Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Usamah Harvey The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

catmydogs Howdy.I really wasn't expecting much from this film. Borrowed it from my local library for a dark night. Yeah, the budget is way down there, the acting is uneven, but I was actually drawn in by the plot. I bet with a bigger budget, better film stock, better lighting, this could have been a really cool mainstream movie. It wouldn't have won any awards for originality, but it would have been entertaining enough for a couple of hours of chills.I wouldn't bother buying it, but if you can find a copy to borrow or rent, it's actually pretty okay. I'd say 5.5/10.Ed

ReflectedGlory Let me get one point across: I only gave it a 2 but I liked this movie. I liked it because it was so terrible it was funny; I felt bad for the people who made this movie. The acting was very, very bad but the chicks were pretty good looking. It looked like it was shot on a home video camera. The plot was completely unbelievable (the hero remembered turns and potholes while blindfolded in the back of a van, allowing the other hero to find the house she was taken to by the bad guy). I recommend it to other B-horror movie buffs but not to the casual movie-renter (hence the 2). Oh, one more thing: it had a few good creepy scenes but most of the time it wasn't scary at all.

MadWatch This movie was pretty good for a college film project. But really sucks that I spent $5 to rent this. Seriously. I rented this at blockbuster because it had professional looking packaging and even though I figured it was a "B" grade horror movie, I at least thought it was done professionally. Nope. The cheap camera quality, the high school drama play acting, horrible directing, numerous plot problems and simple special effects showed that this movie was done by amateurs.Now, the movie was not *totally* bad; it kept my interest enough to watch the whole thing. But it was hard to miss the bad plot, numerous blatant plot holes and sub-par acting.Some of the nitpicks (spoilers abound):1) The main character video tapes someone in her bedroom holding a knife to her throat while she is sleeping (the intruder is the one holding her camera). I understand that she is scared to go outside, but why doesn't she call the police??!!!!2) The main character is seeking help with her "ghost" problem. So, she decides to enlist the help of someone who maintains a web site that is part paranormal equipment dealer and part peepshow. All I had to say was, "What the....?" Then, she is downright catty and confrontational when this person comes out to help.3) The web/paranormal person is basically told that she is not wanted and to leave. So, she sticks around because she wants to help. Why? This is a total stranger that was under the impression she is there to sell equipment to a customer, then is greeted by a confrontational customer. Why does she stay and offer to help?4) The friend said that she is the one that murdered the stalker. Afterward she is shown as being easily scared and intimidated. How did she ever get the motivation to commit first degree murder?5) They come across the "ghost" of the dead stalker and have a pretty major encounter with the supernatural. Then afterward, la-la-la-la, they resume their normal life and go to a party, like seeing supernatural specters are an everyday occurrence.6) As with a lot of supernatural movies, the "powers" of the paranormal entities seems to keep changing. Multiple times the ghost would do some ability, but would not repeat that ability at a later time. Or would not do something that was shown to be well within its ability to do so.As with a lot of movies these days, this one just smacks of misandric (anti-male) messages. No need to flesh out a villain, just make a male character that harms women and voilà! instant villain. I am so sick of these movies. No need to create a background or personality for the "bad guy", just create a male character that harms women. If the villain happened to be female, we would be given all sorts of background information on how she came to be that way and what horrible events happened in her life and how the audience should feel sorry fer her.I give this movie a 2 out of 10. The bad acting, poor quality filming, amateurish feel and misandric story makes a bad movie, but it was *just* interesting enough for me to watch the whole thing, therefore I didn't rate it a 1.

oktobeimperfect i enjoyed the movie, i thought it was fun, entertaining and interesting. what bothers me about all these flamingly mean reviews is that these people seem to forget that this is a FIRST MOVIE FOR MOST OF THESE PEOPLE! David cross, his actors and crew did a great job and show a whole lot of potential even if they didn't get it ALL perfect first time around. I don't know ANYONE who ever got everything right on their first try. show me any of these vehement haters that did, and i will take their criticism. until then, enjoy this movie for what it is, a fun, low budget, horror movie! Keep an eye out for the sequel, and best of luck to all who worked on this film!