User Reviews (10)

Add a Review

  • WOW! This film is rather difficult to review. It was also rather difficult to watch. Before I begin listing the numerous negatives, I'll start by saying that at least VISIBLE SCARS kept me watching until the very end. This is partly due to the fact that the main character and her best friend are rather easy on the eye and there's also a rather cute, albeit annoying, hippie chick. It's also partly due to the fact that I respect Tom Sizemore (Heart & Souls, Natural Born Killers, Saving Private Ryan, True Romance) and I was desperately trying to understand his motives for lending his name to this seemingly low-grade nonsense. He must've owed someone a favour.

    The opening scene gripped me mildly and I was hoping to be gripped tighter as the film went on. Alas, the B-grade acting failed to improve, the plot was all over the place, the death sequences were pathetic and (without spoiling anything) the less said about the ending, the better. By the halfway mark I began to ask myself why I hadn't turned it off yet. It's mainly because I still wasn't sure where they were going with the plot. Unfortunately I don't mean that in a good way. Even though I was rooting for the end credits to roll, during the final 30 seconds I found myself thinking, "The credits better NOT be about to roll... because if they are... this film went absolutely nowhere!" Then the end credits rolled.

    To sum up, VISIBLE SCARS is an atrociously acted, shoddily scripted, mindless mess that begins and ends nowhere. I can't explain my reasons for rating it 4/10 as opposed to 1/10 without adding a spoiler alert. Needless to say I'm being VERY generous. Don't bother watching it unless you're a huge fan of bad horror flicks and you're totally desperate. Watch Guillermo del Toro's MAMA instead.

    Check out my IMDb List for some better suggestions. "HORROR/THRILLER: Obscure, Overlooked & Underrated" http://www.imdb.com/list/8QFZ78e4Ar8/ :)
  • If you want a horror movie that is a perfect example of so bad its good, this is it. This movie was $1.60 and it was worth every penny. The dialogue is line a minute hilarious and quotable, the story is awful but still better than some mainstream horrors, the acting isn't that horrendous but still pretty b-level. The most ridiculous flaws that stood out actually were the wardrobe decisions! the main detective's outfits always seemed several sizes too small and his ties were never done right. People wore wigs that had absolutely no reason to be wearing wigs and just the entire cast all looked strange and unnatural.

    This whole thing was all just a big basket of poorly made crap that is absolutely enjoyable til the totally shitty end.

    watch it.

    this has been a review of Visible Scars.
  • icruz_5523 July 2013
    Warning: Spoilers
    The movie was a big piece of cow (mixed in with horse) manure. Can't believe I wasted 1:42 watching this. It's like a made for TV movie: a bit slow paced, not too bloody, acting was a bit bland, the story background on one of the characters almost nonexistent, and the fact that the "scarring" was hardly noticeable (or believable as to how it was acquired), I could handle all that - BUT as you near the ending I think the editing department saw that it was too long, and ended up chopping the final scenes into disconnected pieces, leaving you with a sense of what just happened? It could've been a nice little movie, if they had put a little more effort into the last half of it. In other words written an ending that made some sense. There are a lot of good examples out there to learn from, like the reviewer Tahnik stated referring to "Mama" as one. So let's hope things improve in the future.
  • do not watch this movie!!! I'm talking to the staffs who made this kind of movie , change your names because your names are written at the end of the one of the most awful movie!!! what kind of movie was that?? that was awful from the beginning and as i watch the movie it gets downward to the bottom of the all awful arts in history.the plot was not something which you would be able to make a ten movie , and by that kind of scenario and directing and ... i have to double my anti depressant drug. BTW what kind of ending was that??? I think as producers got into the end of project they felt like an empty pocket , so they said "ok thats enough we have already shoot 1:40 Min's now we can take it on DVD and sell it as a movie". at last "visible scars"!!!! which scars??? i didn't saw any scars that would make someone name the movie after it!! sorry everyone , I'm not angry , actually happy after watching this comedy movie, I'm just disappointed of American film industry..
  • The Starting of the movie was literally amazing. But at the end of the director literally destroyed the whole movie.

    I was Really hoping something good from this movie. But my expectations were ended in smoke.

    I think the director was just wanting to release it and earn some money. If he really worked on the movie it would be a very good movie.

    The gore scenes were very bad. It was like i'm watching a movie from 1960.

    I think Mama was a very good movie. Director should learn from that movie.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The film starts out simply and develops levels of complexity to propel it beyond your typical feral child slasher film. Mike Gillis (Tom Sizemore) kills a prostitute (Hanna Hall) and goes "Raising Arizona" with her twin daughters. His wife (Carol Abney) loves the children, but they have to be kept locked in the basement(is their home a trailer?) There is also an element of cannibalism that is alluded to as part of their diet. A fire destroys the home, and the area has a reputation of being haunted.

    Years later Stacy (Jillian Murray) comes to this area as a retreat from her abusive boyfriend Brad (Jonas Fisch). Unfortunately she mentioned where she was to her drama queen shallow girlfriend Kelly (Deja Kreutzberg). Soon she has company which include Kelly's boyfriend Chris (Timothy Ryan Cole) who supplies us with the voice of reason.

    Most horror slashers would stop at this point, but this film develops another character, retired Detective Black (Dave Parke) who is working on the cold case of the disappearance of the prostitute and her daughters. Her sister (Diana Costa) is still alive and wants closure. Also in the woods are two herbalists who use the story to scare people away from the area and their crop.

    While there is an abuse theme, the viewer is not overly exposed to it. We briefly see bruises, and Stacy getting pushed to the ground. This aspect was under developed so time could be spent to create complexity. The production is not without plot continuity issues, but then again most horror film have them.

    The film interjects light elements from time to time. The acting wasn't bad, but at the same time it doesn't make you take notice. While the film exceeds expectations of a dull "B" slasher, it won't be a classic horror film either. The gore factor is slightly less than a classic slasher,

    Parental Guide: F-bombs. No nudity. Couple getting dressed after sex.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    VISIBLE SCARS is another cheap indie psychological horror film set in and around a cabin in the woods. As a horror film it forgets the actual horror and instead plays out as a dull character drama. A down on his luck Tom Sizemore continues his career trajectory downwards, playing an abducting psychopath who takes a couple of kids into the woods and keeps them there in the early scenes. However, the story then jumps forward in time and gets very dull as precisely nothing happens until the closing credits.
  • I'm not one to rip apart someone's vision in writing and making a movie. But........it ended with me wondering if my dvd skipped the final chapter. Started out with good acting and just made me scratch my head at the end. It could have been a solid 7. But they dropped the ball in the end. I rarely say this.....don't watch the movie because the end is so disappointing. rUaMovieFreak2☹
  • Visible Scars is an indie thriller, which released in the middle of April. This title won "Best Picture" at the 2012 Shockfest and there is a reason why. This multi-genred film builds momentum as it moves through Acts II and III. Beginning slowly, Visible Scars draws the viewer in to a story of abuse, which later turns into murder. This title is a compelling film, with an intriguing conclusion.

    The story is dual in nature. The film begins with two sisters, who are kidnapped by a psychopathic man and killer. They are raised in poor conditions, until their new home is destroyed by an accidental fire. The film moves ahead several years. The second half of the story involves a new group of characters. Stacy (Jillian Murray) is a young girl who is looking for peace of mind. She has recently been abused by her boyfriend, Brad (Jonas Fisch). So, she seeks shelter in some local woods. Unfortunately for Stacy, these woods are now ruled by a bloodthirsty tour de force. Let the mayhem begin! Some of that mayhem can be found in the film's wide assortment of characters. Viewers should try and spot the protagonist. Is there one? Instead of a hero or central figure leading the story, there are numerous minor characters introduced and outroduced often and quickly. The minor cast of characters are still multiplying into the third act of the film and even ten minutes before the film ends. This is an unusual way to develop a story. Yet, the narrative works, by keeping events on screen interesting, with all of these diverse personalities.

    The film also pulls off a bait and switch, in regards to genres. Visible Scars begins as a crime thriller. An early murder takes place and then a kidnapping. So, viewers might be expecting a simple detective story to take place. But, at the midpoint of the film, the genre changes to horror, unexpectedly. The criminal investigation is mostly forgotten as more and more bodies turn up in some woodland. The gore increases along with the bloodflow and a few viewers might not know who is causing all of the chaos. There are a few surprises to be found in this feature, which is one of the film's more enjoyable elements.

    Visible Scars is a compelling and very watchable feature. Richard Turke's first feature film is well shot. There are several great external shots involving natural scenery. The setting is a sight to see. As well, the acting in this feature is well done. Actress Jillian Murray brings a great performance with her character Stacy. Stacy has a few personalities hidden under her beautiful exterior. And, Murray hints at her character's strangeness. Other actors bring equally solid performances. Also, Visible Scars picks up speed as it moves through the film's climax and into the conclusion. Just when you expect the film to keep going, it ends too soon and the open ending might leave some wanting more. These elements and many more make this indie thriller a must-see.

    Visible Scars was released, in this critic's opinion, under-the-radar April 6th, 2013 on DVD. This title is available for only a few dollars ($5-6) and this horror film fanatic would recommend this film to fans of indie thrillers. Though, viewers will have to be patient as Visible Scars takes awhile to develop. But, the payoff and ensuing chaos is well worth the wait. Visible Scars is a must-see that most will not forget. And, some viewers will even be expecting a sequel.
  • rose-yuill26 May 2018
    1/10
    Nope.
    I don't understand why this movie was made. There is so ending or resolve.

    Don't waste your time.