Krampus: The Reckoning (2015) User Reviews

No Cheer

[scythertitus · 3/10 · 15 February 2016]

There is little positive to say about this movie apart from that they tried. There was certainly some thought put into the story, despite it also looking to be a desperate cash in on the Krampus name so close to the release of the studio produced film.

Besides this however there is only negatives as the writing and acting of this film are atrocious. To make matters worse the film makers clearly do not know how to make a small budget work for them. It helps to have some interesting characters who can fill time with fun dialogue, as well as a bit of flesh thrown in for distraction. However here the dialogue is terribly boring and goes on for far too long without the right pace and editing to make it engaging, and while a little flesh is a good tease, just sticking in some sex for no reason is far too cheap and only serves to highlight the lack of substance that they had to work with.

Overall this movie has nothing to offer apart from a passable idea for what could have been a decent story with more money and expertise behind the project. The main killer for this movie has to be the pace as it is just so, so painfully dull that it takes it away from the 'so bad that its funny' realm and puts it in the 'why am I even bothering to watch this' category. Avoid.

Cheap&Boring.

[Patient444 · 3/10 · 1 December 2015]

Hard to watch, almost fell asleep a few times and I do ask myself, why didn't it?

It's quite a bad movie, from every point of view, it's cheap, with bad acting, horrible dialogue, tries too much to blend in some horror elements and the Krampus itself ...I know a small budget allows too little glamour on screen but still, 2015 comes with some standards.

Anyway, I went it with some expectations, but I ended it with red eyes and yawn after yawn. This isn't a horror movie, it's a weak production, with one of the worse sound tracks ever, that will make you roll your eyes more than anything.

Cheers!

Bad acting , unnecessary scenes , good story

[woogiebobby · 3/10 · 21 December 2015]

OK , to start out , i gave this movie 3 stars just because of the story. I really enjoyed it , so if it was a book i would have gave a way higher grade.

The acting : I don't get how they can act that bad! Like in the first plot , when the psychologist went to the hospital they were staring at each other for like 2 minutes doing nothing. FOR GOD SAKE DON'T DO THAT!

Second of all , why on earth would you add a PORN scene at the start of the movie??? And then ANOTHER ONE! God , please stop.

Then the guy that was burned because of having child porn... OK , you lost me on that one. Really unnecessary , i mean you could have expanded the main story or something , but that one was not at its place.

Overall , DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY ON THIS!The story was OK-ish , but the rest... god please , i only watched it because i thought it would get better...

Stay Away unless you want something that will bore you.

[panther_husky · 1/10 · 30 November 2015]

Well, the only good thing about the movie is the story line but don't let that fool you. First of all, the acting - mmmm no acting at all in this film. I starting laughing when she (the Psychiatrist) walks into the hospital and speaks with the reception. Not sure what happened there but that lady sitting behind the desk just didn't seem comfortable with her 2 minutes of screen time.

All the actors seemed to be robotic, in slow motion and even when they walked, it wasn't realistic. The whole feel of the film wasn't realistic. The conversation between the people dragged out and so slow, I was getting nervous and began shouting at the screen for them to hurry up and finish their dialogue.

Certain scenes didn't make sense either. One scene where a woman starts to cry over her husband. Here we were to think he died recently. She starts to overact with her tears, sobbing like a crazed woman when we find out he has been dead for around 20 years!

The young girl, I think she thought she was ideal for the role. At times she did a not too bad scene but again, not good enough to make me believe her character.

The effects were nothing great - made for television effects and Krampus himself, looked good in the dark shots but when you saw him whole and in the light, well, you be the judge.

A boring B-flick with no story,no real actors and a glimpse of Krampus.

[djangozelf-12351 · 1/10 · 3 November 2015]

While searching for this page found out that there are a lot of Krampus movies on the way.

I think I can all ready say this is the worst of them all and probably made by some "friends" to hop a long on the Christmas bandwagon.

One star is actually to much for this film and it really belongs at he bottom of a barrel or at least far out of sight.

If you sit thru 10 minutes of this and still watch the rest you either had something to do with this or your some what of a nitwit who never seen any flick before this one.

Avoid the mistake that it will get better and actually have"something" because it's just not there.

I am looking for worth to the other 2 installments because their aren't much good Christmas horrors out there.

Only one I can think of is "rare exports"and the rest are more outdated ones from the 70s and 80s.

Almost forgot one of the remakes they made and that was O.K. but more in part and not as a whole(it dragged a lot of storyline).

Just remember DO NOT WATCH THIS ONE!

It will only lead to agony.

2 thumbs down.

Plain awful.

Yawn!

[xxmrsqueenxx-92-157965 · 5/10 · 23 November 2015]

I am not going to call it awful because the story was pretty good, but the acting was terrible. The lead female with her droopy sad eyes, became annoying to look at just like that big bald guy with the ugly smile who looked like Daddy Warbucks. This story is interesting but so unbelievably rushed at the end. Some parts of this movie made no sense. Maybe it is just me, I dunno. I did not love this movie or hate this movie. I am somewhere in between. I think if the acting was better I might have enjoyed this movie a whole lot more. Regardless, if you want to see a movie with bad acting and ugly actors, this is the movie for you.

Good Lord this is Horrible Trash

[This_Really_Sucks · 1/10 · 8 December 2015]

Okay, there is one glaring review by someone who gave this movie a 9 and raves about what a great movie it is. And even states that it is far superior to several other Krampus themed movies coming out this year. HHAAA!!! I saw one of the others, "Krampus", in the theater a week ago, and I must tell you it was also absolute trash, but it's an Oscar winner compared to this bucket of movie puke! The fact that this certain 9-star "reviewer" constantly praises the young lead actress and the director leads me to believe that this person is, somehow, tied to this movie (probably the director himself or the father of the actress using an IMDb alias profile).

This movie was terrible! Just terrible. It drags on and on and on with very weak dialogue and slow action until a scene finally changes. Sloppy directing and some horrible camera work. I think the director may have taken a home-study course in video production... and flunked out.

Here's a little storytelling advice for the director: The sloppy, white-trash, soft-core porn scene in the beginning was TOTALLY unnecessary and a scene like that does not serve to advance the plot. You just put it in there to try to give your horror movie some kind of substance, and probably a couple of friends a chance to be naked in a horror movie. It was like watching a porn video made by some amateur next door neighbors - and not very good looking ones, at that. So next time (God help us if there is one) skip that kind of garbage. It doesn't add validity to your horror movie, it only serves as a sign of weak storytelling.

And stop lingering with your scenes. They just drag on. Build some tension.

And for God's sake, spring for some kind of real creature makeup effects instead of a lo-res, poorly animated monster. The burnt remains of his victims were more convincing than Krampus himself. And by the way, his name is pronounced Krum-poohs, not Kram-pus. "Kram-pus" sounds too much like "Gramps" and it just really doesn't invoke any level of fear. Do your research before your write or direct a movie.

The young lead actress is nothing to behold, just another face in a crowd of 1000's of hopefuls. I know we all want to encourage young talent, but come on, Mr. IMDb Alias, her acting was not that great. I've seen better acting on Nick Jr. sitcoms.

And the guy playing the lead detective... wow. Did he take acting lessons from Ferris Bueller's Economics teacher? You know, the guy who just droned "Bueller, Bueller" for an eternity? There was absolutely no level of excitement in this guy's voice whatsoever. He sounded like he had a perpetual taking-a-dump kind of grunt to every word he mumbled. Christian Bale did it better as Batman.

Well, in closing, if you're considering watching this, I'd suggest you just skip this piece of garbage and thank heavens you weren't a part of its production. Or you could do your very own MST3k episode with it.

Good Grief could this have been any worse?

[daggersineyes · 1/10 · 24 December 2015]

Stupidly I watched this one thinking it was the Krampus that's been getting all the buzz lately and half way through it I could not understand why it was even given a cinema release. Later I realised it's a different movie to the well received one with Toni Collette in it.

Honestly this is absolute trash. It's like a 70's porn movie, even the soundtrack is 70's porn and it also contains a few pornographic scenes between two unattractive actors - not sexy at all.

I wish I hadn't wasted my time watching this trash. No-one could act, the cinematography - well it doesn't even deserve the title - it was just awful.

SOrry everything about this was awful. I feel dirty just having watched it

Make your own opinion

[KimbleLinda · 5/10 · 12 November 2015]

The first reviewer has been watching too many 10 star horror movies (is there such a thing?).

Never ever judge a movie by the reviewers....you might miss something that is not a typical B-Movie Horror Flick.

Krampus is just that kind of movie. I have almost every Creature Feature Flick that I can ever hope to download. I have the bore you to death to "where did that come from" movies. Krampus is one such movie.

OK...it is definitely low budget...but what B-movie isn't!!! The acting is a little wooden but presentable for not having one headliner actor at all.

The plot will surprise you...it actually pulls you along. The Creature doesn't act as well as it looks...and it looks great. I wanted more of the Creature....but alas. The ending could have cleaned things up a little better, but it worked.

The creepy little girl thing has been worked over timelessly. Yet...big surprise here...I love creepy little girls. And for you tata lovers....The movie has something for you too.

I give all B-movie Horror films a 5 star rating if it absolutely doesn't suck. Try this one for size. Would love to hear how you felt about it. Q(:-}

An awful B-movie fake-buster

[salviolog · 1/10 · 8 January 2016]

Made to hitch a free ride on the success of Michael Dougherty's movie Krampus, this rushed lost X-files episode offers no scares, unlike Dougherty's previous holiday classic, Trick'r'Treat, but a ton load of cringes instead.

Krampus: the Reckoning has all the elements of a god awful fake- buster (a movie made to be confused with a popular blockbuster and capitalize on its success): it has the worst CGI you have ever seen, an over-complicated plot with too many elements that go nowhere, wooden actors, obvious post-production dubbing and so much other signs of a cheap shill of a movie that you can't help but expect a boom Mic to appear in the shot at some point.

But the worst thing about this movie has got to be the main child actor. It does make me feel like the world's biggest a-hole to pick on a little girl like that, but man is Amelia Haberman awful in this movie. I don't know if it's bad direction or was there no direction at all, but her character does not come off as sinister, or intimidating, or scary, as it's obviously supposed to be - no, throughout the whole thing she acts like an annoying over the top little brat who tries so hard to act like Hannibal Lecter that you just want to slap her in the face and say "Enough, no TV for a month!"

The least you can say is that she's memorable enough to probably get better parts in the future, though I do hope she tries better in more serious roles in the future.

I am mad at this movie for tricking me and I am mad at the shysters who make such films. It's garbage.

Fire. It's not your friend, but it's mine.

[nogodnomasters · 8/10 · 17 January 2018]

This film is not a sequel to other Krampus films. The story centers on Zoe Eliza Weaver (Amelia Haberman), foster child in Arizona. Her mother Katie Hoelzer (Carrie Fee) gets $500 a month to care for Zoe, "the blond haired devil child" and does a bad job. Zoe has the power to unleash the Krampus who punishes bad people and does. Rachel Stewart (Monica Engesser) is a child psychologist who becomes fascinated with Zoe. Rachel was memory flashbacks in bad dreams about the Krampus.

This is your typical 80's style horror film, some horror, some nudity, and a twist. Good movie if you like that type of production.

William "Bill" Connor plays both the bartender and the Krampus.

Guide: F-bomb, sex, nudity (Monica Engesser, Carrie Fee both- sex and shower)

Decent if unspectacular entry

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 6/10 · 14 December 2016]

Tormented by a troubling home-life, a lonely young girl with an unshaken belief in the Krampus figure protecting her causes a psychologist investigating a series of murders to tie the two together and soon sets out to stop the deadly creature from continuing his rampage.

This one wasn't as bad as it was expected to be. One of the better elements here is the fact that the first half does a great job building up the girl and her loner tendencies in order to build her status for the rest of the film. Showing her locked in the room while the family members get attacked and her fascination with the figurine in her possession as well as the attitude she takes during the questioning, later on, makes for quite a decent build-up to the girls' condition. Once this one starts delving into the investigations both into the strange murders around town and the girls' mysterious past, tying it together to the girl's behavior makes for an engrossing time and starts the first half of this one off quite well. Leading into the attacks throughout here, from the creatures' appearance taking out the foster parents in the beginning, the encounter with the nurse in his hotel room and the drunk in the car all come off rather nicely if all done too quickly. The dream sequence showing the creature targeting her is quite chilling and leading nicely into the aftermath revelations that take place inside the house where the creature goes after them and brings about a really nice twist-ending in the hospital where the trip through the two dimensions dealing with the great revelation that's pretty nicely handled here. Likewise, the fact that there's not a whole lot of action within this yet it still remains at a nice watchability factor is a solid point here by forging the engrossing mystery about her and the connection to the deaths so that even without a whole lot happening this one is still quite entertaining and somewhat enjoyable. While these make this one better than it should be, there's still a few flaws here. One of the main flaws here is the fact that this one's so low-budget that there's just not a whole lot of appealing work in its main worthwhile elements. The Krampus himself doesn't appear on- screen all that often, and it's such utterly cheap CGI that it's hard to really feel any kind of fear from the creature with there not being much to base his fear off of. The low-budget extends to the rest of film by containing barely any action at all except for the few brief, minor kills scattered throughout here since the majority of the film is dedicated to the investigation which ends up resulting in overly bland scenes that go on endlessly in these cramped, closed-in locations that really showcase how little actually happens within this one. As well, there's never any real link here between the girl and the creature which is never quite explained here, leading to a confusing reason why he's the one selected to go out killing the people as this never seems to offer a concrete explanation for this particular creature to be here and makes it quite weird why he's here at all. These here really lower this one somewhat.

Rated R: Graphic Language, Violence, Full Nudity, several sex scenes and children-in-jeopardy.

Blah, Blah, Blah

[bobbynitefall · 1/10 · 4 December 2015]

Sometimes you get lucky with small budget films and you get something cheesy but good in a cheesy way. Take Silent Night, Deadly Night back in the day. Sometimes, you have to settle for friends or untried actors with a not-too-good script, a not-too good director and a god-awful sound mixer and editor.

This is, sadly, one of the latter. The timing was slow, the scenes had a lot of long pauses as if they were hoping that would make the movie long enough to be useful with waaay too little script.

The leads were unbelievable, unlikeable, with no reason to cheer for them, and in all honesty, the little kids probably did the best acting in the movie.

And as other's mentioned, the movie just suddenly wrapped-up really quickly and you don't even care about the ending since you never liked the leads in the first place.

That popping/crackling soundtrack is always a sign of a bad movie. You can hear it often in another clunker "The Eaters".

I've seen student films and Youtube videos using DSLR cameras that were shot better, sounded better, written better, acted better, directed better, edited better, and were, in general, just better.

Don't Get On Zoe's Bad Side... She Has A Special Friend...

[P3n-E-W1s3 · 5/10 · 31 December 2020]

Before I get into the review, here are my ratings for the movie.

The story gets out 1.5 of 2: The Direction a 0.75: The Pacing receives a 0.75: While the Acting gets 1.25: And my Enjoyment level earns a 1 out of 2: Krampus: The Reckoning, therefore, receives a total of 4.75 out of 10.

Considering the rating this film received on IMDb, 1.2k ratings bringing it to 2.4/10, I'm in the minority because I didn't mind this low budget flick. It's not five-stars, by any stretch of the imagination, but it's worth more than the 2.4.

The reason Krampus: The Reckoning ignited my interest was the story. Being an amateur writer and avid reader, I do enjoy an entertaining story. Owen and Robert Conway deliver a slow-burn of a thriller to the audience, with a delightful, if dark, twist.

Zoe is a troubled child. Always in and out of foster homes. She's in a continual state of movement as disastrous and fatal accidents, and incidents, befall both her foster parents and families. The most recent tragedy has seen her transferred into a home for children. It's here she's assigned a psychologist, Dr Rachel Stewart. Through her psychological interviews, Dr Stewart begins to unwrap the mystery enshrouding Zoe. Zoe has an imaginary friend by the name of Krampus. But, as Dr Stewart will discover, Krampus is far from illusory.

I appreciated the Conways' kept Krampus as a 'good' bad guy. He merely executes people on the naughty list. If you've been good then you have nothing to fear. A simple concession that a few other Krampus films opt to ignore.

One of the issues I had with the story was Krampus' killing style. This unpleasant mythical character has a fondness for burning his victims to death. This, for me, was too consistent a method, especially for a creature who's known to use multiple ways to slay. However, there is a reason why he keeps murdering in such a manner. You'll need to stay with the story to discover the explanation. The justification reinforced my appreciation for the story. It was also marvellous to have a well-structured story. Invariably this is a bonus for budget flicks. Most time, the story suffers the most critical hits.

The biggest beating to the film's potency is the direction. Alas, Robert Conway's directional skills are not on par with his writing. The entire movie needed more oomph. It's tough to explain. Conway tries making the picture more interesting by using varying camera angles. However, they don't work that effectively, and at times they feel awkward. For example, in a scene where Zoe is speaking in ominous tones, Conway opts for a downward angle as if we are looking from Dr Stewart's position. It's adequate, but I think it would have been better to have a close-up on Zoe, showing her full features. Amelia Haberman, who plays Zoe, delivers some mean and hostile looks, it's a shame to waste them. I know Conway opted for this shot to express Zoe's disdain for Dr Stewart. However, this still could be achieved with a close-up.

Now you may think I'm being niggly over the matter, but the film is full of similar shots. Too many in fact, and it hinders the movie terribly. Another hindrance is good old Krampy himself. Conway chose to go with a CGI bad guy, and you can tell it's a computer-created unreality. The effects look dated, even for 2015. When you're filming on a budget use a guy or gal in a mask and costume. At least you'll effectively get the shadows and shading right for the scene.

As I stated before, Haberman is a talented actress. In all honesty, she's one of the most capable members of the cast. She exudes an easy air of mystery and malice. Should she stay in the profession, she's an actress to watch out for.

The rest of the cast is unremarkable. Fortunately for the viewer, they all put their best efforts into their roles.

If you want a good Christmas themed horror film to bloody up your festive season, this Krampus flick could be for you. Will I watch it again? Yes, but as I said, it's not a brilliant film. However, since there are few Christmas Nasties to fill your stockings, Krampus: The Reckoning lands within the top ten. All the same, if you don't like slow films then stay away, it won't be for you.

And since you're on the nice list feel free to jog on over and check out my Absolute Horror and Ho! Ho! Ho! Christmas Belles lists to see where this Naughty Killer ranked.

Take Care & Stay Well & Merry Christmas.

Krampus: The Slayer Of The Naughty... Be Careful If You Gave Him A Bad Review...

One Star Is Too Much

[HerrSupahz · 1/10 · 20 January 2016]

Others have said already just how truly awful this film is. Basically, read the one star reviews and you'll get it. Anyone giving this over one star... well, people sometimes forget to take their medication.

I would say there should be some sort of self-torture achievement medal mailed to you if you manage to watch this movie all the way through. I quickly found myself skipping forward looking for something... anything... redeeming, but was completely disappointed.

That early coke-snorting sex scene could be shown in high school to break the wills of teenagers and feel them with an overwhelming sense of hopelessness and loathing for the world. Showering only washes a fraction of the viewing shame away.

I don't even think this is better than the all-around awful "Dracula's Angel" (which at least had some comedy value given the super low "animation" budget, and tour-de-force bad acting).

Pass On This One

[Muilisx · 1/10 · 19 July 2016]

In short, this movie is bad. I stopped watching pretty quickly. Maybe someone might like it but I've seen a ton of movies, and I've never disliked a movie so fast before. It's just dumb how they expose Krampus so quickly and so many times. The way he attacks people or just how the story goes it's just really bad and dumb to me I'm sorry. Just don't waste your time on this movie. I made an account just because I wanted to warn people. I think if they put more time into it, and worked on it a little more it could be better but I don't know just the way they present everything is poor. The acting is also pretty bad. I'm sorry it's just a bad movie. A lot of us work a lot of hours. We barely ever have time for a movie, and when we do we expect the time we finally have to watch a movie for the movie to be worth it. This movie wasted that time of mine, and I just had to let people know how I felt.

Rip off of the Krmpus movie

[bradwhitewolf · 1/10 · 10 July 2016]

This movie made Plan 9 From Outer Space, look like an Academy Award winner. Slow, dull acting (if you can call it that). Very few chills, and hardly any screen time for the actual Krampus himself. We found this movie at Walmart, and being interested, and somewhat knowledgeable of the Krampus legend, and character,and having enjoyed the actual Krampus Movie, I had hopes that this might be a descent film. Boy! Were we ever wrong. My wife walked out of the room after the first 10 minutes, and I remained to suffer through it, in hopes that there might be something to this movie that I would like or appreciate, but I was wrong. All of the cast members were unknowns, and must have been standing by an underpass with a "Will work for food" sign, or they just worked for coffee and cigarettes. Dreadful movie to be avoided at ALL costs!

God dang it

[bookerwoolard · 1/10 · 21 December 2016]

You know it's been a while since I cried. This movie changed that. But these were not tears of joy or even sadness. These were tears of WTF. The acting was enough to make me want the Krampus to get me instead. That raises another issue in the movie. Who the f*** says "Kram-puss" it's "Krum-pus". Even the second way of pronouncing it may be debatable but it's definitely not Kram-puss.

The camera work reminded me of a home made movie I would make with my friends in my backyard at the age of 12, and I would think it was really good. The scenes were so bad and cringey I was laughing the entire time because it was so unbelievably stupid.

The detective's bald melon head was shinier and brighter than my future. I mean dear God, it was like staring into the sun. The little girl was just annoying. And not to mention her initial foster parents, the druggie and the weird car washer...wtf. The only scenes they were in were totally unnecessary and all I could see was the bouncing of boobs and trust me even the horniest of the straight guys would be overwhelmed. I don't know who the dipshit is who gave this movie a 9, but I think they need to re-evaluate their life and seek professional help. The Krampus himself looked like he was made of cardboard. A 6 year old cosplayer could do better.

This entire disgrace of a movie deserves to be burned for it's crimes against the eyes of everyone who's had the misfortune of seeing it. To wrap this up, I can only say, don't. If you have ever loved yourself or anyone you may be wanting to watch this with, just don't. No one deserves to have to watch this.

Now if you'll excuse me I have to wash the shame off my eyeballs.

Cursed with a crappy computer-generated Krampus.

[BA_Harrison · 5/10 · 12 December 2020]

The last film I watched - Slay Belles (2018) - was a bad film with a fairly decent Krampus (practical make-up effects); Krampus The Reckoning is a fairly decent film with a bloody awful Krampus (a badly modelled CGI monstrosity with goofy fangs).

If Krampus The Reckoning had borrowed the monster from Slay Belles, we'd have another solid entry in the Christmas horror sub-genre; as it stands, it's still an entertaining enough effort, but one that is screaming out for far better special effects.

Monica Engesser plays child psychologist Dr. Rachel Stewart, who is called in to talk to orphan Zoe Weaver (Amelia Haberman), whose parents were burnt to a crisp in mysterious circumstances. However, the little girl isn't too keen on answering questions - she's only interested in her box of dolls, which she secretly uses to invoke the 'Christmas Devil' Krampus to punish bad people. Rachel gets the strange feeling that she knows Zoe from somewhere before, but isn't prepared for the awful truth she discovers.

The film is perhaps a tad slow and uneventful for many modern day horror fans, but I felt that the decent performances and competent direction and writing were enough to hold my interest. Engesser is not at all bad as the troubled doctor, and she is given able support from James Ray as the token police detective/love interest. There's not a lot in the way of gore, which will disappoint those who like their scary films messy, but director Robert Conway gives us not one, but two sex scenes instead - can't say he's not trying!

Nudity!

[bbosen · 1/10 · 1 January 2019]

Seriously!! Just turned this on to watch with my teenage daughter and it says it's Rated Pg-13. But a few minutes into it a woman ends up in the shower after having sex and it shows her fully naked breasts. How did this get this rating with nudity? Terrible!

Great Independent Horror Film

[hampton061 · 9/10 · 24 November 2015]

As an independent film, this is a very enjoyable horror film with a surprising performance by a child actress who plays Zoe. She does a very good job and helps make the film. This film should not be viewed and compared to high budget Industry sponsored horror films. Remember this is an independent film and as a viewer of independent films I understand this film was created with local talent and with a limited budget but it is still better than most independent films. The storyline was there and if you let yourself get into the movie with the lights off you will find yourself jumping out of your seat during the scary scenes then laughing at yourself for how the director got you.

The Director did a great job and I have read some reviews by "movie critics" who tear the film apart with little if any positive statements. I never found movie critics to be a credible source of movie reviews. I'm not a critic. I'm just a guy who likes to watch independent films and ignore the professional critics. In short, this is a fun film to watch.

Take note, this film is bound to be a cult classic and owning your own copy should be your goal if you are a collector. This film has something special within it. As a collector I notice that this film has an emerging upcoming director, a new child actress who will soon jump from the independent films industry to main stream high budget industry entertainment and I feel the writer, like many writers, has a yet to be written blockbuster script. That is why I feel this film is the beginning of three major film icons yet to be discovered (A Director, an Actress and a Writer). In five years you will come back to this review and say, "Wow, he was right" Then you will kick yourself for not acquiring an original copy of the film.

It is interesting to note that this year there have been three Krampus films released in November and December of 2015. One by William Shatner which I find to be more of a comedy based on its previews, then there is the second Krampus film I found to be more about a spoiled boy who hates the world. "Krampus the Reckoning" is better than the other two and is a true Holiday Horror Film. A great stocking stuffer,

Bloody krampus efect

[ctiborovahana · 7/10 · 22 January 2022]

Krampus the reckoning is a horror movie with a lot of disgusting victims (insanely many burns) 7/10 just for the disgusting brutality and for the green screen of krampus. Krampus is effective, but again, it's original 100%, I don't recommend this film with a weak stomach, but if you don't have it, it's definitely an annoyance for you that you won't get bored here.

Bad

[lawnnomechick · 1/10 · 12 November 2016]

The writing was awful. The writers don't seem to have a grasp on how conversations work, how children speak, or how a person in any specific profession would speak. It only took me the first few lines to realize this. At that point, I almost gave up on the whole movie but kept watching, hoping it would improve. The writers continued to disappoint throughout the film. Example: Why would a child psychiatrist say she was with the police? It makes no sense for the character to introduce herself as anything other than what she was. The acting was not good. The actors'deliveries of lines were unconvincing and interaction between characters was inorganic. Costume and makeup were also a problem. The psychiatrist had WAY too much makeup that made her look like a hooker rather than a professional. Every time she got out of bed, I swear she was wearing a different outfit than the one she was wearing when she got INTO bed. The costumes of the police officers looked like they came from a Halloween store. Continuing the topic of aesthetics, the CGI of Krampus was unimpressive, lacking color, and not even close to realistic. It looks like it was created by an unpaid college intern. While I'm on the topic of tech, I should also mention that the film editing was awkward. Some of the transitions between scenes were strange, and short, unnecessary scenes were kept in that didn't help move the plot. The story line was interesting but the end was disappointing, confusing, and left a lot of questions unanswered for seemingly no reason. This could have been a great movie if anyone involved had any talent, whatsoever. This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

Cheap cash-in has nothing of note

[Leofwine_draca · 1/10 · 8 April 2017]

KRAMPUS: THE RECKONING is one of many films designed to ride the wave of popularity surrounding the new-found demon of Christmas legend, Krampus. Unfortunately, this micro budget thriller is too cheap to succeed, as it's one of those films where absolutely nothing happens other than the cast treading water throughout.

I suppose it's a film that you could spend your time watching in order to find out if anything will happen of merit, but that would be time wasted; even worse, the creature as depicted on the box art doesn't even appear. Instead there's a lot of chit chat, scenes of a woman tormented by bad dreams, varied locations, and a blue look to certain scenes. It's all completely pointless though.

Naughty reckoning

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 29 July 2018]

'Krampus: The Reckoning' drew me into seeing it, with a cool poster/cover, an intriguing if not particularly original premise and as someone with a general appreciation for horror. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there, made me though apprehensive as well as the low rating and poor reviews.

It is sadly however yet another film seen recently, hence some reiteration because the exact same strengths and flaws those films have are present here, that to me was incredibly disappointing considering its potential which it doesn't do anywhere near enough with. 'Krampus: The Reckoning' is terrible, with a plethora of enormous problems. Low budget Krampus films have not fared well and 'Krampus: The Reckoning' is not an exception. There is next to nothing to recommend.

Lets start with the sole positive. The setting is sometimes atmospheric and spooky.

Unfortunately, it is not done justice by the rather direct to video schlocky way it's shot and edited and the drab colour palette, so much so it was hard to appreciate it, it was very clear that the film was made in a rush with no care or enthusiasm. In particular, the camera work was a nauseous assault on the eyes with its excessive amateurish-ness.

Going on further to the negatives, the story does feel paper thin, disjointed and over-stretched and some of it feels vague, under-explained in the last third where the film especially became duller, more predictable, more senseless and less scary. Too many characters are too sketchy and with nowhere near enough to make one want to endear to them. Their annoying and illogical decision making and behaviours frustrates.

Making the film feel bland and forgettable with not enough heart put into The sound quality is obvious and utilised cheaply (being too loud in the build ups and people's reactions) and it's best not mentioning the uniformly lumbering and histrionic acting that shows a huge indifference to the situation and what is going on, containing one of the worst and most annoying child acting performances ever.

Dialogue can be stilted and rambling, with lots of clichés, lots of unintentional humour that makes some of the film play like a really bad spoof and no depth whatsoever, while the pace goes to a standstill very quickly and drags on forever with very little going on worth caring about and useless padding, never recovering. The minimal action wouldn't have mattered so much if the character development was present or engaging, instead not enough is learnt about the characters, the exposition is too heavily relied upon and is neither interesting or illuminating, actually dragging things down. Found too many of the supposedly shocking moments not surprising or scary and the supposedly creepy atmosphere dreary, due to the excessive obviousness, a lot of dumb and vague moments and explanations and the lack of tension and suspense. Would not have minded the lack of originality (the film is extremely derivative and in a dumbed and watered down way) if the story and atmosphere were at least alright in execution, in reality they were both very poorly done.

A lot of 'Krampus: The Reckoning' has underdeveloped plot elements and often nonsensical and confusing character motivations, while too many of the things to make you jump or shocked are far from creative or scary and are pretty tame. The ending didn't satisfy and felt anaemic and the whole thing felt like an over-stretched-to-beyond-breaking-point short film.

There is not enough threat, and what there is of it tends to be used poorly, is just as poorly designed and so laughably done it doesn't frighten at all. The film is completely unimaginative and more odd than creepy, completely failing to show any sense of horror or creativity. Everything here is neither creative, suspenseful or nail-biting. Some badly sagging momentum too. The direction is leaden and like their heart was not in it or ill at ease, with the chemistry between the characters and actors coming over as constantly random and aggressive with the subtlety of an axe. The Christmas spirit is completely lost underneath all the gratuity, dreariness and mean-spiritedness and the deaths are neither creative or scary with a complete lack of suspense or sense of horror.

Overall, awful with no redeeming value apart from an element that is difficult to appreciate with it being complemented so badly. 1/10 Bethany Cox