Snow Beast

source: Snow Beast

To be honest I wasn't watching this to see A-list actors however, the acting was good for what it was. However, when the small snowmobile rolls away at idle and then this is what triggers what seams like a small thermonuclear device!! What the fxxx were they thinking. I turned if off at that spot, I want my 60 min back!!

I was tempted to abort this movie but plowed ahead just to see how these OK actors were dealing with a mostly nonsensical script. Best example: Lead scientist Jim (Schneider) tells everyone 'I'll take the snow mobile to the ranger station to get help'(the trip would be hugely dangerous). As he leaves he turns and says, 'meanwhile call the ranger station and tell them I'm coming.' I'm scratching my head... why go when you can call and ask for the rangers to send help? See Beastley's review...spot on! The group stares at great video, from their remote cameras, clearly showing a yetti or Abominable Snowman prancing around. Clear as day. It takes five minutes of like, what can that be? A bear standing up? Yada yada.... till Rob finally says...looks like a Yetti to which Jim says.... naw they're in the Himalayas. As if this scientist is clueless of hundreds of sightings in North America. Emmy goes out alone to photograph the beast, knowing it has killed people, taking a tranquilizer gun and promptly leaves the gun on her car seat. Father and daughter doing high fives minutes after major tragedy has occurred. No explanation of why their beastly videos did not survive. Next, a hugely tall powerful beast that is too weak to break down a door. Rob stares at a huge pool of blood and does not mention it to Jim who is several feet away. Two men go out to find Emmy and take no weapons of any kind. I have rarely seen such a defective script. It left me rooting for the beast.

Oh now this here was just a terrible excuse for a horror movie! It was boring, and a lot of the acting so stiff and forced that I frequently found it downright awkward to watch mostly. I didn't find it enjoyable in any way really, not the drama, the dramatic side of the film was awful. There wasn't even any nice gory kills to ease things along. Not that I watch horror movies for that, but in certain cases such as this, it's a plus. No laughs, I wouldn't call this a movie that was so bad it was good. Even that other stinky yeti movie, "Curse of the Snow Demon", the one where the monster hops around like a flea was better than this! It doesn't even feel like a proper horror movie, it feels more like a very bad TV drama with tinges of horror and sci-fi, all the way through to the lame done-to-death "gotcha" bit at the ending. Should this film actually be called a remake of 1977's Snowbeast? Why would anyone want to do that anyway, it's not exactly a shining classic. Despite the vaguely similar plots, the films are vastly different. Example, Snowbeast(one word)actually had a kind of plot, whereas this thing doesn't seem to, and this picture doesn't have any of the, admittedly meagre magic of the Bo Svenson "classic." Mouldy old Snowbeast from the distant 70's, a film not at all that good in itself, still manages to do so much more for me than this thoroughly forgettable tripe. I didn't rate it zero/one because uh, I liked the snow. We don't get it in England any more and I always find such winter wonderland surroundings pleasant to look at in a movie. And of course, who could ever forget cuddly 'ol Mr yeti, such a badly put together creation that he was merely amusing rather than scary. More about him in a minute.::: I thought John Sneider's performance was the best , though the best in this isn't saying much. He held many an awkward situation together by the skin of his acting teeth. Good actor, bad movie. His daughter was so annoying! Her sullen, teenage girl mad at her father for mother leaving act was such a worn out old bad cliché. And Jason London-what a stupid little weeny part he had! What was the point of him even being in the movie? He didn't do anything, just hung out with, and exchanged insults with a fat viking guy. And he looks tremendously stupid and corny when he screamed as the yeti gets him. In any case, I bet this is a role the guy will happily forget. I'm not a fan. He's so boring.::: Someone wrote something about the monster looking like one of the Mangalore's from Fifth Element.(a good one) I had thought that too, and the Wampa monster from The Empire Strikes Back mixed together. I thought the face was impressive. Too bad the rest of the thing committed the grave sin of simply looking like a guy in a suit. Not that I'd normally mind that at all, but this was a very poor example of a suit. The design of the creature in the 'original' was far more effective and impressive-looking, I'll put it that way. I thought the yeti looked so cute in the scene where John Sneider takes out the rubbish and hears a growl and looks into the forest and sees nothing. And when he goes back in, the camera pans to the spot he was looking at and the yeti slowly peeps his head up-oh, looks so cute I just can't stand it! The thing sure liked to slap people around a lot. It's pimp-slapping and snatch and grab skills were second to none! The monster in this movie may have been pretty pathetic, but there is a short story that I know of that is far greater than any movie of this kind, it's called Creature of the Snows, by William Sambrot. Try and find it, 'cause if you're intrigued by yeti monster, I promise you'll love it.::: I watched this expecting to at least enjoy it, because I usually do with yeti/Bigfoot monster movies, of which there aren't that many, and this ain't one of the good ones, I would not recommend it. If you think things are looking bad when you see the prologue, well then you ain't seen nothing yeti!

The greatest directors are more than artists; they're also wildly creative free thinkers who push our understanding of the possibilities of art to change our perceptions of ourselves. Snow Beast comes along at just the right moment to help us come to grips with gender politics in a winter environment. Is this the greatest film of all time? Let the public be the judge of that. Without a doubt its 1:28 runtime will leave you staring at the screen at the end making you think, really think about the way we perceive snowmen and the rapidly changing world of LGBT politics. Snow pole? Snow hole? You can't change the weather so you'd better change your consciousness. This lesser known Orson Welles classic is probably the greatest snowman movie in the history of cinema. Like its predecessor Citizen Kane, we begin at the end where the Snow Beast is watching his grandchildren play in his garden as he reflects on his life of randomly killing humans just for fun, because he never really acquired a taste for the creatures, and they gave him diarrhea. Welles plays the part of the Beast perfectly and surpasses every other performance in his film repertoire. As a director he breaks all of the rules of Hollywood. I only pray that Hollywood will heap praise upon the special effects in this classic like the good people of Bromide, Oklahoma, where the snowman outfit won third place in the Halloween costume competition at Dell's Tavern. I think that's probably enough, possibly too much.

SNOW BEAST is the low-budget remake of a '70s creature flick I saw and enjoyed years ago. The difference being that the 1970s version was a proper film, whereas this is a shamelessly silly B-movie that lacks a proper script and the kind of money to make a film that even slightly resembles the earlier version. Instead, we're bogged down in SyFy Channel territory, with only a handful of cast members and a film that takes place in a single location for the most part. While I enjoyed the icy Canadian backdrop of the story, for the most part this film focuses on a father/daughter relationship which includes one of the most irritatingly obnoxious characters ever...can't we ever have one normal, friendly teenage character in a film for a change? Spliced into these shenanigans are some tame kills committed by some kind of yeti, although when you see the costume (which looks like something somebody would wear at Halloween) you'll be laughing rather than screaming. The PG-13 rating hurts this one a lot, and you'd hardly be tuning in just to see the cast, either. John Schneider has form battling monsters (having appeared in LAKE PLACID 2, which, while bad, was a lot better than this) but the appearance of Jason London (JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS) makes you wonder what happened to the guy's career for him to be forced to appear in this dreck.

The cast is good but the writing and direction is so predictable. In the original Snowbeast 1977, you didn't see the beast until the very end so you never knew what it looked like. It made it more interesting. This snowbeast is fully seen right from the start. It's so predictable that he pops up right beside you each time even to the bitter end. Smaller cast than (less carnage) the original so not as many background actors which shows off the cheap budget. Overall less imaginative. The Snowbeast costume is well done. The special effects are very lack luster. If you have not seen the original, skip this one, you're not missing anything.

Sometimes bad movies are fun to watch as there is unwanted comedy in them. Not in this one though. Why i do not know but it fails to be anything but BAD. not funny not scary not even ridiculous, just bad. The actors seem lost, the scenery seems to come from acquired footage from the Tourist Information bureau of a ski resort. So bad actually they decided that it should be in Canada, probably to escape the shame of being in the US. No storyline, no logic, nothing. A monster runs around, but nobody informs the authorities. The actors are so bad that you get the feeling they hired them straight from the slopes of a Ski Resort! "hey guys, anyone interested in playing in a horror movie?" the two Canadian Park Rangers are so dumb they only qualify as monster food. The women fall down and twist an ankle, the truck does not start, the key does not fit the ignition.I could go on and on. I only wonder who pays for such a crap. these films remind me of the cars that the industry produces for the rental companies, nobody really wants them but they are there. go on and rent them, you morons!

In the Canadian wilderness, furry white "Snow Beast" attacks a young man while snow-boarding. Unaware of the precise danger, animal researcher John Schneider (as Jim Harwood) arrives to investigate. When the next attack occurs, you'll know before it happens. Also predictable is the subplot involving Mr. Schneider and his ungrateful teenage daughter Danielle Chuchran (as Emmy)... Schneider handles the acting assignment well. However, all is lost when he appears to forget all about his friend Paul D. Hunt (as Rob) and leaves him in a cave. Making this particular scene even worse is the fact that Schneider momentarily wants to save a dead woman over his living friend. In a serious story-telling error, the hatred for Mr. Hunt's very likable character is never explained. ** Snow Beast (10/4/11) Brian Borough ~ John Schneider, Danielle Chuchran, Paul D. Hunt, Jason London

Given the overall rating that "Snow Beast" had received here on IMDb, it was with some hesitation that I decided to watch this movie. And the sole purpose of purchasing it was simply because after having seen Danielle Chuchran in "SAGA: Curse of the Shadow" then I wanted to watch some of her previous work. Well, with "Snow Beast", then you know exactly what you are in for. And true enough, the movie delivers exactly that, and does so without even a single surprise along the way. But despite its predictability, then "Snow Beast" was still an enjoyable movie to watch. It is one of those cheesy and campy pseudo-horror movies that we all indulge in once in a while and most of us don't admit to. The story is about a group of scientists who trek deep into the Canadian mountains to study lynxes in the wild. However, when they arrive there, the lynxes are gone, and the scientists come face to face with a ferocious man-like beast, reminiscent of the mythical Yeti. Campy, cheesy and dim-witted, yes, the movie delivers on every account. But still, it managed to captivate me and hold me all the way to the very end. There were some mistakes here and there, sure. Such as the feet of the snow beast were painstakingly molded latex in the shape of feet fitted upon shoes. The toes were not even parted or moving separately. And the avalanche scene, well that has to be seen to be believe. It was just bad. And something puzzled me beyond mortal comprehension; why would a scientist venture out into the frozen mountains alone, knowing very well that a deadly creature was lurking out there, and arming herself with a camera and a tranquilizer gun - which was conveniently left behind in the car. It was stupidity on a level where even the most of stupid people would go "wait, what did she just do?" The characters in the movie were detailed and nicely portrayed, and the people hired for the various roles were doing good jobs in acting. If you enjoy campy horror, then "Snow Beast" is most definitely worth a watch.