ofumalow It's fast-paced, slick, lively, deliberately silly/comical, and certainly a lot less dumb than myriad recent horror spoofs like "Transylmania." Some aspects are broad, but others are slyly unexpected, like the villainess' seduction scene with yuppie jerk Charles, and her mute giant brother's feelings toward the camp yet resilient gay guy. It's a deliberately crass movie, yet it's got some wit, energy and invention, certainly more so than most recent low-budget U.S. slashers (or spoofs thereof). As a semi-guilty pleasure, I've watched it several times and quite enjoyed it every time. My favorite performer was Martin Bayfield, absolutely. He does a sympathetic Igor/Frankenstein "monster" act with considerable charm.

ichocolat Hmmm .. I do not even know where to begin writing, because I can simply sum it up by saying, "The film sucks big time." There weren't a single scene worth mentioning in this film. The horror was far between, and even that it weren't a bit scary.The jokes were crude, unfunny and lame.And the thick British accent, annoyed me to death. It is completely okay if the accent is original, but in this film, they tried very hard to speak the accent, is was quite painful to hear it for an hour and a half.I strongly recommend others to watch other film instead. Heck, even Hilton's 'Bottoms Up' film fared better than this.

Paul Andrews Stagknight is set in England where Brian (Simeon Willis) has been taken on a stag weekend by nine of his mates, an isolated cottage deep in the countryside for a paint-balling competition. However the owner of the cottage has other plans for them as she makes them chant an ancient spell (don't ask) which unleashes some some of Knights Templar demon known as a Guardian who protects a magical cauldron (or something like that) by killing everyone. As the paint-ballers numbers begin to fall rapidly the survivors must find a way to send the Guardian back to hell for good...This English production was co-written, co-produced & directed by Simon Cathcart who also played Sean & one has to say Stagknight is as bad as it sounds. The script by Cathcart & Robert Mercer tries to be funny & scary but fails miserably on both counts, the horror comedy genre is very difficult to pull off as there is a very fine line between being funny & just plain stupid & being scary & being anything but. There wasn't one single scene in Stagknight which I thought was funny, jokes revolving around people sat on toilets farting a lot or Asain character's speaking in funny accents or an old woman giving a guy a blow job or a character falling down a large hole & then someone else 'accidently' dislodges a brick which drops on them or someone removing a dildo from his anus complete with a loud popping sound effect just scrape the bottom of the proverbial barrel as far as humour goes. The horror elements are no better, this large Knight dude show's up every so often & kills a few people but apart from that there's nothing here we haven't seen a million times before. This is just your average teen slasher with comedy character's who irritate rather than entertain. There's barely any gore, the kills are unimaginative & the story about ghostly Guardians & some rubbish about a magical cauldron just sucks.Director Cathcart has to be blamed for a lot of what I saw, besides the script being generic uninspiring crap it's so badly shot it's untrue. The version I saw was so dark in places there were times when the screen was virtually black & I didn't have a clue what I supposed to be seeing. The worst lit film since the notorious Humongous (1982). The gore is virtually none existent, someone gets an axe in their chest, there's a bit of blood splatter, there's a decapitated head & someone is impaled on a spear. I don't think there's any nudity either, I can't remember any anyway. It's not scary or atmospheric & since it's so bloody dark & badly lit it becomes incredibly frustrating & annoying to watch.According to the IMDb Stagknight supposedly had a budget of about £1,500,000 which surprises me since it's a very badly made film with barely any CGI effects, no gore effects & no name actors. It's set entirely within some woods & I really can't see where all the money went. Also according to the IMDb Stagknight was shot in 2005 & presumably sat on the shelf for a few years which is no surprise since it's so bad. In fact I'm surprised this didn't go straight to the Sc-Fi Channel. The acting is nothing to shout about & the thick English accents are annoying.Stagknight is a poor moronic horror comedy slasher film that isn't funny or scary or gory & it's so badly lit half the time you can't see whats happening. Definitely not recommended.

pbc_123 when there are props there are props! Stagknight gets a certified 9/10 I was at the holehead festival and this was awesome,the best point of this film were the kills, I have never seen such inventive deaths, a guy gets his head punched through a tree, you gotta see the mess, it was so effective the audience actually felt it a few people even touched there heads! I want simon cathcart to sign my children lol. This is what the British call 'satire' what borat did. Funny ,scary and a good ending, the worst point of the film was one plank of wood in the audience called Steve who was this over judgmental out of shape and out of style uncool dude, He was just siting there whole audience cheering and this 80's throwback reject is the only one not laughing. I got a tip for you granddad pull up your stockings ,drink your soup , take a walk outside and smell the roses then zip your mouth up so no one has to hear an idiotic rant by an idiotic nobody, who probably beats off to reruns of 90210. This is the new comedy not the old.I can't wait for release, make more films!