Dead & Rotting

2002 "Let the punishment fit the offense ..."
Dead & Rotting
4.1| 1h12m| R| en| More Info
Released: 03 February 2002 Released
Producted By: Shadow Entertainment
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Three prankster buddies release the wrath of an aged witch, Abigail, when they unwittingly become accomplices to the murder of her son. Scheming in anger, the witch seduces the three friends and then uses the men's own ill-born spawn to destroy them. Death and rot are left in the wake...

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Shadow Entertainment

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Michael Ledo This is one of the better Tempe videos. Three young men get into a tussle with a witch and her son. Things escalate to a point to where ghouls are involved. The surviving man gets help from a stripper named Rose, who is also a part time witch.The acting, plot, dialogue and sound track are far better than most of the Tempe videos out there. If you can't stomach this low budget attempt, don't bother with other Tempe films.Parental Guide: Contains Nudity.
Russell62 My wife and I take turns to select the DVD for our weeknight viewing. It was my turn, and the crap looking cover and the title were enough to convince me this would be a turkey. I wasn't wrong there!Anyone who comes here looking for a classic horror movie will be sadly disappointed. This is absolute garbage, the acting, if we should even dignify it with such a term, is mostly diabolical, the story seems to have been written on the back of a beermat, and even the quality of the film is often grainy and indistinct. To put it in a nutshell, I laughed my head off! It is a comedy, pure and simply, a side-splitting no-budget collection of bits ripped off from every other B movie you can imagine. Please, whoever you are, see this movie! My wife, who usually is not that impressed with my choices of DVD, had to pause the thing a couple of times, as she was laughing too hard to breathe.
Michael O'Keefe You may think that DEAD & ROTTING is a stinker...surprise. For a very, very low budget flick, its not so bad. Thanks to Debbie Rochon for tweaking interest. A trio of rednecks pay a couple of looking for trouble youths to torment Abigail(Barbara Katz-Norrod)and her deep backwoods son Pox(Christopher Suciu). Is it rumor or fact that Abigail is the wicked witch living in the woods. When Pox is murdered, the wrath of Abigail is dealt. The three drinking buddies become victims of a curse...dead and rotting. My favorite scene is watching a naked Katz-Norrod sinking into an antique bath tub to rise up as her younger self(Rochon). Also in the cast: Stephen O'Mahoney, Tom Hoover, Trent Haaga and Jeff Dylan Graham. DEAD & ROTTING runs about 72 minutes and is written and directed by David P. Barton. Straight to video is not necessarily a curse.
dasneakerpimp I saw this movie on a compilation collection called "A night to dismember" that I purchased from Wal-Mart. I picked it up because it had "The Bonesetter", a film made by local schlock filmmaker, Brett Kelly, and I thought it would be good for a laugh and it was. All of the films were no budget productions and by that I mean anywhere from 500 to maybe 10,000 dollars. I bet a lot of people think that they could do something pretty good with 10,000 dollars and I say: Try. Put your money where your mouth is. A lot of "reviewers", and by that I mean people who go on the net and whine about things, say this movie is horrible. They say bad acting, bad camera work, bad lighting. You have no idea what you're talking about. Have any of you actually seen bad acting? I mean, truly horrible acting . Imagine the rejects from American Idol but instead of singing they are acting. For what this movie was, a couple of guys with an idea, a camera, and few thousand dollars, it was pretty damn good. the acting wasn't bad, not great but not bad either. The story wasn't bad either. The lighting did shift from time to time but it was marginal. I've seen movies that looked like they cost at least a few million that were a lot worse than this. And what's with all these people knocking digital projects? Ever heard of Robert Rodriguez? He said he'd never use film again. Micheal Mann? Collateral was digital and that was a damn good movie. 28 days later was shot with the Canon XL1S and that was pretty successful. So give credit where credit is due. I think David Barton did a good job and I would definitely like to see what he could do with an actual budget.