2hotFeature one of my absolute favorites!

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Mabel Munoz Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

alezey-27516 I've seen many bad movies in my life, but this one is probably on the top 10 worse movies i've ever seen.I mean, the over-acting from all actors made me wana cring. Firstly, that Sean Faris guy is just awful in everything he does. Starting with the way he is acting all romantic while on the phone with his wife, and also the way he is Mr.Friendly guy at his work, and finally as Mr.Angry at his wife. He also tries to show-off his muscles every time the cam is on him lol.I also got disgusted with the amount of sweat in that room. Just Imagine the smell :-S.anyhow, Bad movie, not worth watching. I give it 1/10

ericaficwriter The film begins with Sammy returning home early from work to surprise his wife with gifts on their anniversary. He finds her home early and she is "getting busy" with another man. He quietly closes the door, goes and grabs his guns then comes back up stairs...The question that comes up is: Who has the right to judge? Does Sammy have the right to judge? Just because someone betrays us, are we supposed to take the law into our own hands? Or does this go deeper than that. Is it Justice Sammy wants? I appreciate the excellent acting given by the characters. Their response to the situation: the anguish, the hurt, the sadness and pain could be felt in this film. I gave this film a high rating because of topic matter and acting skills.This film contains all kinds of graphic language, violence, and nudity. Just a warning.

vwald This film is an excellent textbook example of the bankruptcy of fundamentalist Christian morality. The plot is straightforward: a man comes home from work on his wedding anniversary and finds his wife having sex with another man. He pulls a gun on them and the rest of the movie is the conversation they have while he decides whether to kill one or both. A loving marriage is clearly defined as one in which nobody cheats.The man calls the wife of the adulterer, who runs over and denounces her husband and then has the first man has sex with her in front of her husband and the first man's wife. They are seriously tortured over this—witnessing their spouse having sex with someone else (as punishment? for their having sex with someone else?) It turns out that the husband's boss repeatedly raped the wife when she was in highschool and she let him because her father worked for him and needed the job and she loved her father. The movie gets her shot but leaves the completely unremorseful boss scott free. I guess the difference is she is a woman and he is a man; or, he is a capitalist and she is just a worker.So the definition of married love and fidelity is that penises stay out of extramarital vaginas. This is supposed to be morally inspiring and indicating the spiritual wonder of the old testament.The horror of forced sex on the highschool girl is suggested as the source of her infidelity. This isn't a psychological analysis, however; it's just cause/effect, and she blames herself for it. Also, the bizarre sex between the good husband and the betrayed wife of the adulterer is just shown as something that happens—doesn't seem to affect either the wife or the husband.None of these people pay attention to the bible, although they can quote chapter and verse. Their reactions and their decisions appear to be completely independent of scripture, although scripture is quoted. So one has the sense that this movie is directed to nominal fundamentalist Christians and gives them an excuse for various sexual activities on the grounds that they had a bad childhood, suffered abuse, etc. Further, the movie implicitly condones the cold-blooded murder of two people.

scadjen It was a decent premise and could have made a good film but from the opening credits, the guy sounded like he belonged in Steel Magnolias as opposed to being in New Orleans. It's 2016! Everyone has heard New Orleans accents by now and they should know they aren't dripping in sweet tea & magnolias. Get it right and maybe, MAYBE I could watch the film again. Not only was it a terribly fake accent from all who attempted it, it was SO FORCED -- sometimes there, sometimes not.Other people might like it better than I did if they can ignore the accents or don't care that they're fake. I've seen worse acting at a local high school, and the plot was plausible and interesting.