billcr12 A married guy who actually loves his wife becomes the victim of a female demon in another badly acted and un-scary drag of a movie. The husband, Rick, has a weekend fling with Ariel, a sweet young thing. Karma strikes when she comes back to him over and over and over again, and he kills her over and over and over again. Can you say redundant; I knew that you could; I would rather sit through Mr. Rogers Neighborhood, than subjecting myself to this sh** ever again. The only positive aspect of this stupidity is its' ninety minute running time. Axelle Grelet is Ariel, and although she is nude at times, she could use a set of implants to divert our attention from her poor acting ability. I do not see a bright future for Ms. Grelet, unless she visits a plastic surgeon and enters the lucrative world of adult entertainment. Ariel Does Dallas has a nice ring to it; couldn't be any worse than Killing Ariel.

movieman_kev In the summer of 1933, little Ricky sees his mom kill his father before turning the gun on herself. In the present day, a clearly disturbed Ricky is talking to a psychiatrist about whom he deems truly responsible for his parents' deaths (an incubus), he then proceeds to tell of the events that he witnessed in 1973 (where most of the film takes place). Rick, a happily married insurance agent finds his life unraveling after remembering his past, feeling alienated from his family & deciding to take a peculiar young woman by the name of Ariel on a trip to his childhood home.I've seen worse low-budget horror films, and the plot itself is fairly good. But the film just feels fairly repetitive and I found my interests waning before too long. I kept expecting a 'shocking twist' ending that was going to tie the incoherence of the rest of the film together. But when it did finally come I found it to be trite, silly & easily enough to see coming a mile away. Perhaps if the film spent a tad more time incubating it would've been (somewhat) worthwhile, but as it is the film is half-baked.Eye Candy: Lindsley Allen, Axelle Cummings, Lauren Mary Kim, Nyra & Sukunya Wangsomnuk all get toplessMy Grade: D+DVD Extras: A 25 and a half minute Making-of; and trailers for "Hide", "Pandemic" & "Ghost Image"1 Easter Egg: Highlight 'Killing Ariel' in the extras menu for the film's trailer

frog663 Was this supposed to be a comedy? An interesting premise, I suppose, but it played out like a second rate sitcom. Plus, far too little was shown of the "actual" demon, and far too much shown of the Jack Nicholson wanna-be in the lead. Seems the filmmakers spent a lot of time and make-up trying to film him from angles that would accentuate whatever bare resemblance he might have with Nicholson, though, in the early going, he reminded me more of Michael Keaton than anything else. Facially, in both cases...never talent-wise.I will say that I did come away with one positive from this film. Axelle Grelet is definitely easy on the eyes and did a credible job with what she was given. I definitely would like to see some of her other work. Aside from her, though, there really isn't much I can recommend here. Watchable once, perhaps, but nothing I would want to see again.

nonconformistx7 I can't believe so few people have seen/rated this movie. Judging from the film's website they're still working on getting proper distribution. That is a shame, because fans of the genre deserve the chance to see this. I consider myself lucky enough to have seen this film, which is quite a rarity for me to say when it comes to horror-thrillers, especially low budget ones such as this.I love horror/thrillers, but come out of almost all of them with general feelings of disappointment. Why? Because all I want is something a little bit original that scares me and is at least a little bit believable. Movies continually fall short on either one or, typically, all of these points. Instead of originality and thrills I get recycled bits of other horror movies, a couple spoonfuls of bad acting, and several buckets of corn-syrup blood. If the budget is low then acting gets worse and is then accompanied by campy effects, bad puns, and bad camera work, all of which eliminate any redeeming qualities of the film. I see this time and time again, and I am happy to say that's not what I saw with Killing Ariel. The fresh premise had me interested from the beginning, the acting - while not Oscar-worthy - is far better than most in this genre, (think Jack Nicholson in "The Shining"), and they didn't try to overcompensate a lack of genuine thrills with gallons of blood, although there was some gore. Also, not once did any of the characters do something that they wouldn't rationally do were they in a similar situation. That is to say there are no, "We're in danger...lets all split up!" moments in this film.While not a perfect 10, the fact that it didn't suffer from the pitfalls that even "blockbuster" horror movies out there suffer from makes me tip my hat to all those involved. I can't even say that I was "pleasantly surprised" by this movie because I hold the same standards to all movies in this genre, regardless of their budget or status. It lived up to what I consider to be reasonable standards: originality, thrills, and believability. (A decent plot and acting helped as well).Simply put, if you like horror/thriller, find a way to watch this movie. You won't regret it.