Abominable (2006) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

Abominable is a cross between a giant creature film and Rear Window.

Say What?

Yup, no kidding, that's exactly what it is. Imagine that in Rear Window Jimmy Stewart had seen crimes committed by a giant creature instead of by normal humans, and you have the general idea. Update the story to 2006, so that the crimes are reported over the internet, and you have the exact movie.

A wheelchair-bound man is trapped in the top of his mountainside A-frame. His vertiginous vantage offers him a good look at the neighboring forest and his nearest neighbor. The neighbor's house has been occupied by five college girls, and the forest has been occupied by Bigfoot.  Peering through his binoculars, the man can see what is happening and what is going to happen, but he can't seem to communicate it to anyone. His phone line is out, and he's the only guy in the world without a cell phone. He tries simple shouting, but the girls think he's a pervert. He tries sending e-mail to the sheriff, but the police think he's nuts. And so it goes until only one girl is left and she, together with the crippled man, must somehow make it to a car while the beast lurks nearby.

The film is assembled quite well. The direction manages to convey the star's increasing panic, and the flight to the car is extremely suspenseful. Give the director a lot of credit for understanding how to create and maintain dramatic tension, and Matt McCoy a lot of credit for his understated portrayal of the troubled, panicky man.

There are a few problems as well:

1) The actual creature is ridiculous. It's one of those "guy in a suit" monsters like the ones from every Roger Corman horror movie in the 60s and 70s. It looks like a cross between Groundskeeper Willie and John Candy in a Harry Crumb disguise.

2) There is a long, long sub-plot about some local guys who encounter the creature in the nearby woods. Rather than being intricately interwoven with the main plot, it's basically another similar movie stuck somewhere in the middle of this one. It seems to go on forever (more than twenty minutes). I can see why the auteur thought he needed some colorful characters (Jeffrey Combs and Lance Henricksen) and some humor in an otherwise too serious drama (by genre standards), and the sub-plot did allow the script to show where Bigfoot lived and what he did with his victims, but this scene goes on so long that we have enough time to forget the paraplegic guy!

Overall, it's not a bad little movie with some good T&A to meet genre requirements. Of all the movie genres in the cinematic universe, the giant creature genre has to be in my bottom five percent, right down there with pretentiously symbolic art films, Bollywood musicals, and graphic splatter flicks. Given that fact, this must be quite a decent little film to have held my attention as well as it did. With a better creature it would have been a keeper.



  • "Back to genre: Making Abominable" featurette
  • Audio Commentary with writer/director Ryan Schifrin, Actors Matt McCoy and Jeffrey Combs
  • Deleted and Extended Scenes
  • Outtakes and Bloopers
  • Shadows: Director Ryan Schifrin's USC Student Film
  • Trailers
  • Poster & Still Gallery
  • Storyboard Gallery
  • Screenplay (DVD-ROM)


On the plus side: a nice Tiffany Shephis shower scene, as seen by the Jimmy Stewart guy through his binoculars. Breasts, buns, and an "almost" on the lower frontal.

The Critics Vote ...

Miscellaneous ...

The People Vote ...

  • Box Office Mojo. They made a tremendous commitment to the theatrical run - one theater, three days. Total gross: $1800.
The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

Our own guideline:

  • A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre.
  • B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. In order to rate at least a B-, a film should be both a critical and commercial success. Exceptions: (1) We will occasionally rate a film B- with good popular acceptance and bad reviews, if we believe the critics have severely underrated a film. (2) We may also assign a B- or better to a well-reviewed film which did not do well at the box office if we feel that the fault lay in the marketing of the film, and that the film might have been a hit if people had known about it. (Like, for example, The Waterdance.)
  • C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by people who enjoy this kind of movie. If this is your kind of movie, a C+ and an A are indistinguishable to you.
  • C means it is competent, but uninspired genre fare. People who like this kind of movie will think it satisfactory. Others probably will not.
  • C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie, but genre addicts find it watchable. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film, but films with this rating should be approached with caution by mainstream audiences, who may find them incompetent or repulsive or both. If this is NOT your kind of movie, a C- and an E are indistinguishable to you.
  • D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-. Films rated below C- generally have both bad reviews and poor popular acceptance.
  • E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre.
  • F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.


Based on this description, this film is a C, a solid genre picture. It has a cheesy-lookin' monster, but has some entertainment value and some genuinely suspenseful moments.

Return to the Movie House home page