Dead Noon (2009)

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Blistering performances.

An action horror flick with undead cowboys, skeletons and ancient demons all in current time. An old west outlaw(Robert Bear)makes a deal with devil and returns to present day with a gang of zombie cowboys to seek vengeance on the small town of Westin. The only law in town is the newlywed Sheriff Logan Kane(Scott Phillips)and his arrogant and power hungry brother Stuart(Robert Andrus). This may be one time the law does not win. Story line is pretty stupid; acting is atrocious; but special effects are cool...smoking skeletons and flaming zombie cowboys. Also in the cast: Elizabeth Mouton, Lilith Fields, Nick Martin and Kane Hodder.

An outlaw, Frank (Robert Bear), who has the power to unleash the evils of Hell at will, returns with a vengeance to take down the lawmen. The sheriff (Scott Phillips), his brother (Robert Milo Andrus), and the owner of the local gun shop (Lillith Fields), join forces in order to take down this psycho hellion and his legion of the demonic undead. Kane Hodder also makes an appearance as a zombie cowboy.I must admit, with as few quality (and few in general) horror-westerns, I'm always on the lookout for a gem. There are really only a few worthy of a look (most notably Ravenous), but I'll always give a look to any that come along. I believe the one major problem with making a horror-western is the fact that it takes place in the past. To recreate the towns, the costumes, etc., it takes money, which is something low-budget filmmakers obviously don't have. And those that have the money don't want to risk it on a dead genre (westerns). Sadly, I'm almost always disappointed. . . and 'Dead Noon' does not break that streak. I'll start by speaking of the plot: It's not bad. Sure, it's a little ridiculous, but c'mon. . . a maniac outlaw looking to seek vengeance by bringing the powers of Hell to Earth with him? That's a pretty cool combination of evil there. But, other than that. . . it's just all pretty awful. To start, these characters were just ridiculously poorly done. I mean, we have this sheriff and an outlaw that, in their first gunfight, can't hit a target to save their lives (literally), even with the sheriff firing at least ten shots out of his six-shooter. What kind of 'maniac outlaw' can't hit a man standing still four eight feet in front of him and vice-versa? Also, speaking of this outlaw. . . is he supposed to be, at all, imposing? At, probably, 5'6", 140 lbs, I was less scared of him than I was of Cat R. Waul in 'Fievel Goes West'! And Fievel was a better (and more powerful, it would seem) hero than all of them combined in this flick! Moving past the characters (for sake of my sanity), let me give a word on the effects (oh no). I'm sorry, but, if you can't afford to do effects well. . . why even bother using them? The blood, the gore, the fire (ESPECIALLY the fire), etc., were so fake-looking, the viewer is completely removed from the reality of the film. If you can't make the fire real, do the burnings off-screen. We don't NEED to see it. I think if you show someone holding a torch, then turn away, then show a smouldering pile, the viewer will understand. And the blood? I don't really get why, when you have fake-looking blood effects as it is, there's a need to show them far more than necessary and even have it splatter on the camera (à la 'Sweeney Todd'). The fakeness is already ruining the mood, so why rub it in our faces (almost literally)? So, now on to the technical aspects. . . well, the writing's not completely awful, just really not good. The writers (it took three to write this, apparently) made no attempt whatsoever to keep any kind of real "1800s"-style to their dialogue and actions. It's no difficult: Just watch a few John Wayne flicks and take notes on key words & phrases. How about the look of the film? Well, the cinematography was pretty horrendous and the cheap shot-on-video look was a complete mess (use film or at least some kind of graining effect to make it look more 'old-fashioned'). Guess the only thing left is the acting? Well, it's not much to speak of. Some of the actors are okay, some are very bad, just like in most low-budget affairs. The main problem I had with the actors is the actual casting. . . none of them really looked "Old West" to me. But, oh well, it's forgivable with something this cheaply made and it's certainly the worst of the worries about this film. Overall, it's a very bad film. It shows some heart and had a LOT of potential with that plot, but due to obvious budgetary constraints and poor execution, it crashes & burns in some extremely fake-looking fire.Final verdict: 3/10. I think I'm being generous, but they tried, so I'll give 'em that.-AP3-

I've never seen a movie this bad before. I rented this hoping to see a decent B horror movie. What I got was not a horror movie, nor a B movie. This movie isn't even a C or a D movie. I've seen better movies made by juniors at Senior High.Let's start out with the script. The foundation of any movie. It was bad. Really bad. The first 45 minutes of the movie is as follows: Introduce a character, kill that same character, introduce a character, kill that same character, repeat. If that's not bad enough, the deaths aren't even original. It's just the antagonists shooting people. It's mind numbingly boring. The end was also a sad excuse at making a twist.Let's move on to the acting. The acting is bad throughout. It is quite obvious that no actor in this movie has had no prior acting experience. If you took a group of mentally handicapped children, you would have gotten better acting.Special effects. Were they not aloud to actually use fire? Did they need to do that in post? Worst special effects ever. They even accidentally green screened things out that were supposed to be in the shot.Even if this movie is free for you to watch, don't. Don't waste your time. Even if your best friend is on the production team, don't watch it. As a matter of fact, slap him/her right in the mouth.

This is movie is a blast! It's "High Noon" done as a horror western. Some bandits return to take vengeance on a sheriff, who recently married and stays to protect the town rather than run away with his wife. The difference is, these bandits were killed by the sheriff's ancestor over a hundred years ago. And they've been released not from prison, but from hell and begin destroying the town.I saw this film at the "Tabloid Witch Awards Film Festival" last year. It was there I learned they made this film for $4,000.00. Which still amazes me. This does not look or feel like a four thousand dollar film at all. It's full of action and gun fighting. And some wicked special effects considering the budget. I recently saw the version which LionsGate bought and is releasing. I must say, I liked the original better. The music was much more dirty and gritty. And the story flowed a little better. The cute blonde (Lillith Fields of Urban Legends: Bloody Mary) was in it much more (including a shower scene). There was also a lot more comedic moments. I guess a studio's gotta do, what a studio's gotta do. BUT, the LionsGate/Barnholtz version still has a hell of a bite and they added one great element to it. KANE HODDER (Jason Voorhees of Friday the 13th)! It was so nice to see Kane rocking some dialogue and looking like his extremely intimidating self. I'm very happy to see this film got picked up and distributed. It'd be great to see more indies out there to freshen' up the film world. Once again gotta say, for a $4,000.00 dollar film, this one knocked my socks off!