but your audio and storyline need some work.
  • rhaynes19746 July 2013
    I need to waste as little time on this review as possible since the film wasted 90 odd minutes of my life that I can't get back.

    This is insulting, dumb, devoid of any suspense with bargain basement gore effects. I really don't understand the hype surrounding it, which was the only reason I decided to check it out in the first place.

    Every performance is way below par, we're talking porn level performances here folks. The backstory is trite and nonsensical, and the piece de resistance is the "SCORE"

    A death metal onslaught that is lacking in any feeling, nuance or subtlety . It becomes an assault of the senses and not in a good way.

    The other tip for the film-makers. If you're going to include obvious stock footage in your film (we've all done it) at least use footage that's the same aspect ratio or size it up accordingly. Sheesh!
  • The Orphan Killer can best be summed up as a mixed bag of a horror film. It has some great makeup effects, but bad camera work. It has some great scenes, but overall isn't all that good. It has an interesting concept for a story, but plot holes and unbelievability derail your immersion while you're trying to enjoy it.

    The story is about two orphaned siblings, Audrey and Marcus. Audrey is adopted while Marcus is left at the orphanage. While Audrey grows up and apparently has a normal life, Marcus grows up tormented for most of his life by the nuns that run the orphanage, and is made to wear a mask due to the fact that he is dangerous to the other children, and the staff. He goes insane and wants to kill his sister, as she left him there, and film gives you enough back story to make it clear.

    The movie has several flaws that include, but aren't limited to; camera work, acting, sound, too much fake blood (to the point that it's laughable), plot holes that are huge, and no real character development beyond Marcus. There is no doubt that the film is low budget, so a few of these things can be over looked, and there are some really solid moments in TOK which makes you wish that more time could have been taken with the story and some of the camera work.

    The scenes between Audrey and Marcus, while they are in the basement, are done quite well in parts. The camera work, while they are on the roof of the building, is pretty well done as well. Unfortunately these moments aren't enough to make you look past the flaws, but it's worth checking out if you're really in the mood for some low budget slashing. If you're prepared to lower your expectations, when it comes to everything needing to make since, and you may just enjoy it.

    5 out of 10
  • A lot of hype on this one and that hype is a fabricated smoke-screen that hides a mediocre low budget slasher flick. The only "tour de force" is the methods that the film makers have undertaken to bring recognition to this not awful but not particularly original slasher film. It DOES NOT "defy classification" folks...it's a slasher flick. That's pretty standard stuff. The wheel hasn't been reinvented here. It also DOES NOT go any measure of length "beyond current trends in gore" nor does it "break open a new suffering genre of horror". That being said, it's not the steaming pile of rubbish many angry viewers have portrayed it as. There is A LOT of anger from users on here about this movie and it's justifiable. The film maker went out of their way to paint this as some sort of movie that sets the bar. As if this movie would be the new standard that we measure horror by. When a film maker puts that sort of unrealistic pressure on their movie then there's a lot to live up too. Unfortunately, this movie cannot stand up to a number of obstacles in it's path. Namely, acting, budget, special effects, score, and pacing are all very amateur. The pacing and cinematography are some of the worse I've seen in some time. The ending is certainly a theme recycled over and over and over... For a good laugh...go read some of the better user reviews that found this movie to be the next big thing. Then go read their comments on other movies. 90% of them only did one review and this was it. That's what you call guerrilla marketing folks....and that's where this movie succeeded very well at. Call it Blair Witch Part II...
  • billcr1224 March 2012
    A man in a hockey mask, much like Jason from Friday the 13th, swings an axe over a scantily clad, screaming woman; and this happens before the opening credits. A man in a convertible drops off a hot blonde in front of St. Michaels Catholic School. Dressed in a mini skirt and revealing tank top, blondie forays into the adjoining church, kneels at a pew and crosses herself, bless her heart.

    Next up, teeny boppers are smoking in the girls room, discussing the legend of the orphan killer. Shortly thereafter, a man in an alley is the first victim. The madman drives a large machete into his forehead. The swordsman then, for no apparent reason, places a photograph of Pope Benedict into a fire.

    Back to the good catholic lass. She visits the locker room and has the good sense to remove her clothes and take a shower; cleanliness is next to Godliness, after all; and her headlights are on.

    The masked mad man continues his murderous ways, using a wire to strangle a young en' at the school. A flashback to nuns beating a young boy provides clues to the reason for his violent personality.

    The church is then the setting for a man receiving oral sex from a sister, and a priest is mutilated; the writer seems to have some serious issues with the ancient Roman religion.

    Now to the basement, where Jason, jr. ties the hot blonde, Audrey, to the ceiling with her arms up and thus begins the real fun; sick, sick, sick, and sacrilegious at the same time. Much like the "Saw" series, don't look for any redeeming value in the orphan Killer, it's just another torture film.
  • the film plays like a standard 80's slasher horror that tries to flesh out the character of the masked killer. the film is almost like a remake of John carpenters halloween with a heavy dose of Friday the 13th and whiff of nightmare on elm street.(creepy child singing the title over and over)though unfortunately not as good as any of these films that it is clearly inspired ripping off or a homage too.

    the first act is a little too drawn out and has some truly terrible acting but has some fun kills. even if low budget kills effects are a bit ropey. the second act is where it becomes interesting and has some moments of discomfort but is mostly when we find out about what motivates orphan killer, unfortunately the third act becomes laughably predictable and badly thought out and hurts the rest of the film.

    the film did have its moments and was not a complete waste of time and shows promise but largely has no new ideas and only cares in developing the orphan killer even the heroine is largely left without any depth or motivation other than trying to keep her extremely good looking body alive and in one piece.
  • First of all, I would like to point out that if you're watching this movie entirely for the expectation of gore (like I was), you're probably going to be disappointed. Don't get me wrong it's definitely there, but it's nowhere near the level of the "groundbreaking tour-de-force" the creators would like you to believe it is, your average homemade German splatter flick (e.g. Zombie '90: Extreme Pestilence, Bone Sickness, etc.) could outdo this one in a heartbeat.

    As far as the plot goes, the movie actually manages to tell a rather interesting story about a traumatized and mentally-unstable young boy named Marcus that grew up into a vicious masked killer. Marcus' voice was effective most of the time, but others (like when he starts singing) it just sounds ridiculous. But overall I was pleased with the killer.

    The biggest thing that dragged the movie down for me was the long, boring, dragged-out torture sequence near the end that killed the movie's otherwise decent pace. Marcus also starts getting pretty redundant around this point ("I'm the dealer of pain", "I'm here to cause you pain", "I am going to show you what pain feels like", etc.).

    This movie apparently was the official selection of several film festivals, and the cover shows one critic describing Marcus as "the new legendary slasher". This movie is far from legendary, but it's a decent way to kill some time.

    5.5/10
  • trashgang21 September 2011
    All I have seen so far concerning The Orphan Killer is the fact that it is a bad flick. Okay, the storyline isn't that good but it does have something to shown. Gore just for the gore and metal music for the geeks of the genre. The director, Matt Farnsworth is more an actor than a director but being also a video artist he wants to show us that he can make a gore flick too. I wont go in the storyline because such kind of movies doesn't need a story. The gorehounds just want blood and more blood. The killer played by David Backus, also seen in Priest, does it all pretty brutal. The way the attacks are filmed are sometimes off-screen. But he makes it up with the use of buckets full of the red stuff. Naturally this is low budget and all actors have been seen in earlier flicks of the director. I would say that there is a bit of torture porn too. I really would recommend it for the gorehounds and not for the casual viewers. As a bonus Diane Foster gives us full frontal gratuitous nudity. I liked it, strangely most of the reviewers doesn't.
  • A pair of young children, a boy and girl, survive a home invasion that claims their parents lives. They are sent to the standard "evil" Catholic orphanage, and the girl is adopted while the boy stays behind. As with all Hollywood movies, the orphanage is home to a lot of abuse in the name of God, and the young boy acts out violently to others around him. He also enjoys wearing masks, but hey, who doesn't? Years later, the young girl has grown into a woman who teaches dance at the local Catholic school. Im not sure how many practicing Catholics go to mass in a black micro mini and fishnet stockings - sans underwear. But hey shes pretty hot. Long story short, killer brother comes back to Church and starts offing people left and right, tracking down his sister. Lots of blood later, with the help of her police boyfriend, she has her final showdown with her long lost brother.

    This isn't a badly made film, in fact, it actually is a lot better then most of the low budget slashers out there. The acting is above average and the gore special effects are also well done. One of the problems is the music, with consists of loud heavy metal blaring during the action scenes. The other problem is the story plot points. Characters who do dumb things at dumb times, etc. Lots of horror movies do this, so it can be overlooked for the sake of the movie.

    The movie as a whole is watchable and even enjoyable for a bit. It is not however, anything you will remember as soon as the credits roll.
  • Finally, finally there comes along an independent horror film worth watching. It would be easy to look at the description and dismiss this as just another slasher film, but it's not. For an independent film, it's clear that they had a decent budget, and that the filmmakers were truly passionate about the project.

    I'm not going to go too much into the plot, because it's fairly straightforward, but the kills and gore are excellent, and this film has a level of pure brutality that sometimes makes you cringe, especially when the killer is torturing his sister. It's very intense, and actress Diane Foster is a real trooper, given what Director Matt Farnsworth puts her through.

    I highly encourage everyone NOT to listen to the haters out there who are trashing this film simply because their film didn't make it. This is a good, independent film that delivers, as opposed to the hundreds of indie horror films out there that look exactly like they were shot in someone's backyard for $500.

    I admit that I am every so slightly biased because this movie was filmed in my old elementary school, as well as several other places throughout my hometown, but that just adds to the experience for me.

    Give "The Orphan Killer" a chance. You will NOT be disappointed!
  • The Orphan Killer stumbled onto my conscience on Facebook like everyone else.I'm riding high on slashers now with Bereavement and Chromeskull out within weeks of each other, so I checked this out for honestly two minutes. I Thought, " screw it, my paycheck was big enough, buy and support low as hell budget films". A short wait brought the disc to my door and the film begins. I say this film is interesting because honestly, it's a somewhat "mute" film. An odd description as the movie's littered with loud music, but script is very spare without a ton of exposition, a slick move from a movie with a lot to explain. It also plays out almost in real time, so our main girl doesn't have much time to realize she's next on the kill list. The flashbacks are well timed and show a pretty original origin to our Killer that could easily warrant a prequel with funding.

    Diane Foster plays Audrey, the killers sister. She is a formidable scream queen and also sexy as all get out, so no complaints here. When needed, the girl can kick serious butt; she's not leaving without a fight. everyone else in the film play sitting ducks waiting to get hacked to death, but there's nothing wrong with that. Supporting acting in horror films is always questionable, but overall the actors are decent gore fodder. Speaking of which, damn that Gore! Orphan Killer does not shy away from serious blood and limbs, tons of it! I wont spoil it but those searching for copious amounts of body parts will find it here. Overall, The Orphan Killer is a great addition to the new wave of slashers, and MAY BE gorier than the Laid to Rest films, I'll have to watch again to compare. Either way, don't mess with Marcus Miller The Orphan Killer.
  • This movie was one of those movies that, for me, wasn't as good as I had heard. It had mediocre acting and although it was trying to recapture that 80's slasher style bloodbath type movie feeling, it went on at a slow pace and dragged out what could have been a good story. I was left thinking that if you actually fast-forwarded the movie it would have gone at the pace it should have, I mean it was actually too slow. There was a lot of slow walking, needless build up, and it made me want to just hit that fast-forward button to get to the end to see what happened. And as for the ending, predictable. In saying all that, I have to admit it was really gory and bloody with the old-school effects, which I did like. But the movie as a whole wasn't great and for that I give it a 4 out of 10, only because of the gore factor saves a couple of points.
  • When I found "The Orphan Killer" I had never heard about it, nor did I know anyone on the cast list. With those two facts, I do like the odds of it becoming something of a surprise, so of course I gave it a watch. And the fact that it being a horror movie just adds to the interest, of course.

    I managed to watch 30 minutes of this boring movie, and it failed to captivate me or keep my interest in every aspect. Nothing of any value or worth happened to win me over.

    There were a couple of interesting effects, but nothing that could turn the tide of the losing interest.

    The movie was riddled with mundane and boring characters, whom lacked depth and dimensions. That sort of thing is something that quickly drains away the will and desire to keep watching a movie for me.

    I have no intentions of returning to watch the rest of the ordeal that is known as "The Orphan Killer". So a friendly word of advice, stay well clear of this one.
  • Heislegend10 July 2011
    As anyone who's ever tried to make a cake knows, you can have the right ingredients to make a really awesome cake, but if mixed wrong you can come out with something a little mediocre. That's kind of how I found this movie. It has all the right ingredients to make something truly amazing, but the execution left me wanting more. Don't get me wrong, it's still a bit of a shot in the arm for some more predictable horror films. It just also happens that it's hampered with limitations.

    The story is very much rooted in the 80's horror mentality: children witness murder of parents, children are sent to orphanage, the one who isn't evil (and is subjected to inexplicable cruel treatment even by his caretakers) is adopted, the evil one tracks down the other later in life while all hell breaks loose. OK, fair enough. You've seen it before, but it's still fun. The kills are fun to watch and the effects are genuinely good for what feels like a movie on a budget. The setting is where I find a lot of fault...it takes place in pretty much one single building. While I often enjoy horror films that employ a sort of claustrophobic setting, in a stalk and slash movie it just seems silly. Basically, you'd just need to leave the damn building for it to end. I was also a bit confused when the movie turned from the aforementioned stalk and slash into sort of a torture movie. The transition kind of makes sense, but I was really hoping to see more of the effects-driven kill scenes.

    All in all the movie plays well and keeps up it's pace. But at the end I was left wanting more from it. I imagine if you remove the limitations (many of which I suspect are financial) you'd have a truly great horror movie, not one that's just good. Here's to hoping this movie gets a second chance...or possibly a sequel.
An error has occured. Please try again.