Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Bofsensai Similar to likely most of you reading through these, I'm a fan of 'so bad it becomes good' cinematic art (well, efforts); and the DVD box come on for our edition was irresistible - disembodied buxom bum clad in one size too small fitting red panties! (Why mention that in connection with film viewing: coz even that was a disappointment coz although there is a scene in which porn star struck character (Laura / Amber Benson) is instructed (er, directed by director?) to remove her panties so to lure the disembodied 'dick' of the titular owner's, they were NOT the same! Bad distributors!) So, anyway, why add this one in? Most others have set out all the salient - and awful points: of course, if someone tells you its so bad don't waste your time watching, you're gonna wanna know why, or just disbelieve them, and still go ahead anyway, right? So, having not heeded the advice / warning, what could you look out for that would make you feel that the 80 minutes you invest in this twaddle will return something of movie buff value? Well, besides delicious dollies playing porn stars in a location straight outta most horror tropes (cabin in the, ah, woods) and yet in WINTER (there's obviously false snow all around) - and they're gonna do a get ya togs off shoot in such a climate? They don't even light up a fire anywhere and that's despite veteran actor Charles Napier first appears from outside as frozen up … then perhaps it would be to actually just listen to: because, yes as you will see from the extensive quotes sidebar, there are many lines that beggar belief (Wanda with Angel's, er, nether regions exploration advice has gotta be the most outrageous delivered in any film I've ever seen = kudos to scriptwriters - siblings? - the three Fields): so perhaps you would want to watch, if only to catch the contexts in which these daft deliveries are made. Oh, and that being it's about porn stars, then to see real life legendary '70's R. Jeremy and V. Hart attempting non porn acting chops: the former (deliberately so?) appallingly wooden, the latter (not deliberately, but desperately so?) some of the best facial scenery chewing, as she herself is presumably chewed on (or something!) from within. Oh, and in that context, again from the scriptwriters some profound commentary on ex porn stars lot in society. Oh, and that it's apparently the one of the pair on murderous penis (genre!) films (the other 'Pervert' = make it a double bill evening to tolerate its unwinding?) So that, in the end, if you still wanna not heed all the don't waste ya time invocations, then I would recommend you at least add in the challenge to make it a drinking watch = choose your favourite tipple and you can't drink until you hear the word 'DICK' (beware in C. Napier's central interminable monologue!) - guaranteed you'll be so blotto by end, you'll be spared the utterly pointless end along with oh so lame last line.

Leofwine_draca ONE-EYED MONSTER is a low rent comedy horror that makes use of real-life porn-film legend, Ron Jeremy. The plot is preposterous - an alien life force comes to each and possesses Jeremy's detached penis before going on a killing spree - but the execution is surprisingly likable given the paucity of imagination and the sheer dumbness of the premise.The story template is pretty much a rip-off of Carpenter's THE THING, with characters holed up in a snowbound cabin and finding themselves bumped off one by one by an unseen premise. The special effects aren't up to much, so they're wisely left off-screen for the most part, which I think was a good idea. The humour is quite funny in places and as a whole the film is funnier than I'd expected. It's also tamer than you might think and rarely distasteful.Oddly enough, the best acting comes from the two genuine porn stars in the film, Ron Jeremy and Veronica Hart. Jeremy in particular comes across as a lovable goof rather than anything else. B-movie fans will enjoy the presence of old-time cult star Charles Napier in a supporting role, although my favourite character is the geeky Ed Bryne-lookalike sound technician.

leonardcosnowski Have you ever giggled for 90 minutes? I just did while watching this movie. Whoever paid to make this, thank you. May it live as a midnight movie forever. Is it silly? Hell yes. Is it smart? Very. Scary? Not particularly, but this is a comedy first and foremost, and on that level it succeeds brilliantly. The actors are first rate, even the unknowns, but I have to say that Charles Napier steals the show with an unforgettable monologue that is clearly a nod to Robert Shaw in "Jaws" and Amber (Buffy the Vampire) Benson is effective as always. Yeah, there's not enough nudity for a movie about a killer penis and porn stars, but I can see nudity from a thousand porn sites. Only a select group of movies can make me laugh, though, and this is one of them, so I'll take the trade-off.

catfish-er I recorded ONE EYED MONSTER on a whim, as it featured Ron Jeremy in his first legitimate movie. It's an "R" version of an adult movie being filmed away from the city, the boyfriends, girlfriends, etc.Thank goodness Ron Jeremy's screen time is limited to about 20 minutes, before his character -- he plays himself -- is killed off. As bad as Ron Jeremy's acting is, the rest of the cast is even worse! The acting is wooden, unemotional; and, insincere. The dialog is laden with sexual innuendo, which is not subtle or clever at all.About 40 minutes in (after the first few deaths -- yawn) I fast-forwarded to the end, which features the lamest special effects since THE CREAPING TERROR of 1964. I know this is supposed to be funny; and, yes, some of the death scene's are reminiscent of SCARY MOVIE; but, that does little to save this film.The gag of a homicidal, detached penis gets old fast. And, while I could live with such an insane premise, the worst is the long, dragged-out, heavy dialog. There was just too little action, barely any violence (for an "R" rated horror flick, with "graphic violence" that means virtually none); and, little of anything else to hold your attention.