IMDb > Scrapbook (2000) (V) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
Scrapbook (2000) (V) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]
Index 33 comments in total 

88 out of 100 people found the following comment useful :-
Just Not Very Good, 10 April 2006
5/10
Author: hmmdrmike from United States

It's true: this movie is disturbing and will shock you with some scenes of depravity and torture that you've never seen before, but despite all that it's still just not very good. Among my main complaints: - Some people extol the fact that the production quality was very low, giving it a grim "snuff" film look to the movie. But seriously, I thought it just made every scene look that much worse because of the image quality, shaky camera movements, and muffled sounds.

- The acting, though pretty good at times (the female lead whose name I forget must've gone through hell to make this movie) is still suspect throughout much of the movie. They try hard but in the end... it's just not very good.

- The special effect. I know a movie with such a small budget can't be expected to have Hollywoood quality special effects, but seriously, a lot of the corpses and body parts looked like discarded parts from Halloween costumes.

The premise of the movie was great but the execution was just bad. Blame it on the small budget, the neophyte actors, or whatever, but in the end it boils down to this movie just not being very good. There are much better, scarier, gorier, "shock-ier" movies out there. Don't get taken in by the hype.

Was the above comment useful to you?

87 out of 100 people found the following comment useful :-
Truly Pathetic, 29 January 2007
2/10
Author: groucho_de_sade from Houston, TX (where the cows come from)

Wow, what a disappointment. After watching the director's ICE FROM THE SUN, I thought I'd give this one a shot. If you've ever seen ICE FROM THE SUN, feel free to laugh up your sleeve at my naiveté for thinking this one would be even better. SCRAPBOOK is a truly awful pseudo-movie, all the more stunningly awful because the mise-en-scene at least indicates that a modicum of talent resides behind the camera. Tommy Biondo, who "wrote" the "script", plays a serial killer who keeps a scrapbook of all the women he tortures and kills. Why? It's never made clear. He kidnaps a girl and tells her that she must maintain an account of her torture in the scrapbook. Why? It's never made clear. The killer has a deep-seated resentment of women, and is sexually maladjusted. Why? It's never made clear. As a matter of fact, the only thing that's clear from this stupid movie is the filmmakers' desire to "make something really disturbing"; their miserable failure comes from the fact that without subtext, scenes of violence and torture are simply demoralizing, not to mention boring. Maybe the film could've at least been uncomfortable to watch, but all the torture sequences -- the film's bread and butter -- are so ineffectively staged that all their violence is rendered completely useless. The acting in this movie is so bad: how hard could it possibly be to act out blinding pain? The girl in this movie is so stupid; through the whole thing, she simply cries and whimpers, rolls up into a little ball, says "Please" a lot. I'm not ordinarily the type to watch a movie and say, "If I were there, I'd do this...", but in this case we're talking about a dumb weepy girl who isn't even tied half the time, and through all the rape and debasement, never once a raised hand, never a kick, not even a cross word! I know girls who would eat this psycho-killer prick for breakfast. I'm not the sort of person who thinks that gore and graphic sex disqualify a film from greatness. I just find it insulting that this movie is intended to be "thought-provoking". The only thought it provoked in me was "What an idiot I was for spending $25 on this horse-s__t." If you want to see a truly disturbing and thought-provoking horror film that has a point beyond the lovingly-detailed (and poorly rendered) torture of a severely stupid young woman, watch IN A GLASS CAGE, HENRY: PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER, Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE, or LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT (that's right, even LAST HOUSE wasn't this bad). Some people here have called SCRAPBOOK offensive and nauseating; I'd argue that this is giving the "film"-makers too much credit. SCRAPBOOK is stupid, boring, and pointless; I wouldn't even do the cast and crew the favor of getting sick at this stupid, boring, and pointless movie. I could go on and on about how terrible it is, but just see for yourself. If you found this movie stimulating, I have three words for you: READ A BOOK!

Was the above comment useful to you?

87 out of 102 people found the following comment useful :-
How can you like a film that has nothing but a woman being tortured?, 9 February 2005
1/10
Author: destroyedcelluloid from manchester, uk

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Not so outrageous but more…bland, this attempt at shock seems rather sophomoric and immature, like a frustrated filmmaker trying desperately to get some attention. It comes across as being more of a vehicle of publicity for the makers rather than someone making a film because they love the medium and have a story to tell.

Not at all stylistic or intelligent as say, 'Henry' or 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre', this film is rather ephemeral and I would be extremely cautious of anyone who tells you they have seen this film more than once, and run in the opposite direction from anyone who tells you they enjoyed it. Why? Because it's pointless and sick. A woman is kidnapped, raped and tortured, then escapes. That's it, the whole film is a woman being tortured. Now you see what I mean?

Shot entirely on digital (they were right, ANYONE can make a movie these days), and with bad lighting, this is certainly no pleasure to watch, and despite its extreme nature, the characters are badly written and very clichéd, like the sensitive side to the kidnapper, I laughed inside at the stupidity of it! This is a very graphic film and I don't actually know anyone I would recommend it to, and its graphicness is all it has going for it. It's pointless, unwatchable. I mean, you'd have to be a sicko to want to watch it more than once, since there is no artistic value, no plot and is just 90 mins of a woman being tortured (note: this has already been done 15 yrs previous, in the guinea pig series of films, and they're just as pitiful) and quite frankly, it's boring.

I've read a few reviews of this film and some people seem to think it's groundbreaking. It isn't, no one is interested in this film, it's too lame.

Was the above comment useful to you?

87 out of 104 people found the following comment useful :-
Don't believe it's hype!!, 7 April 2004
Author: yank_soto from NY

What a waste of time and money this overrated piece of crap was.

I was pretty excited to see this movie. Most of the reviews I read on the independent horror websites made it sound like it was a new violent and disturbing classic. While it does go out of it's way to be offensive, it fails on every level. The acting and directing is what one would expect from a backyard home video and that kills any chance of getting behind the cardboard characters.

This movie is not below the level of an Ed Wood film like Shatter Dead, Nikos the Impaler or countless other backyard horror videos but it's also no where near the classic that the independent horror websites would have you believe.

Was the above comment useful to you?

89 out of 109 people found the following comment useful :-
What Might Happen if Some Special-Ed Kids Found a Video Camera..., 16 September 2005
Author: aliasanythingyouwant from United States

Scrapbook is home-made horror-porn from a director whose sadism is matched only by his crude-mindedness. Undoubtedly there is an audience for this stuff - there's an audience for just about everything I guess - but hopefully, for the sake of humanity's future, it's a small audience, and one that isn't able to procreate too profusely.

Does this make me sound like a snob? I don't care. If you can't be a snob over something as base, as technically inept, as profoundly repulsive as Scrapbook, then what can you be a snob about?

To call Scrapbook a movie would be to lend it a dignity it does not deserve. Roger Corman's A Bucket of Blood is a movie, a cheap, low-rent travesty but still a movie (and quite an amusing one at that). Night of the Living Dead is a movie - hell, even Last House on the Left is one - but Scrapbook? No. Scrapbook is something else - let's call it a stream of digital-video vomit until we can think of something better. Too harsh you say? You obviously haven't seen it.

The stream of digital-video vomit (it is a bit ungainly isn't it?) has a plot: a chunky little broad with a buzz-cut is kidnapped by a lunatic and imprisoned in his isolated house; the lunatic proceeds to torture the girl not only physically but, more importantly, mentally by subjecting her to his incoherent ramblings about his sad existence as a sexually-dysfunctional serial-killer. Ah, the serial killer - what is it about acorn-brained men with the emotional lives of fourteen-year-old lobotomy-patients that makes them so fascinated with obsessive murderers? Do they see something of themselves in these fractured, compulsive, socially inept predators? Or can they simply not think of anything better to make movies about? Scrapbook's serial-killer is one of cult-horror-moviedom's silliest, a snaggle-toothed drunken loner who got beaten a lot as a child, and can now only become sexually aroused by doing unspeakable things to women who bear a physical resemblance to the tart who used to play with his winkie when he was a boy. Huh? Forget it - it doesn't make sense for a second. Maybe - maybe - it could have made sense, but star/screenwriter (snicker) Tommy Biondo so muddles everything with inane speeches and amateur histrionics that even if we cared for a second we could not hope to sustain this interest through our ever-increasing annoyance.

Is "digital-video affront to all things natural" better?

It must be said that Tommy Biondo is only half-responsible for this particular insult to cinema - the rest of the blame falls in the lap of director Eric Stanze, a cult filmmaker who has developed a certain reputation amongst connoisseurs of crap. Stanze, it must be said, is a truly committed director - he doesn't skimp in creating his psycho jerk-off fantasy, but gives his chimp-like audience everything it could want and more. To catalogue the outrages perpetrated by and upon the actors in Scrapbook would cause this review to descend to a level of explicitness beyond what is tasteful; suffice it to say that what the female lead, a spunky no-talent named Emily Haack, is forced to endure in the name of schlock goes beyond challenging and into the realm of masochism. I hope against hope that Ms. Haack's parents never see this pile of steaming pig-guts.

Of course, even the worst piece of garbage is defensible - isn't that what progressive-mindedness is all about? Therefore, in the name of progressive-mindedness, I will attempt to defend Scrapbook. Perhaps one can find something in this heap of buzzard-entrails's rawness, its dim-witted purity, to applaud. The film is certainly not slick. It is not pretending to be anything other than what it is - the problem is that it is what it is.

Progressive-mindedness? Forget it. Sometimes one has no choice but to be narrow and snobbish. You don't watch a movie like Scrapbook, you fend it off until it's over, then go take a shower.

Was the above comment useful to you?

83 out of 98 people found the following comment useful :-
Contrived. Acting School Required!, 20 May 2004
Author: horns-1 (horns@exitthelight.com) from Cincinnati, Ohio

I had no expectations, good or bad, about Scrapbook before seeing it. Nor was I acquainted with the low-budget horror team headed by director Eric Stanze and the volume of straight-to-video films they've produced. What I sat through was a third-rate, tasteless, and throughout borderline cheesy exploitation – the tasteless aspect probably being the film's only strong point. This one takes its graphic sex scenes to where others have only hinted at. I admire the fact that the filmmakers were willing to 'go there,' to push the envelope, to shock the viewer without restraint, but there are so many negative points to the film that its cinematic chutzpah is all but extinguished by them. Contrived, I think, would be the best way to describe how most of the scenes come off. There are only a few moments when the dialogue reaches a stage of believability, as the rest is addled and poorly delivered with bad timing. The violence is on par with wrestling entertainment (WWE) – in particular the weak slapping. There are so many ludicrous moments that I can't begin to explain – the prologue being the utmost example of it. There's a glass bottle scene that screams I Spit on Your Grave (1978). Was this homage?

The gore, however, is done quite professionally. It's something most exploitation horror film afficionados will want to see at least once. In a nutshell, it's 95 min of killer and victim pornographic fair.

Was the above comment useful to you?

43 out of 44 people found the following comment useful :-
The video makers have no shame, 30 September 2007
Author: iglooman000 from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

The only thing worse then a boring, over-hyped low budget home video is a boring, low budget home video that relies on FAKE hype and planted shill reviews that most likely come from the people who made it. Why do I think and claim this to be the case? Well because I've been trying to work on a review of this movie for most of the last month. I'd always start writing it and then something would come up and I wouldn't get it done. Eventually I began to notice that every time I come back to work on my review, that Scrapbook was getting a ridiculous amount of new "10" ratings. It had to be like 40 "10"'s within the month!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now I'm sorry, but there's no way that so many people are out there loving this movie so much that they have to rush here to give it a "10". Especially since Scrapbook is a pretty weak movie all things considered! I'm not going to even go into the details I was going to share in my actual review because after seeing the endless shill reviews and ratings, I decided against it because this movie doesn't even deserve it. To put it mildly, Scrapbook is a weak carbon copy of every rape/revenge film (guy kidnaps girl and forces her to do bad things against her will) that's ever been made only with way less talent behind it. What Scrapbook does in abundance is an obvious army of shills who load this page with endless "plant" positive reviews and who sign up for multiple accounts for the sole purpose of giving Scapbook "10" ratings in order to boost it's IMDb rating. It's almost strange that the filmmakers even find it worthwhile since Scrapbook is nothing more then two non actors delivering the worst Jr. high school level performances that you're ever likely to see. There's no decent gore, just lots and lots of BORING dialog between the two non actors. There's also the so called " controversial" scenes between two actors and after seeing them you'll be wishing they never agreed to do those scenes. As for all the reviews claiming it to be this brutal, confrontational classic. Laugh at them because they're so ridiculous and they actually show more creativity then Scrapbook ever does. Always keep in mind with movies like Scrapbook that very few people see them and even less like them when they do see them. When you see garbage like Scrapbook with over 100 "10"'s for it's user ratings, be suspicious. All that said, I'd have probably gave this movie around a 3 or 4 (for effort alone) rating prior to seeing all the shill BS, but since Scrapbook has people who are obviously trying to boost it's rating by claiming that it's something that it's not, I have to give it a 1. For a much better low budget film, give the controversial Live Feed a chance.

UPDATE: Since yesterday when I posted this review Scrapbook has mysteriously gotten another 5 "10" votes. How pathetic is this movie when the filmmakers have to manipulate it's rating. What happened to the days when actual fans would dictate your movie's cult status?

2nd UPDATE: As of October 2, 2007, this piece of garbage movie now has 135 "10" votes!!! 6 more since my last update. Eric Stanze and company are pathetic!

Was the above comment useful to you?

7 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
Torture flicks are really the weakest sub-genre in horror., 19 December 2007
4/10
Author: ElijahCSkuggs from Happy Land, who lives in a Gumdrop House on Lolly Pop Lane

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

If there's one sub-genre of horror that I'd happily see disappear it's the torture genre. This sh!t bores the living hell out of me. Well the American torture films do anyway. I personally find the August Underground films to be complete piles of crap. Boring pieces of sh!t. There is nothing to making a torture flick. Grab a camera, some actors that aren't afraid to scream, cry, get naked and have blood effects on them. Bingo, you've got yourself a low-budget torture flick. Scrapbook only saves itself from being a boring pile of crap due to a couple interesting ideas. It's obvious most people hate this movie, but it's undeniable that having a serial killer keeping a scrapbook with his victims' photos and thoughts written inside is a good idea. You add a couple big name Hollywood stars and put some cash into it, you'll have a hit. But when you have a low-budget film with amateur actors, it's ingredients for failure. But, Scrapbook isn't an entire failure, it gives off a dirty, gritty feel that I really disliked (which is a good thing), a couple scenes of hope for the victim, and like I said above, a good idea for a serial killer movie. But the movie is plagued by crappy writing and amateur acting. The girl is always amateur, but the guy who plays Leonard wasn't entirely poor, he reminded me of Jason Mewes actually. But most of all, just like all these other torture flicks, there are zero scares. The tag-line for the film: "True horror is simply what one human being can do to another." Sorry, but I don't agree with that at all. If you're saying this movie is true horror, then I'm not a true horror fan. First and foremost, the reason I enjoy horror is to be frightened. I'm not saying I don't like to be shocked by disturbing images, I actually love watching disturbing movies. But when it's done in such a tedious, bland manner, I'd much rather waste my time doing something else.

Overall Scrapbook is just another below average flick that doesn't do anything special. Sure it has "the goods" when it comes down to a nasty flick, but overall it's very weak film-making. My favorite scenes of the movie was when they were focusing on the whole scrapbook idea, which unfortunately came near the last half of the film and was used sporadically between scenes. And if they focused on that instead of showing the chicks awful tattoos and his limp weiner, the film would have been much better. Instead of highlighting the scrapbook idea, and using that to make the shocking scenes more shocking, they do the opposite and show the shocking scenes first and foremost and then talk about the Scrapbook idea. It seems like they knew they had a cool idea for a serial killer, but didn't really know how to use it. Or maybe they didn't what do I know. And also at 95 minutes, the movie goes on a little too long. I seriously have no clue why they included the horse dude guy....just to kill him, and show how crazy Leonard is. I think we got the idea he was nuts when he whipped out the old Scrapbook....and raping the chick was also kinda a good way of saying he's serious. These "shocking" torture flicks are really a played out genre and I seriously hope they die out....unless they tack on some big Hollywood actors and a big budget, then it'd be awesome....right? ;)

Was the above comment useful to you?

4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
Don't do it!!!, 2 February 2008
1/10
Author: Max Baldwin (maxbaldwin@btinternet.com) from United Kingdom

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

No,no,no!!! Do not dare breathe this lump of feces in the same sentence as classics such as "Last House...", "Henry.." or even "I Spit..." They aren't even in the same league. And don't think I'm against the low budget restrictions of this film. Some of my favourites are were made for much less.

There is, seemingly, zero plot. Im watching it now. To be good and gory, ya gotta have a story!! You must know the plot by now, killer kidnaps woman to complete his scrapbook of murder, rape and mayhem. And thats pretty much it. The acting is non-existent. There is too much time spent on the unfortunate Clara's "do or don't do" moral dilemmas (i.e giving him oral sex, getting down on her knees etc) and she hasn't spoken a word until now (im 76 minutes through-out of 94 minutes), so its pretty difficult to empathise with her. Oh, shes just spoken!!! It makes no difference. This is still hopeless. In the end, I'm watching it now-86 minutes in, she seduces him, ties him to the bed and kills him-about the best bit of the whole film. She then leaves. The End. Ho-hum.

Anyway, the killer/rapist/tool is just quite frankly annoying. He's just too immature to convey any real sense of dread when he turns up. The aforementioned classics contained a strong "Alpha" male as the main perpetrator, Krug, Henry and the one from Spit (cant remember name!). This all helps to give a real idea that anything could happen when they turn up. This tool is just a kid, with a moustache resembling an earwig. And a small penis!

I bought this film (thank god as a copy) as part of my mission to watch the goriest stuff out there. As an indication of how bad it is, this is the 3rd time I've attempted to watch it. Its broad daylight and I fell sound asleep the first two times.

Stick with the above (Last/Henry/spit) and try Chaos-I liked it despite being a complete Last House remake. As a film, on its own, it stands up well.

Don't bother with this.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Good actress, bad actor, lousy film., 13 April 2008
2/10
Author: Rob_T_Firefly from NY, USA

The only points I can give this film are for lead actress Emily Haack. She must have gone through hell making this.

Actor/writer Tommy Biondo, on the other hand, fails at doing everything vaguely movie-related. Nothing good can be said of his writing, because there just doesn't seem to be any writing beyond "in this movie I get to rape a girl." There is some rubbish about the titular scrapbook, which just ends up a half-forgotten plot device for most of the film.

Nothing good can be said of Biondo's acting, either; he delivers middle-school-level improv lines (which I'm sure he thinks are super-scary serial-killer lines) with all the menace of a rubber ducky.

The so-called "violence" is at a Three Stooges level of laughability, with none of the charm. He lightly pats his victims on the face, and despite said victim acting dutifully like they've been slapped by a bodybuilder, it is about as believable as third-rate WWE fights.

The very fact that a slim, squeaky, bandy-armed man with the physical intimidation factor of a stalk of celery is supposed to be able to kidnap, beat up, and rape a woman who looks about three times as strong as him, and later beat a big strong farmer twice his size to death, defies any attempt at suspension of disbelief. This man couldn't physically kidnap a sandwich.

The poor actress suffers though badly-done rape scene after badly-done rape scene, a scene of non-simulated fellatio, and a scene of actually being urinated on, by a bad actor and worse writer who seems to be on a sad wish-fulfillment trip that has no business calling itself a horror film, or even any kind of film.

If you're into horror, get another horror movie. If you're into porn, get another porn movie. This film fails entirely at being either. Hopefully it won't leave too dark a mark on the resume' of Ms Haack, who comes out of this whole sorry mess as the only one with any sort of talent whatsoever.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user comments Your vote history