User Reviews (29)

Add a Review

  • This is a difficult movie to review. It had both good acting and bad acting. Good visual effects and bad visual effects. Interesting story line and a boring story line. The start played out kind-a-like a 90s B movie and then it got better, then it got worse, then better, then worse.Christopher Lloyd appeared all of 10-15 minutes throughout. Tommy Wiseau said 1 - 2 giving them first billing is dishonest. Overall there were some OK scares and I Liked the bizarre imagery at times. Otherwise the story was a bit disjointed and the editing felt a bit jerky. It wasn't good enough to like, but not bad enough to hate. 4/10
  • If u can get past the first 20 min or so, then you'll find the movie to be not bad at all. kind of a classic ghost story. not too big on special fx or gore, which is great...nowadays we are plaqued with CGI filled gore scenes. Overall liked it.
  • The nice thing about Cold Moon is that it near immediately gripped me, this is a movie that got my attention early on.

    Set during the late 80's the tale is told of a young murdered girl and her family seeking justice while the killer is besieged by terrifying apparitions.

    The film looks beautiful with a decent cast including the living legend that is Christopher (Doc Brown, Uncle fester) Lloyd.

    It delivers and is a very riveting interesting piece of cinema that thoroughly fell under the radar.

    Sadly it gradually loses steam and when the vague and open to interpretation ending happens and the credits roll I was left finding myself sad that a few lose endings still remained.

    Cold Moon is a decent enough film, I think it could have benefited from another 30 minutes to flesh it out but kudos to all involved for a damn fine effort.

    The Good:

    Very impressive cinematography

    Christopher Lloyd

    Great sfx

    Genuinely creepy

    The Bad:

    Feels a bit incomplete

    Inconsistent in its quality
  • If you want a movie with some chills and thrills I feel like this might be a movie you would be interested. in For a movie based in the 80s I feel like the movie hit on the campy style that a 80s horror movies had and this is coming from someone who really enjoys the horror/thriller genre. As someone who has read and enjoyed the book that this movie is based on I feel like the movie was right on with the source material. The movie gave many of the same chills that the book did and having watch it twice I found I really enjoyed the feel of it. While the plot line is not 100% exact I still found there were few plot points like character deaths that were right on. Now if you walk into this movie expecting the modern horror movie effects then yes you will likely be disappointed. But if you like the old school horror/thriller feel I think you will very much enjoy this movie. This is definitely a movie that I will watch again.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Semi spoilers ahead - Movie was pretty good. Decent horror movie with bigger actors but not so great effects. I will say that the acting of the grandmother was absolutely horrendous, I mean so bad that I almost had to turn it off at times. Started out giving this movie a 5 because of her, but due to wonderful events I raised it to a 6. Seriously she was ALMOST as annoying as Lily from Modern Family.
  • This movie came and went with apparently little notice from the general public or horror fans, unless I just missed it. I came upon it by chance almost two years after it's release so I wasn't expecting much. Set in the 80's, it's a horror ghost story about revenge. It has more than a few genre actors that you'll recognize and a decent story. I found it well-made and entertaining, certainly better than it's rating suggest. There is a bit of a murder mystery but don't expect to much depth there. Nevertheless, I recommend this one to fans of supernatural horror.
  • This was actually a pretty good movie. Not gory or any kind, but more chiller "I'll haunt you 'til you admit" type thing. A lot of nice twist and turns and it tells you who the killer is straight up, but it doesn't stray from the movie.
  • kosmasp5 September 2018
    I think the actors deserve a better rating than the movie/script gave them. Illogical twists and mad entities included. I guess you could explain the latter with just being mean, but the way some of the characters have to behave is just plain wrong - in the wrongest sense possible.

    And it's a bit of a shame because the actors really seem to give it their all. Be it Josh Stewart or anyone else from the cast. The advertising for the movie might have been missleading as some other user suggested, I never saw it, someone gave me the movie as a gift, so I went in there without any knowledge of it. I've seen worse ...
  • Someone reviewed before about Tommy Wieseau being in the movie for 10 seconds, I'd say that's an overstatement. He's kind of on screen clearly for maybe 5 seconds tops. Cheesy cameo he say's a line almost directly from "The Room".

    I went to see this movie thinking it might have some terribly bad but amusing parts. I was wrong, just bad everything. Surprised movies like this still exist somehow.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    In Babylon, Florida, Margaret Larkin (Sara Catherine Bellamy) is killed by a masked individual early in the film. Her grandmother (Candy Clark) knows Nathan (Josh Stewart) did it without a thread of evidence. At 40 minutes into the film the killer is revealed (not really a mystery) and is haunted by the dead girl.

    The film felt like it was made for TV. The plot was rather bland. An overly perky Rachele Brooke Smith is the only eye candy. On the plus side, the special effects reminded me of "Beetlejuice." Not a bad film, but not one you will remember.

    Guide: No swearing, sex, or nudity.
  • When I saw the trailer, I was excited but mad that I had to wait a whole year for us just to rent the movie. I was happy when I rented it, sat down immediately and watched it. There were some things that I didn't know would be in the movie but I blindly went in without reading the book so...yeah. You can tell that there are some people who just started out acting because it shows. All I'm gonna say is that it is kind of boring and bland at the beginning but as the movie progresses, it becomes more interesting and pretty good. The characters do talk low to the point where you need to turn up the volume a lot in order to hear but when the intense scenes come in, it explodes in your eardrums so....just wanted to warn you.

    I do, however, find it as a good movie. It was kind of worth the year of waiting. I actually watched it twice and hoped that it would later be released on DVD so I can watch it whenever I please. It was bland at first but it gets juicy later on.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I am giving it a 4 rating because i really don't know what the hell was going on or what that movie wanted to be.

    When you have scary movies like Annabelle creation and the Conjuring that scare the bejesus out of you.

    I understand it was made by the people who made beetle juice, which is more dark comedy then horror, etc.

    First off what was the Sheriff daughter doing living with that family instead of him and is wife? lots of weird stuff.

    The story as been done a zillion times but why did those spirits come back from the dead to take revenge? was that place a special place? haunted? In part this movie makes no sense at all, the special effects where very good but the rest was confusing.

    The acting was very good too.
  • paulclaassen20 June 2018
    Its been a while since I saw a film where every single minute is interesting. This is one of those rare finds. The film is wonderfully mysterious and became more and more interesting with every scene delivering more twists. There was literally never a single dull moment. The acting was great and the effects were awesome. The film has some great scares, and also great scares thanks to clever editing. 'Cold Moon' was fantastic!
  • I didn't watch because of particular actors being billed so that wasn't a turn off for me like it was for others. It was a lot better than the typical 3/4 star horror movies I watch on Amazon. I agree with those who consider it more of a ghost/supernatural flick rather than a horror. I think since the ghosts were after the bad guy it didn't seem scary, although it did have some freaky scenes toward the end. It did have a bit of a slow start, but after the first murder it kept me engaged throughout. It also had me emotionally vested in the movie as I just kept getting angrier that the D-bag antagonist just kept getting away with more and more stuff. It really had me hoping he would get what was coming to him. It really got to the point where I was thinking that simply getting killed wouldn't be enough punishment for him, and I must admit I wasn't disappointed with how it all caught up with him...very satisfying. If you're like me and are constantly scouring Amazon and Netflix for a nightly horror flick I would definitely recommend this one. It's by far the best I've seen this week (turning off Mr. Cleaver as I type, this seems awful).
  • The movie poster is nice and inspires much higher expectations... but the story eventually meanders into a travesty of a climax and finale... It packs no mystery or intelligent story lines. The viewers are bombarded with a beaten-track B level movie-making and a story that could've worked but never did. It's got a childish plot and bad acting that's not worth the time spent on it. The characters and the ridiculous looking monsters do not develop and stay as static as the first time you meet them... they're just there to fill the screen. I gave the 3 points to the cinematographer and the set manager.
  • "I never seen nothing like this. Well, you might want to have a little chat with the father. He's dead. In fact, he died in the sticks too, about 13 years ago. No, I mean the father of the baby she's carrying. This girl's about four months pregnant."

    Not long ago I received an invitation to attend the premiere of "Cold Moon" in the company of the creators and actors, including Christopher Lloyd. Needless to say, I was slightly excited at that moment. Imagine me being in the same room together with one of my youth idols. Together in the same movie theater with Dr. Emmett Brown, the crazy professor who made the time-spiral unsafe with his converted Deloreon in "Back to the Future". Would I be as enthusiast about the movie in question, I would have been mad at myself for not booking a flight. Unfortunately, the enthusiasm was totally absent while watching the screener that was sent to me. Even though "Cold Moon" is similar to those cheap 80s vintage horror-films. I get melancholic when I think about that period. In those days, I always came home overloaded with a stack of rented VHS cassettes, after which I sat down in front of the TV the whole weekend.

    "Cold moon" is an ordinary crime story that could serve as an episode in the Columbo series. However, there are also supernatural entities scaring the living sh*t out of the perpetrator (although he turns his back to them during most confrontations. Nerves of steel, I guess). And all this begins the day Margaret Larkin (Sara Catherine Bellamy) is on her way home and is being thrown into the local creek with her bike. She drowns on the spot. When her body is caught by a fisherman out of the water, it's the beginning of a search for the perpetrator (That shouldn't be such a hard task for the sheriff, since it's such a small community). Grandmother Evelyn Larkin (Candy Clark) points her accusatory finger at Nathan Redfield (Josh Stewart), son of James Redfield (Christopher Lloyd) tycoon and founder of the only bank there.

    And at the same time, Margaret's wicked spirit winches itself out of the water and starts to haunt the killer. It's not entirely clear why Margaret returns as a revenge-seeking spirit. It's also unclear why the identity of the perpetrator was announced so quickly. In my opinion, the rest of the movie must be damn intriguing enough and of high quality when doing that. There's no tension anymore. And that's the big drawback in this movie. It's not really scary or thrilling. A horror without creepy moments or a frightening atmosphere can hardly be called a horror. Even though the apparitions and ghostly images are at times quite successful.

    The acting performances are equivalent to that of the overall atmosphere of the film. Rather bland with a few exceptions. The only one who sort of made an impression was Josh Stewart. Although most of the time he walks around with sleepy, semi-closed eyes due to the amount of alcohol he consumed throughout the day. He doesn't look like a real manic psychopath, but his personality shows some dark sides. Christopher Lloyd's role is no big deal and is limited to a few minutes. The only thing he does is gaze at the local beauty queen (Rachel "Miss Pie" Brooke Smith) while jabbering unintelligible sentences. And then you have Evelyn (Candy Clark) and Jerry Larkin (Chester "My father die" Rushing), trying to run a blueberries farm. You can't say it's high-quality acting during their short-term presence. Especially Candy Clark was an annoying character who constantly acts hysterically after the death of her granddaughter.

    "Cold Moon" isn't extremely bad, but it wasn't convincing either. Personally, I think the movie poster is brilliant, but overall the movie is just a weak attempt. The attempt to make some kind of horror didn't work well. The movie has nostalgic value. Certainly if you've experienced the 80's intensely when talking about horror movies. I'm sure you'll see this movie on some television channel in the middle of the night in the future. However, I wouldn't stay up for it.

    More reviews here :
  • subwayss8 October 2017
    Tommy Wiseau is in there for like 10 seconds. And what about Christopher Lloyd? I'm gonna guess ≅ 6/7 minutes.

    Oh, and the movie is bad in every way: the effects, the acting is mostly awful (with a few exceptions), the story is really simple and boring. Don't watch this one.
  • dcarsonhagy2 December 2017
    Warning: Spoilers
    "Cold Moon" is a ghost story, albeit a BAD ghost story. It seems a local family is about to go tits up on their mortgage with the local seems the evident bad guy at the bank is after that land.

    "Cold Moon" managed to misadvertise itself all over the place. "Coffins will rise from the earth" (there was actually one that did that). The story is just too lame--not to mention too unscary--to pass for horror. Couple that with the fact the audience knows from the beginning who the bad guy is and you've got yourself a movie that has no way to entertain anyone. EVERY person in this "small southern town" is diabolical and/or already bought by the bank president. The people involved did try to create a few scares, but even they became laughable after a point.

    The version I saw is unrated. It contains nudity, sexual situations, violence, and language. Can't recommend it.
  • bob-bershad7 October 2017
    The scary stuff is pointed at the antagonist. It was good scary stuff. The antagonist was great (reminded me of Robert Mitchum). Aiming the scary at the antagonist makes the viewer a disinterested third party. Had the scary stuff been aimed at a sympathetic protagonist, then - with all the talent on both sides of the camera in this movie - wowee.
  • wendywells6224 September 2018
    Excellent work by the entire cast. Finally glad to see a thriller made with great cast who can truly act and play out their roles perfectly!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Unclear the motivations of the protagonist and his gullible sidekick.

    You pretty much know who did it from the beginning, but you keep asking why? I guess the answer is he's just an alcoholic sociopath running rampant through a little southern town, cause he's rich and can do whatever he wants.

    Characters'do stupid things. Like getting out of their car to see after some weirdo in a mask. Every big city instinct says stay in your car, keep driving.

    The cops are idiots. I mean the first thought would be way too convenient when someone casually points to someone else and evidence is conveniently right there. The victimizer had the same dumb expressionl throughout - none.

    Some special effects are good and interesting. Others are over the top or cheesy and ruin the movie.

    Keeps you interested if only to see some justice. Anyway, this is one busy ghosts. No reason why this ghost is so active. Haunted town???
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This is a no-slasher, little-gore, story driven tale. Josh Stewart is excellent in his role as the low or no scruples banker, who spins out of control (aided by liberal amounts of liquor) and who finds after one murder, more killing gets easier. Frank Whaley does a fine job as the easygoing, laid-back local boy sheriff trying to piece the multiple murders together. If you would like a good old-fashioned ghost story, then this is a good one.
  • MikeVagan21 April 2019
    The film is not very scary. The plot is unclear. During 1.5 hours only one idea is pursued. There is no disclosure of the characters as such. There is only the main character and his victims. Actually all. The film is an Amateur
  • Warning: Spoilers
    IF this movie would of been made around the 80s, I would consider it a average movie you can watch if you are bored on a Sunday afternoon.

    The Storyline is just so dull, man kills girl, girl ghost haunts man, man dies at end.

    Effects are sometimes a little funny..

    Actor are average tending to bad acting

    Biggest problem I had with this movie, the murderer cant make him self more suspect even if he tried really hard.
  • The writer wrote Beetlejuice and Nightmare Before Christmas? He also wrote "Halloween Candy," probably one of the creepiest Tales of the Darkside--and certainly my favorite. Maybe he didn't fail here. Maybe it was the director. In any case, the accents for Northwest Florida are all wrong. Why does Hollywood insist on making all Southerners sound like Antebellum Georgians? This could have been a good film, if it had been a comedy. Instead, it's a mish-mosh of really good CGI and really bad acting and dialogue. The characters are, for the most part, two-dimensional comic book people. Smartass rich Southern gentleman, bumbling bought-out small town sheriff, ditzy high school cheerleader (played by a woman far older than 16 or 17), and a grandmother who is no more from the Pensacola area of NW FLA than she is from New Jersey. And the men's haircuts for 1989, when the film is set: all wrong. In that part of the country in that year the men still wore their hair parted down the middle and feathered back on the sides. And if they were a lot older, they might have had WW II military haircuts, that is if they could find barbers in the 80s who still knew how to cut that style (I was a barber in Pensacola just two years before that.) The kid that assists in the crimes would have either had really long hair pulled back in a ponytail (the trend in '89) or the previously described 1970s cut. Anyway, this movie is a disaster overall, so don't waste your time.
An error has occured. Please try again.