An independent movie studio connected to an old house with a history of violence is tormented by the vengeful ghoul that insists her home is not bulldozed over by other potential buyers. The head honcho of the studio (Billy Zane, who mostly looks bored and disinterested, with less-than-subtle hints of sarcasm in his performance towards the project he's stuck in) plans to finish his latest project then sell off the house with plans to move to a brand new studio but when the ghost of bad little girl Carly starts raising a violent, psychopathic ruckus, he might just have to consider. Zane's cast and crew will also be under siege and terror, attempting to escape but unable to do so, some meeting horrific ends, others trying to "negotiate" their way out of the place to safe freedom. Decent cast (the aforementioned Zane, Lacey Chabert, Matt Dallas, and Danielle Harris) is really trapped in a bad horror movie with variable special effects (primarily laughable) and some okay dark humor. The film can't escape a putrid low budget, and the cast running around a studio attempting to find safe haven from a ghoul (that pales in comparison to the Japanese Onyro ghouls so popular about ten years ago) that isn't all that scary doesn't help. There are some eerie dolls in a room, a nasty bit of business involving a mirror slashing (the ghoul can "manipulate" people into harming / killing themselves), and Zane trying to talk the ghoul into leaving them alone has a bit of funny to it. Harris is too good to be stuck in parts which do nothing with her and too often these days she is…this film especially wastes her talents. Chabert keeps on a serious face as does Dallas (as the put-upon rookie, placed with doing multiple duties due to the crew losing their head editor (B-movie vet, Richard Tyson) in the opening sequence), her lover, but the plot is anything but worthy of a straight performance…the content and effects accompanying it leave much to be desired. This is fit for syfy and that is not a compliment. I think Zane knows what kind of crap this is and his performance doesn't hide that fact. Carly's mother's back story is even linked to Charles Manson! Christine Bentley services the film as some nice eye candy in scantily clad outfits (she *almost* gets nude for a shower sequence) as Zane's "star" and Allyn Carrell is the creepy old lady with a story to tell and secrets to unveil. One truly funny and odd scene has Carrell just appearing and walking throughout the studio as Zane (and his kooky crew member Johnny (Adam Whittington, a very realistic loser)) is bewildered at how to get her to leave. The back story involving Jeanie and Carly's reasons for acting out are particularly weak but the film probably couldn't have made it out successfully regardless. Lynn Andrews III is the token black character (he is over the audio/sound department of the studio)who actually makes it out alive, but not without a few bumps and bruises.

Let me start out by saying that I am a major horror movie fan and watch a LOT of movies that come out that are supposed to be scary but it turns out that about 90% of these so called "horror" movies are not, and what's worse is they are filled to the rim with bad acting, bad cinematography, bad direction, bad sound, bad effects and everything else that makes a movie just a torture to sit through. THIS MOVIE however, is NOT. Okay, so it's not a $200 million endeavor but in my opinion, this movie was WAY more entertaining then World War Z, which cost close to $300 million after re-shoots.Here is what I saw that was entertaining for me. The story, although similar to a few other films, was executed pretty well. The acting was solid from pretty much all the actors in the film. Billy Zane rocked his part and made me think he should be doing more comedy because he actually made his character of the producer, which everyone pretty much hates in real life, a good likable guy. I laughed out loud at some of his comments during the film. Well done Billy! The cinematography, although semi-amateurish, worked for me. It had an overall low-budget feel to it, but that didn't bother me. The CG effects were great, the only think I wish was done better was the sound design for the scares. If done correctly, this could have been really scary! I'm almost tempted to take the movie and re-edit the sound design with my own library to kick the adrenaline up a notch in the right places. Lastly, the girls in the movie are all totally gorgeous and a lot of fun to watch. What's even better and actually pretty amazing is that they all did a great job with their acting! Doesn't happen often. Fantastic job ladies! Anyways, after watching all the garbage put out by The Asylum and crappy companies that should literally have their right taken away to make movies because they are so friggin bad, Ghost of Goodnight Lane was a breath of fresh air and is actually inspiring that a decent movie can be made on a low budget with the right people working on it.

Well this is just awful, but what makes it even worse is that it has all been done on purpose. Many people will watch this for Billy Zane, and for those people this will be exactly what you are hoping for in Zane's non stop blabber and off hand remarks that on some occasions don't even have anything to do with the movie. Now fans of Lacey Chabert will be completely disappointed by the amount of screen time she actually gets, and the limited depth of her character. Lacey has talent, (find, and watch Thirst if you are not already as sure of that as you should be) but once again, she is being wasted in a terrible movie that very few people will actually ever watch. Now about the movie itself, there is no reason why it has to be this bad, they started out well, and they have stocked the movie with a lot of talent, it is just that the intention of the production team seems to have been to create something funny, sadly that mark was missed. Every door before it opens has to be shown first as a scary thing that the cameras must rush up to as if a great invisible beast were coming (every time). Why does it hate the doors so much? is almost funny, and sadly the only almost in there. The ghost is in the house, and of the house, so where is it coming from each time that it needs to storm the doors, or when no one is looking to get scared, why would it need to open doors sneakily? I'm sure I am taking this movie a lot more seriously than the cast did while they worked on it, but if you are going to choose a movie to be entertained by for an hour, and a half or more, you should at least be entertained. The acting is all fine, how can you fault a room full of improving actors when the script most likely just gives a rough idea, and says go nuts. I did not Enjoy this movie, and do not recommend it at all. Even a horror parody has to be based in something, or anchored somehow to some rule that does not change, this is too loose for it's own good.Jesse of www.Jesse.ca

I was pleasantly surprised when I watched a screening of this movie .Although not a 100 million dollar Hollywood budget the special effects are done very well . Alin Bijan is a brilliant director and has made this movie into a fun but yet extremely scary one . What makes it more scary is that its based on true story of the studio at goodnight lane and its shot in the same studio ! Billy Zane does a great job as well . Lacey Chabert is adorable and does a good job as well It can definitely compete with the really scary movies such as paranormal activity, the ring , etc but yet fun and has funny scenes that are awesome. I can say by the near end of the movie I was hearing screams and the girls sitting beside me jumping off their seats