Did you people see the same film I saw?

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Another "When science goes bad" themed b-movie film about a son who discovers the extent of his mothers experiments and the creature that lives within the bowels of her home.Truth be told The Kindred has some good ideas, some of the practical effects are great and it's not entirely awful. Sadly on the flip side it's not very well made, for every decent sfx there is a poor one and the characters are instantly forgettable.The Kindred is one of those very few films I'd like to see a reboot of, or at least modern sequel. The potential is there, it just needs a budget and a decent team to put all the pieces together.In it's current form The Kindred is a barely passable effort that I'd advise only big fans of the genre give time to.The Good:Some great practical effectsA few good ideasOne decent death sceneThe Bad:Some poor practical effectsWeak constructionDoesn't meet its potentialThings I Learnt From This Movie:Had Japan made this film it would have been an entirely different movie, you know......the tentacles!

Okay, first and foremost, let me take my pants off. Just kidding... No, First and foremost, this film will delight you ONLY if you are a real fan of films described in my summary above. It is ULTRA low budget, but you really have to admire how well they did with what they had. I thought for very low cost creature effects, the creators / directors of the film did an excellent job in making them as believable as possible and actually truly scary at times. You could tell that the directors had a nice natural sense of how to visualize what they wanted; for example, without giving too much away, just the simple scene with the little guy in the jar was really quite good. When compared to MANY other similar scenes in Horror or even Goofy, NOT-Serious Horror (A La 'GREMLINS', for example) where you would use similar effects, I really felt that they made it very believable and lifelike, which went a LONG way in involving and truly immersing you more in the film.Sure, as some others have stated here, there are some pretty Cheeeeeeezy moments, but even compared to MOST of the Horror crap that has come out during that time and even within, say, ten years of this being made, I think this one very much holds it's own in drawing the audience in and creating a decent level of tension. There are also a nice twist or two that adds to the entertainment value of the movie. One transformation scene, which I WON'T go into because I do not want to enter Spoiler territory, was honestly quite effective and well done, despite some of the scornful comments from a couple of other reviewers here. The acting is nothing to get too excited about; we don't see very much from the veterans here, except the usual Rod Steiger getting worked up to either an orgasm or heart attack, take your choice... I personally liked Brad though; he had a rather entertaining personality. Everyone else was adequate; the British girl was decent, of course the accent (to us easily impressed Americans) always helps.I'm NOT trying to say that this is by ANY reach of the imagination an 'ALIEN', 'SESSION 9', or 'EVENT HORIZON', believe me; but for the modest intent of the film and for PRECISELY what it is, it comes across surprisingly well. So, like I mentioned before, IF you are indeed a fan of these kinds of films, then you should have a lot of fun watching it...

After three years in a coma, Amanda Hollins awakens and tells her son, John. To destroy her life experiments and any information found in her secluded old house. He heads there with his girlfriend, some work colleagues and one of his mother's admirers. They eventually discover more then what they bargain for, as some of his mother's genetic engineered creations run amok.I thought I've seen this one before, but I was wrong. This modest combination of 50's sci-fi / horror goes onto deliver a undervalued oddity, with a tip-top ensemble cast and sure-handling from dual directors Jeffrey Obrow and Stephen Carpenter. Suspense is lacking because the minimal story is just too typical and shredded with loopholes, but it's the surprisingly efficient make-up effects, which are over-the-top and horrifically creative that makes for a pleasurable treat. The excessive use of this icky business in some wicked (and at times silly) set pieces is the film's only real imaginative bone. A quick tempo, builds up after a slow opening and the shocks are well placed for maximum effect. Be it a laugh or a gasp. The material mostly plays it with a straight face, with slight slabs of humour and Rod Steiger's small meaty turn. The composed performances (with Steiger being the exception) are reasonably good from the cast. David Allen Brooks is likable in his steadfast delivery and the ravishing Amanda Pays shines in her shifty portrayal. Talia Balsam gives hearty support and Peter Frechette diverts. The classy Kim Hunter also gets some minor scenes as Amanda Hollins. Obrow and Carpenter's directorial style is systematically sturdy without an ounce of any visual flourishes. The look of the film generates a gloomy air, mainly due to Steven Carpenter's murky photography and dim lighting. David Newman's moody, understated music score is fairly unnoticeable.

This one was a real surprise. I expected it to be a tedious and clichéd film but it was so so much more.The acting was simply magnificent and for an 80's movie, the special effects were some of the best i have seen. The story line was also very solid and i found myself wanting to the movie not to end as i was so into it.One of the very best horror films you are likely to see.10\10.A A A A