A leprechaun is accidentally freed from his crate and from this moment onwards he terrorizes a household while searching for his gold that was stolen from him. He punishes any unlucky individual who hinders his relentless search of his gold and it up to some teens/kids, Tori, Nathan, Ozzie and Alex to survive to the devastation that this pest is causing them and find the only weapon that can protect them from this malevolent nightmare.<br /><br />Straight to the point you want? Stupid and unfunny! Yeah 'Leprechaun' is a woefully dull horror flick that leads to spiteful violence with an underbelly of hokey humour, which is unbearably painful. Well, it was for me! I was thinking to myself while watching it, why am I putting myself through a second viewing. Simple, I thought maybe during my first viewing I took it the wrong way, but honestly this time it wasn't any better. Maybe I need to be drinking a lot and I MEAN a lot of alcohol, to find something amusing about it. Because this could have been a great twisted fairy tale nightmare, but it's a nightmare for all the wrong reasons! You might call it more a black comedy than horror, but I believe it didn't work either way. Actually, I thought it opens rather well, but then not too long it falls away quickly. Becoming nothing but a one-idea joke that's filled with too many awful one-liners and wise cracks, which was an uphill struggle to sit through. Sadly all the effort went into the nasty side of the effects, which isn't too bad as the makeup of the leprechaun was excellent and the gore didn't disappoint. But I was just having a hard time with the supposed humour (more like childish), lousy thrills, annoying editing and uninteresting characters. These things bothered me more than the obvious horror clichés, predictability, no frights and that there's not even a real story backing all this up. The acting was average to say the least, though Jennifer Aniston's presence shows and keeps one watching. Warwick Davis as the Leprechaun was obviously enjoying himself by pulling out countless bad-lines. While, the dialogue was just plain nonsense. Almost everything misses the point. Maybe it was a missed opportunity, or I'm just fooling myself. The more I think of it, it felt like I was watching a more nasty version of 'Critters', from the people being under siege in their house and how much do I hate those films, maybe with the exception of the original.<br /><br />What were the distributors of the DVD I own were thinking? The thing is they got a pretty recent picture of Aniston from her 'Friends' days and stuck it on the original poster art for the DVD cover. Gosh, I don't remember her being on the original cover art. Who's the actual star of the show? Were they thinking that putting Aniston on the front that it would sell by the truckload? *Hmm* I guess that would help, as there would be more fans out there of Jennifer Aniston who might be a tad interested and who most likely skip it not knowing she was in it. I might be talking crap and moved totally off the point, but I just found it an interesting side-note.<br /><br />It's definitely not worth its weight in gold!