Dalbert Pringle About the only "astounding" thing that you're bound to see in this film is the astounding incompetence that prevails.Well, OK, sexy Shirley Kilpatrick as the "She-Monster" was pretty astounding, too. Especially in that skintight, metallic spacesuit of hers. Yeah. It looked like that she-monster had literally been poured into her outfit. Zowie! And, actually, another astounding thing about this dumb Z-Grader was that Director Ronald Ashcroft filmed the frickin' thing in a record 8 days on an $18,000 budget. And, believe me, every single one of those dollars shows quite conspicuously in this particular production.As the story goes - Nat and Esther, a pair of Hollywood kidnappers, abduct heiress Margaret Chaffee and then take over the country home of geologist, Dick Cutler, where they plan to hold Margaret until her ransom money is collected.In the midst of all the commotion at Cutler's place, an alien spacecraft crash-lands in the woods nearby. From the burning wreckage emerges a seductive, blond, alien-beauty in a glowing spandex outfit, high-heels, fresh lipstick and incredible eyebrows.As it is soon discovered by the occupants of the Cutler home, this "she-monster's" touch is deadly (in the strictest sense of the word).The Astounding She-Monster is "bottom-of-the-barrel" Z-Grade movie-making all the way, featuring an alien who not once utters a single, solitary sound, or word, throughout the entire course of the story.Trivia notes - During filming, Shirley Kilpatrick's costume ripped, and since the film was done on such a low budget and on a tight schedule, she couldn't get a new one - This is why she walks backwards as she leaves the room.This film is listed among The 100 Most Amusingly Bad Movies Ever Made.

fedor8 It starts off with an idiotic voice-over and a cheap-looking galaxy which couldn't evoke awe out of a three year-old. In this funny intro ("BLACK void of NIGHT") we are informed that other planets have noticed that Earth is close to destroying the entire galaxy so they send a meteor(?!) to Earth. The implication is obvious: we Earthlings are to be punished before we commit "cosmic suicide". Fair enough, I thought. Why should we live if we are about to destroy the entire galaxy with a nuclear explosion? It just wouldn't be right. The prologue also informs us that an ancient galactic explosion had a power "so tremendous it didn't have the sense to compute its enormity". Well, I am sure that the explosion's power would have had the sense to compute its enormity had it been a sensible enough power, but, alas, clearly it hadn't.Happily enough, the inane narration continues after the main titles, but someone else takes over; a narrator who quite possibly has a word or two to say about class-struggle. Cut to a woman driving off in a car. By this time the narration isn't simply of a scientific, intellectual, and informative nature as it was in the galactic intro: now it is smug, self-confident narration, full of disdain for the rich woman driving off in her fancy car. Is the narrator jealous of the upper-class? Maybe, but I doubt it: when the woman gets kidnapped a minute later, the narrator revels in her unfortunate situation, but is kind enough to give her advice; he tells her that there is "no use to struggle, Margaret" and comforts her with those gentle but oh-so true words: "Being kidnapped could be termed almost normal for a wealthy socialite". Not only normal, but also to be encouraged, judging from the voice of the not at all socially envious narrator. Having heard those words, both the viewer and Margaret sigh in relief, realizing that kidnapping is just part of the bigger picture in the daily routine of a rich person. I was certainly relieved to hear this, for the excitement was getting too much for me at this point what with my worries about Margaret being dragged off like that by a couple of 50s B-movie thugs. The narrator certainly laid my worries to rest, and I will always be grateful to him for that (as will Margaret). We are then introduced to a geologist - and movie's brave hero - taking a walk in the woods with his faithful dog, Lassie. He witnesses a very cheap special effect in the sky and is shocked by how low-budgety it looks. But that shock doesn't get the dramatic treatment it deserves; instead, he tells Lassie that he never saw such a colour in the sky before - light grey, namely. Later, when our hero reaches his cottage, he tells Lassie this again, but Lassie is too well-mannered to tell his master that he is repeating himself. Even the narrator steers clear from pointing that out to him, or at least gently warning him not to say it a third time. A scene later, we get to see the astounding she-monster: she is a rather cute little thing in a very tight costume and looks like Spock's bastard daughter. She moves very gracefully, like a ballerina, and has an ethereal kind of dignified quality which is so rare in blood-thirsty hostile aliens. Yet there is something about her behaviour which suggests that she will soon kill off some gangsters. She strolls in the woods, observing the flora and fauna. She is so enchanted by what she sees that she probably doesn't even notice how the animals appear only in stock-footage, while she is eternally damned to this director's camera only. I would also put my money on her not realizing that the animals are enjoying day-light while she has to content herself with night-time. To show the viewer and the animals that she is benevolent, she kills a snake. With this violent but necessary gesture she has shown her galactic masters that they made the right choice in sending her to destroy Earth: one dead snake, 500,000 trillion other creatures to go. She was on her way. Cut to the gang who kidnapped Margaret. They are lead by Kenne "Horse cock" Duncan, the Robert Mitchum of B-movies. In his tow are a drunk middle-aged blonde who probably showed her breasts in a couple of early blue movies, and a trigger-happy guy who likes to engrave his name in other people's furniture; his other hobbies include bad acting, and being the first to die in cheap Z-movies. Meanwhile, our tireless, loyal narrator no.2 tells us what we all have been dying to hear: that all of these characters will somehow join together to form a unified plot; for a while there it looked like we would have three different plots (all for the price of one!): a gangster movie, a happy geologist/Lassie-come-home movie, and a alien-she-beast roaming around the countryside killing off defenseless snakes movie. The human part of the cast congregates in the geologist's cottage, while the half-Vulkan part waits for a dramatically opportune moment to quit roaming the forest aimlessly and involve herself more actively in that unified plot which we were promised. The events in the cottage are too numerous to fit in this humble review; let's just say that the human characters waste no time with pointless discussions about the re-distribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. Eventually the astounding she-creature threatens everyone and they run out of the cottage. A little later they come back to the cottage. Even more later, they again abandon the cottage, running for their lives. After that, it's back to the cottage for more of the fascinating goings-on. A while later, it's again time to run away from the cottage. And after a while after that, guess what? It's back to the cottage.

Scott_Mercer Others have commented upon the similarities between this and an Ed Wood film. I submit to you that these are more than mere similarities...First of all, the box copy on the DVD from Image states: "Producer-Director Ronnie Ashcroft's first feature film venture guided by his friend and mentor Edward D. Wood Jr., whose "uncredited" help gives this film that unmistakable "scent" of Wood." Quote by Wade Williams. The box also states: "Consultant: Edward D. Wood Jr. (uncredited)." Just what exactly are we trying to say here, Mr. Williams? Just come out with it! Could it have anything to do with the fact that Ed Wood stock player Kenne Duncan appears here? How about the film's writer, the alleged Frank Hall? He has no other credits at all on the IMDb. Could that be one Edward Wood under a pseudonym? Ed almost always put his own name on films he either directed or wrote, but he was known to use pseudonyms on many of the paperback novels he wrote in the 1960's and 70's.I have not checked Ed's biography for any possible information on this film, but could it be that this film was actually written by the Anti-Master himself? And what does Wade Williams have to say on this theory? Clearly, the matter needs further investigation.Anyway, this is a hilariously bad film. If Ed didn't write this film, it's right in his wheelhouse. Ridiculous dialog and lots of scenes with no dialog at all since they were shot with no sound. Lots of scenes that drag on (did I say drag? In a discussion about Ed Wood? That was a bad pun, I guess) and on and go nowhere. In other words: prime Badfilm. Ed Wood fans, be aware. You may want to give this one a spin in the old machine. Normal people will not enjoy it though. If you are normal, stay away.

march9hare A svelte alien space-babe with alarming eyebrows and a sprayed on silver body stocking threatens Robert Clarke, a bunch of gangsters, and a bimbo in this awful 1957 sci-fi clunker. Almost unbelievably cheap (the movie only has one set), loaded with pointless running around in the woods, pointless running in and out of Clarke's mountain cabin, and one not so special effect, this has got to be the longest 61-minute movie ever filmed, and makes Clarke's next film, "The Hideous Sun Demon", play like "The Tragedy of Hamlet". Stunningly bad. Even when I first saw this movie as a kid, I thought: "This movie is stupid". Chances are, you will, too.