Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

GazerRise Fantastic!

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

lojitsu A-Z Horror Movie of the Day..."Lost Colony: The Legend of Roanoke" (R - 2007 - US)Sub-Genre: Monster/ParanormalMy Score: 5.2Cast=5 Acting=5 Plot=7 Ending=5 Story=4 Scare=4 Jump=5 F/X=5 Monster=6 Creep=6In the 1580's English colonists arrive in what was to become North Carolina and find supernatural terror. "Save your soul, before they take it from you." I kind of liked this...sure it was low budget but I love the story of Roanoke and the village that vanished. So I was intrigued by the premise, but other than that it was a middle of the road SyFy channel horror film. Is it worth a look? sure why not...just keep your expectations low. Originally titled, "Wraiths of Roanoke", it kind of lets the cat out of the bag. I don't recommend it but it won't suck the life out of you, either.

sddavis63 At the very least, one has to give this film credit for originality, and, I suppose, since this is based around a very real and unsolved mystery anyone who makes a movie about it has total license to do with the story whatever they want. Having said that, "Lost Colony" is a rather silly movie, with a few chills included and a fair but not overwhelming amount of blood and gore, but it certainly isn't anything that should be taken at all seriously. It's based on the mystery of the lost colony on Roanoke Island off the coast of what is now North Carolina in the 16th century. It makes a claim at the beginning to be "based on actual events." I suppose that's true in the sense that there was an English colony on Roanoke Island in the 16th century and it did disappear without a trace so that to this day - although there's a lot of speculation - no one knows for certain what happened to it. I am reasonably certain, though ...I'm reasonably certain that what happened on Roanoke Island didn't involve "wraiths" - the spirits of Vikings who are trapped in this world, having been unable to make the passage to Valhalla, and who are rather vicious creatures, literally sucking the life out of the living, and looking for a perfect innocent (in this case, little Virginia Dare - who really was the first English child born in the new world) whose life will apparently be able to set them free. That's not likely - but as I said, one gives credit for imagination, when the more likely explanation for the colony's disappearance was simply that it ran out of food and its inhabitants joined with a local native tribe. But that's not as much fun as this bit of conjecture. This really isn't as bad as some might say. Its basic problem is its silliness - and the fact that it never really overcomes its silliness to really reach the level of a good thriller or horror movie. The performances in it are all right, and the setting seemed quite authentic. It's just too silly! (5/10)

PhilipGHarris Wraiths starts off at speed and the viewer feels that since it isn't going to take itself too seriously besides being "inspired by actual events". This is especially clear when it starts to stray from any basis of fact in the first five minutes.This is a made for TV Movie but has been well produced and budget has been used to great effect. The acting isn't bad, although some of the English accents do leave something to be desired. Scenery shots are pretty and music is exactly what you would expect for this type of fare.Unfortunately the internal plot just doesn't gel and I found myself getting annoyed with what would have otherwise been a passable little bit of nonsense.Rarely in this type of movie we are given the fact that all characters seem to know there is something seriously wrong but who refuse to talk to each other about the implications. Well not until a great way through the film, when of course it really is too late.Wraiths are not meant to be able to cross water – except they can if wooden trellis bridges are laid down. Or possibly if a man outstretches his arm or even for no particularly explainable reason. At least they give up mumbling in a foreign language so the people in the camp understand them.Our hero also seems to have an astonishing knowledge of Norse mythology and language that he picked up where? A vague explanation is given but really fails to hang. People go into what is described as hostile areas solo, especially at night without allowing the gate to be closed behind them. There is a wholly unjustified attack on the natives and it is really helpful that they seem to have a good technical knowledge of the occult. Oh and grenades.Much of the script stinks as well and lines where guards ask if it is unusual to have this much fog within the walls or when in the thick forest and Ananias calls for them to, "Burn it all down!" really fail to make sense.No-one seems to understand the chain of command as well and there always seem to be more guards to die than ever arrived at the settlement in the first place.I don't want to nit pick but these and others are blatant flaws in the plot that could have been resolved and moves this film from a 6 to a 4.

shannonphoenix I wouldn't be so hard on this film. No one has ever been able to give a good account of what really happened, and the whole mystery is there to speculate and to guess and write stories about. Sci-fi channel has had it's good stories and dull ones, and this is not at good as I was hoping for, but I don't believe it was half bad. It could have been better if they had a seasoned director and producer who is use to doing mystery/suspense thrillers, but I don't think that was the case. I wonder what George Lucas could have done with it or someone with a little more imagination. Besides, think about it, we didn't see the entire movie, we saw the edited version and I willing to bet that it would have been a lot more scarier and would have made a lot more reasonable sense if those parts were in there. Sometimes I wish when they came out with movies on DVD, they would give you a choice of seeing the extended version with the deleted scenes or the theater movie.As for the acting, the movie, just like X-men III, it seemed very rushed and I am sure they were times constraints. However, actors do a better job when they have more time to get into the part and make some suggestions of their own and I am not sure that happened. I think they were just given the part and told to "do it!" which also does not make for a good movie. But, you can't blame the actors who are given a script that they can only do so much with and I think the actors did the best they could and were not able to live up to their talent.I also think if just a little bit more money was put into it, it would have been a better picture. I hate it when things "happen" and there is a reason why they may be happening, but no one tells or says what it is. You see that in a lot of horror movies. People want to know background history, legends, etc. I thought a halfway descent effort was made for this. But like Eddie Murphy says, "Why do white people stay in a place that is haunted?" I am white but I would have gotten the HE** out.The whole incident is a bit haunting itself. It is very hard to really know how many Native American nations and tribes there really were. Many died out before the settlers came and some were dying off about that time. But, the word on the tree, "Croatian" (SP) does seem familiar and I do believe it was the name of a Native American tribe that may have befriended the colonist and took them into their tribe and that word was put on their so that the coming settlers would know where to find them. But, instead, the just left it a mystery and may have wanted to on purpose because they may have wanted a plan or something to scare people about in the event of any indigenous people in the area they wanted to get rid of. I mean, look what happened after wards? I believe that those colonist did not want to return and stayed with the Croatians since a lot of tribes were nomadic during the seasons. That is just a theory with no scientific backing. But it beats thinking that they were slaughtered because the Native Americans were blamed for a lot of things they didn't do and we nearly committed Genocide.