PlatinumRead Just so...so bad

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Griff Lees Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Jerrie It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

tiky-32419 'So bad it's good' is a very difficult thing to pull of, but just within the first 30 seconds we were entranced with what can only be described as the absolute worst acting ever put to film.The absolute highlight personally (spoilers!) was when a schoolteacher became pregnant because of a creepy red-headed child. At that point it was just bad, but then you see the nurse in the hospital asks with genuine concern if she has been with any animals lately. Apparently this happens with such frequency that pregnancy tests have evolved to spot mystical reptile pregnancies. When her sister scolded her when she missed her appointment with the vet tears were rushing down my face.Every prediction we made was out-weirded by this movie. There is nothing like it.I don't want to spoil too much, but gather some friends and enjoy the best comedy from 2016.

kosmasp So it isn't that easy to make an Anthology after all. That's one of the "positive" things you can take from watching this. If you're mean you could even argue that SyFy has done better feature length movies than most of the shorts being on display here. One thing is for certain: there is not much to cherish to be found here.And it's a shame, because it did sound cool. Kevin Smith alone doing a short sounds great. But then again, I guess even he was either too busy with other stuff or somehow else occupied. Maybe something else happened, you never know, except you do know where the short stories are going. And almost none of them actually can create a mood, a tension, a story or anything else substantial to hold the viewers attention. There are some neat effects (the Easter Bunny story comes to mind) and occasionally a bit of quality that seems to shine through a story. But in the end, it's more like "whatever" and "why did I watch this again?" feelings that overwhelmingly win and leave you befuddled

Harold Boss I mostly just logged on here to talk about the Halloween segment, which was directed by Kevin Smith (Clerks, Mallrats, Chasing Amy). This was one of the weaker shorts and it ends with a guy apparently being electrocuted by a car battery attached to a dildo inserted into his anus.Has anyone actually ever been electrocuted by a car battery? Nope. As is commonly known, the voltage is too low to get through the skin. Go outside, find a car, lick two fingers and put them on the terminals. At best you'll feel a mild tingling.OK I know films aren't meant to be entirely real world accurate, but hey, I expected a bit more from Kevin Smith.But wait you say - the wires were right inside his arse, so the current didn't have to go through the skin. And they attached another wire to his head so that the current would flow right through his body. The girls were actually trained electricians. They knew what they were doing. Maybe they cranked up the voltage using a mcGyver type device they put together in a real hurry.Meh, come on Kevin Smith. This really felt like an abysmal student film.The rest of the shorts are better, although there's a lot of unsatisfying endings. It's a decent horror anthology, inconsistent but better than the average single horror release in my opinion.

michael-3204 Horror anthology loosely organized around holidays, where each short is thematically related to a different holiday. The usual problem with these sorts of anthologies is wildly uneven quality, but in this case the quality is fairly consistent and reasonably strong. One of the many oddities of "Holidays" is that the worst short is the one by the most famous director included here, Kevin Smith. It seems like he wasn't even trying with his Halloween short and its disappointing that they gave the most on-topic holiday for a horror movie to someone who seems so disinterested.Another oddity is that the first five shorts all have female protagonists, with only one being written and directed by a woman. It is almost immediately apparent which that is, not because it is appreciably better or worse than the others, but because of its attitudes toward its female characters, and the way it handles nudity (something that is mostly absent in the rest of the shorts). The fact that several films in a row all feature not especially strongly drawn or unique protagonists, some of whom are almost interchangeable, is a problem. The shorts are organized chronologically through the calendar year, starting with Valentine's Day and ending on New Year's Eve, but I think it might have been better to reorder them so that a sense of repetition didn't start to set in before there was some variation. The final short is actually the best, in terms of telling a compelling story with the most interesting characters we meet in the whole series. It is largely a two-hander and ends on a satisfyingly twisty note. And that brings up a third oddity -- all except the final short, and Smith's, have intriguing ideas, set-ups and situations that the various writers and directors seem unable to resolve in a very satisfying way. Some of them just end, some try for a conclusion that is perhaps meant to be ambiguous or disturbing, but they fail to stick the landing. Its strange to watch a bunch of short films in a row that share the same strengths and the same weakness.I'd say most of the writers and directors represented here show promise, even if most of them don't quite deliver as fully as I'd have liked, and I look forward to more from any of these filmmakers. I don't know that I'll be returning to this collection of shorts anytime soon.