Nonureva Really Surprised!

SoftInloveRox Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Nitzan Havoc Films like The Tooth Fairy are my favorite Horror sub-genre, a nice mixture of supernatural/ghosts/monsters with an "epic" legend for a background story. Therefore, I must have enjoyed it a lot more than the average viewer.Like many other films that simply didn't shine, there's not much I could say about this one, for better or for worse. The cast and acting, the screenplay and story, the cinematography, everything wasn't half bad nor exceptionally good. The plot could have used a twist in my opinion, I always prefer twists in such films. The best thing here was the music, the main theme really was perfect for this kind of horror.What I didn't understand was the unnecessary use of semi-gore shots and nudity. Who's ever made it a rule that Horror films had to be for adults only? The story here could have easily been suitable for today's children, so why plant this unnecessary adult content? Could have been just as good without it.All in all, like I've said, I have no complaints and no specific compliments. I've enjoyed this film very much, yet I would understand viewers who'd find it lacking. Personally I'd happily recommend it.

Anthony Pittore III (Shattered_Wake) First, let's get it out of the way. . . yeah, this film steals a LOT from 'Darkness Falls' (2003). The plot for 'Darkness Falls' goes something like this: The Tooth Fairy, a murderous woman who hides her face due to disfigurement kills people who look at her out of revenge. In 'The Tooth Fairy' (2006), the disfigured Tooth Fairy (who, yeah, hides her face) unleashes her furious vengeance on just about anyone. A little too similar to be coincidence.But, what must be asked is this: If you're going to directly steal the exact plot from a movie, why choose something as mediocre as 'Darkness Falls'? Sure it made a few bucks at the box office, but that was strictly for the fairly okay theatrical experience the film delivered. A low-budget, straight-to-video movie will not have that same effect. And it didn't.As I watched the opening 15-20 minutes of the film, my expectations actually rose. There seemed to be at least SOME production value. The story didn't seem terrible, just blatantly ripped off. Past the first scene, we get an okay cast of characters including an ex-doctor with secrets (played by that guy who looks like a Busey) and some hot veterinary student (Jenifer from Argento's 'Masters of Horror: Jenifer'). After those few minutes, however, the film just slowly goes down the drain. It serves all the basic horrible clichés including, but not limited to: some crazy old person with an unheeded warning, the buff dumb jock, the psychic, and the stripper with the heart-of-gold.One of the biggest problems this film had was its inability to stick with a target audience. It's kind of like the filmmakers wanted to change the tone for whatever character was on screen at the time. When the adults were on screen, it had a more mature feel. When Star (the stripper) and whatshisface (the jock) were on screen, the dialogue went down to a more stupid, err immature, level. When the kid was on screen, it felt like an episode of 'Are You Afraid of the Dark?'. . . only less scary.Technically, the film is all over the place. The visuals range from fairly good to plain boring. The writing is subpar, as is the acting for the most part. On the plus side, there's some excessive gore at parts (including a fairly cool (yet painfully predictable)) woodchipper scene and a pretty vicious nailgun scene. Also, if you're looking for a bit of the sexy stuff, there's a brief topless scene (but if you want to see this chick topless, there are better films to do that). Other than that, there's not much to bother with when it comes to this film.If you're a huge fan of 'Darkness Falls' (do those exist?), maybe you can check it out to see the story done in a different way. . . but, that's about the only reason I can find to see this one.Final Verdict: 3/10 -AP3-

Scarecrow-88 A badly tumored witch lures children to her rickety abode promising gifts for their baby teeth. Once they fork over the baby teeth, she murders the children taking their souls hostage. The teeth remain inside a magical music box until someone can burn her alive retrieving the item and subsequently freeing them from their limbo. In present time, Peter Campbell(Lochlyn Munro)renovates the witch's home into a forthcoming bed'n'breakfast inviting his girlfriend, Darcy(Chandra West)and her daughter Pamela(Nicole Muñoz)to stay with him on the weekends. With one baby tooth left, Pammy becomes a target of the dormant witch who will kill anyone in her path to get that which she so desires. Bobby(Jesse Hutch)is assisting Peter in fixing up his joint, Star(Carrie Fleming)is a former stripper who is leasing a room as she plans for veterinary school, and Cole(Steve Bacic)is a wannabe rock star down to bum cash from his reliable money source Peter. Meanwhile, Pammy meets a ghost girl, Emma(Jianna Ballard)who was a victim of the witch and needs help from them so that her soul can be freed from the limbo imprisonment she finds herself. Pammy is the key to stopping the witch's reign of mortal terror for she is the middle-link between the children caught in limbo and the adults who can help her. Pammy is also in mortal danger herself so it's up to Peter and Darcy in accepting this wild story and finding out how to kill the witch. Two nuisances, Chuck(Peter New) & Henry(Ben Cotton)who were squatting on Peter's newly purchased land and house, raise as much trouble as possible..they run a gas station and nearly sexually abuse Darcy when she stopped for fuel.You should know what you're getting into by reading the premise alone. It's full of gory bits..beheadings, staple-gun nails piercing through body parts, ax murders, the works. Carrie Fleming does expose her breasts, but that's pretty much the only real nudity in the film. The film really isn't at all scary, and the story regarding the tooth fairy is merely given a bit of back story to set up all the bloody murders on display. PJ Soles has a(unintentionally) hilarious cameo as a neighbor prophesying doom to the cast regarding the witch and what she'll do to them. She informs Peter and the gang that they will have to burn the witch not once, but twice for certain effect. This is one of the few chances where you'll actually see Lochlyn Munro play a restrained, mature character, even if it's in a film about a tooth fairy witch capturing the souls of children through murder and the collection of teeth.

shawshank86 i was enjoying this movie most of the time, but i kept getting the feeling that i was watching a children's movie. i honestly think that somebody wrote a pg script and then, while filming, decided to add in some blood, nudity and language. it was a big let down. there's that believe the children magic that exists in movies like "babe" (the pig) or "angels in the outfield" that defeats the evil tooth fairy. the parents end up believing their daughter about her ability to see the ghost and utilize this skill to supernaturally defeat the tooth fairy. when i bought this movie, i thought it would be a b-film response to the dreadful darkness falls; somehow manage to make a better film with 1/4 of the money, but they don't. they made a worse film and will probably lose the same proportion of money lost on darkness falls.