Ghosts of Goldfield

2007
2.8| 1h30m| NA| en| More Info
Released: 27 March 2007 Released
Producted By:
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

A group of five led by Julie set up their filming equipment in the hotel of the derelict town of Goldfield, hoping to capture footage of the ghost of Elisabeth Walker, a maid tortured and killed in room 109. Troubled by visions, Julie discovers that a necklace, handed down to her from her grandmother, is somehow connecting her to this tragedy.

Genre

Horror

Watch Online

Ghosts of Goldfield (2007) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Director

Ed Winfield

Production Companies

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial
Watch Now
Ghosts of Goldfield Videos and Images

Ghosts of Goldfield Audience Reviews

SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie
Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!
FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.
Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;
loomis78-815-989034 Five young filmmakers go to the deserted Goldfield Hotel in Nevada in hopes of filming Elizabeth (Ashly Margaret Rae) the wife of the owner of the hotel whose spirit roams the halls looking for her lost baby. Her affair with a bartender (Roddy Piper) leads to a baby that her husband George Winfield (Chuck Zito) had killed along with Elizabeth. The crew searches the halls acting like school kids rather than a documentary crew with the ghost sliding past and all around them. Two members of the crew Mike (Richard Chance) and Keri (Amano) seem to think the reason they are there is to party, flirt and hang out being completely unaware that they are in a haunted hotel and what their mission is. Group leader Julia (Patterson) quickly realizes her Grandmother may have had something to do with the death of Elizabeth and the group can't escape outside the hotel. Decent Direction by Edwin Winfield and excellent cinematography by Adrian M. Pruett and Roland "Ozzie" Smith cannot disguise the terrible screenplay by Dominic Biondi and story by Brian McMahon. This is a shame because the filmmakers are quite talented and make the most of the location. The story is by the numbers and when you add two of the most annoying characters (Mike & Keri) a horror film has seen in a long time, the film can't overcome it. The dialog is absurd and downright laughable at times. The filmmakers create a good atmosphere only to have it ruined by stupid actions of the characters. There still manages to be a few scares and some gore thrown in but the relentlessly bad script keeps sinking any momentum the film gets going. A lot of talent behind the camera is wasted. It seems pretty clear this team could have made a good low budget horror film with real pay offs if they had any kind of script to work with.
krystinapilkington The biggest problem encountered with this film is the fact that it actually makes no sense at all. If you choose to watch this pathetic excuse for a film you will be subjected to an hour and a half of painful dialogue, pathetic acting and terrible filming and still come out at the end none the wiser than when you began. It is in no way clear why they characters that are murdered are. It's a low budget film so naturally I expect bad shooting and poor acting. However, it costs nothing to think up a story that is actually consistent and makes logical sense.In the initial scene at the 'saloon', which is meant to be 'unchanged since the 1800's', you can clearly see the bar owner leaning on a Fosters lager pump. Not really in keeping with the idea that this bar has not been altered in over two hundred years. Thankfully the director does redeem himself in noticing this mistake and removing the Fosters badge for the next scene! That's about the only congratulations I could offer to whoever thought of, and produced, this atrocity.Life seriously is too short to waste on this film.
cobbler88 I don't watch a horror movie looking for perfection. I look for a decent story that isn't screwed up by the actors or production staff. Unfortunately, pretty much everything that could have been done wrong in this film was.First, lets talk about the group of five documenting hauntings in the abandoned hotel. Only three of the five were actually doing so. The two remaining hangers-on were the stock obnoxious boyfriend and slutty girlfriend - both of whom were so obviously ill-matched with their partners that it trumped all suspension of disbelief. There was simply no way either of the documentarians would have been going out with either of their mates.Second, lets talk about shooting day for night. This is when a film is shot in daylight but manipulated to make it appear that the scenes were shot at night. At the very darkest it appears that the events in this movie occurred at around dusk. During other interior shots throughout the film it was clearly daylight outside because - duh - you could see the daylight through the windows. I don't believe a single exterior shot was actually filmed at night, and sometimes within the same scene the lighting would change from more red to more blue. The characters also inexplicably kept returning to what seems to be the basement of the hotel, which not only seemed to be a bit more haunted than the rest of the place, but also generally had daylight streaming down into it.Third, how about doing at least a LITTLE research for minor points? This Nevada hotel was, to paraphrase, "one of the grandest hotels between Chicago and San Francisco. Now it sits abandoned off I-95." Can anyone tell me what is wrong with that sentence? Exactly! I-95 runs north-south from Maine to Florida. Would it really have taken more than 20 seconds to find a genuine interstate or state highway along which to place this hotel? Fourth, the ending is never explained and the viewer is left not really knowing why it ended as it did. I know this is often a device used by inferior film-makers to deflect criticism by reflecting it back to how stupid the viewer must be to not understand the film. Viewers too often fall into this trap, and sometimes with good reason. In this case, however, the nonsensical ending is yet another symptom of a horrible movie - not the viewer's inability to follow a story.Even when looking for a low-budget horror flick to pass an October evening, avoid this one.
parmenides6 The plot of this movie is the basic haunted house scenario. However it suffers from bad direction, a bad script, bad acting and bad special effects. The cast is relatively small and I only recognised two of them, Roddy Piper (They Live) and Marnette Patterson (Kaley Cuoco's sister in Charmed). Marnette can act and in my opinion is the only person in the movie who can. I would go into more detail but i wasted enough time watching the movie itself so I'm not going to waste any more. This should be a 1 star rating but unfortunately and unbelievably I have seen worse movies than this, therefore I have to save the 1's for them.