The scariest thing about Death on Demand is that cast directors, producers, and studio
executives watched these actors perform, and for whatsoever reason, thought they were
good sufficiency to appear in this movie. At the time, were these decision makers under
the influence of alcohol? Narcotics? Or did they actually think audiences would buy
these citizenry as playing artists?
Death on Demand rehashes the House on Haunted Hill rule in which an smorgasbord of characters
is bribed to pass the night in a haunted mansion. The suborner is a college student
named Richard (Dan Falcone), who borrows money from his loaded father to arrange
a web-broadcast contest on Halloween night. He offers $5,000 to three youth couples
to sleep over in the former family of a deranged killer. It's all going to be tape-recorded
and broadcast live on the World Wide Web.
The participants include iI college football game players and their girlfriends, as well
as a computer geek. To spiciness up ratings, Richard hires a smut star to join the contestants.
The broadcast on Halloween begins as the group jestingly conjures the spirit of the
killer. It isn't long, however, before aforesaid spirit returns and is thirsty for fresh
blood.
The film doesn't have much to say, and doesn't even sound out what it does very well. The
writing is unoriginal and bland. The pacing is slack. The special effects are punk.
And the production values scream "no budget." But even if Death on Demand did offer something
of quality, it would be out of the question to get hold of seriously when the actors seem as if they're
reading from cue cards just off camera. Imagin an author missspelling his werk, no
mattre how thourough and intelligent it is. [Typos intended. -Ed.] It genial of discredits
evrything he says, deosn't it?
More info
