qmtv Ok, this is not the worst movie ever made. At least I didn't have to fast forward through it. I knew it would be bad. Because it was part of an 8 movies for $5 set. And all the other movies sucked. The only way I made it through the end was because I was playing guitar while watching it. If it was a good movie I would have to stop playing and watch. So in that regard it was fine. It wasn't so horrible that I had to stop playing the guitar to press the fast forward button. There were a few seconds of decent scenes, like when the blond girl got the knife in the head. Busey was in the beginning and only voiced the rest of the movie. That would mean he can literally telephone his lines. And he did.The horror element is minimal. The comedy, not much. There was some kind of nonsense soap opera romance happening while these people were stuck in a bakery with a killer gingerbread man. So, that's it. Rating is an F. 1 star. Nothing to see here. Once all the movies in the dvd set have been seen I will destroy this set.

punisherversion1 The Gingerdead Man: Directed by Charles Band and Written by William Butler and August White(Pseudonym for Domonic MuirThis was a suggestion by James Cowdrey but I'm not entirely sure it was a serious suggestion. This movie is called The Gingerdead Man and it features a bonkers Gary Busey voicing a sentient cookie trying to murder people. This was never supposed to be taken seriously. The actual gingerbread man is pretty well done and shot in a way to make it as convincing as it needs to be in this situation. This is an extremely short movie. It says it runs at 76 minutes but it has a good ten minutes of credits. It also has this super cheap royalty free casio keyboard music that runs through every single solitary minute of the movie. If it was used a little more sparingly, it would work better to add to the wacky, goofy mood this film is trying for. There is almost no gore and all the gags you think they would use they do albeit poorly. This comes from Charles Band, that great B movie video king who I enjoyed during the 90s. This has a few moments that are fun in that way but not enough. It's schmaltzy. The acting is abyssmal as to be expected. It's also not very funny. It's what you think it is.I give this movie a D.

bowmanblue Now, there's a school of thought which I call the 'Snakes-on-a-Plane' viewpoint – it's where a film's title tells you everything you need to know about the story and therefore, if you can't work out whether you like it or not from that, you don't really deserve to complain if the movie turns out to be not for you. So, armed with my love of cheesy and 'so-bad-they're-good' films, mixed with my enjoyment of the horror genre stories and appreciation for Gary Busey, I figured that the low budget 'Gingerdead Man' would be right up my street.I think it's fair to say that I'm not 'spoiling' the film by letting on that Gary Busey plays (mainly be voicing) a killer who's murdered, but whose soul is sent to that of a gingerbread man (think 'Child's Play' but with pastry instead of a 'Good Guy' doll). Then he returns to reek revenge on those who, er, turned him into something from a baker's window display. I expected daft. I expected ludicrous. I expected low budget. I expected a ridiculously over-the-top performance from Busey. However, I only really got the low budget part.Yes, the film's premise is as daft as it sounds and the budget is so small that the film stock used actually looks worse than you could probably recreate on your iphone. In fact, the budget appears so small that there's only really one location used for the whole film – a pretty bland factory. Not only is the scenery nothing to write home about, but there are only really three cast members. Now, the problem with this in a 'slasher' film is that it doesn't really give the deranged killer many options with who to kill. In 'Scream' the film would be over in about a quarter of an hour with that few 'expendable' characters! Of course the lack of people to murder also equates into a lack of gore and/or creative kills, so don't do expecting too much of the 'red stuff' here.Yes, Busey does do his best with the script and adds an air of sheer manic madness to the proceedings, but I just felt that his best wasn't enough to justify it. Or, rather an idea this whacky could have been so much better with a bigger setting, cast and (gore) effects. I could forgive the awful model of the Gingerdead man himself as that seemed to add to the overall silliness. So, I think I can safety say that I wasn't as much of a fan of the franchise as I thought I'd be. Yes – franchise. Just because I didn't like it doesn't mean that other people agree with me. It seems to have developed enough of a cult following to warrant a fair few sequels, so what do I know? I just won't watch them. I'll stick to viewing Gary Busey on the UK's 'Celebrity Big Brother' to get a true dose of his madness!

catfishman If you watched The Gingerdead Man expecting a serious horror film then I am sorry...for you parents, as they may be something wrong with you. Okay, maybe not, but if you really did think Gingerdead Man was going to be anything other than a silly B horror film then yes, this movie may suck for you. That said if you are like me and was actually looking for a silly kinda' horror flick then you might actually have a good time. Throw in the fact that Garry Busey is playing Millard Findlemeyer, the murderous both as human and from the after life as the voice of the Gingerdeadman and you've almost got gold. Or not - it really depends on whether or not you like cheezy movies. I had fun.