BallWubba Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.

Helllins It is both painfully honest and laugh-out-loud funny at the same time.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Brooklynn There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

scarlettspecial-151-238180 Boring! Mundane! Mediocre! And these are the good things. The only reason I watched this entire movie is because I was, also, doing a job that required little thought. If you don't have the entire plot figured out, including whodunnit after the first 15 minutes, you either aren't thinking about it or haven't watched enough movies. Filled with terrible music for fill-in, which goes on ad nauseum. The acting was only saved by ~ hmmm ~ nobody. Terrible acting all around. There is a 'bit' of a twist at the end ~ but if you reach the end, you don't even care anymore. This is my first review but I felt that someone should tell people how awful this movie is. It would be better if it was even 'bad' because then it could be watched for a laugh. But ~ this waste of time should never have been made! I'm amazed that it even got an 'average' on IMDb. Terrible!

Danii Disaster I was looking for similar movies to "Cube", and this came up. It sounded very promising, and I'm sure it could've been a semi-decent flick, but the p***-poor acting, ridiculous script, and crappy camera work ruined it all.Even Dennis Hopper, who usually is a very good actor, sucked in this movie. But still... even considering the fact that his performance was quite poor, he was still better than the rest of the "actors".The characters were one-dimensional, stereotypical and plastic -- I couldn't relate to any of them, so had no desire to root for them.The deaths were plain boring and even a little ridiculous.Tension and suspense are the key element of movies in this genre. This movie has neither. A thriller is supposed to be suspenseful; horror is supposed to be scary; drama is supposed to evoke some sort of emotion. None of the above was present in this movie. So why was this movie necessary at all? It's just FLAT.I rate it 3/10 - 1 star for the fact that there was no cheesy sex/nudity scenes (a rarity nowadays). And another star for the twist at the end, which was the best part of the movie. And one more star for the soundtrack - it was bearable at least.

mfivejude-1 OK, with all that booze around,why wouldn't they just make Molotov cocktails and blow the doors down, they also had cloth and lighters..all you need that is th e one thing that made this story so incredible, besides the lousy script,plot,actors endless silence with awful organ music. it must have had a budget of $1,000 dollars because no wardrobe expense, location cost(a municipal bldg in Romania? set decoration expenses, unnecessary etc.i'd rather have root canal than see this again also,the title House of 9 is such a bland name for a story that is not about fashion or culinary,which the title seems to suggest,but then again that may have been the intent, to draw people into the theater.even the "special effects" were amateurishly done.what i suppose was meant to depict tears on Dennis hooper,in reality appeared as a face covered all over with sweat. it seems a shame that such a good actor as him,even took on this poorly written part,and also he is the only actor in the film i ever heard of before.

patrick powell Oh dear. House Of Nine, unfortunately, has Euro TV trash written all over it. The giveaway was, as always, that production companies from several countries have their finger in the pie, and the list of producers leads me to believe that oil money is involved at some point. Or perhaps sons of oil money who are a little bored with buying new cars and fancy turning their hand — that would be Daddy's oil money — to film financing. What with most of the world to sell it to, it will most certainly recoup its productions cost and then some. And most certainly some who see it will think it rather good. But it's not rather good. It's rather bad. I picked this up for £3 at my local Tesco seeing that Dennis Hopper starred in it. Well, he does star in it, but his involvement means only that he must have several pressing bills to pay. Another name which caught my eye was that of Peter Capaldi who does such a splendid turn in In The Thick Of It and its cinema offspring In The Loop. Capaldi, too, must have several pressing bills. Oh, and Kelly Brook can't act, or at least acts no better than most wannabes in a sixth-form production. Hopper's 'oirish accent' slips everywhere from Ulster to Killarney and occasionally even Boston, the mad Frenchman overacts so much he probably thought he was on double wages. Briefly, a disparate group of nine people, chosen at random, are locked in a smallish mansion after being kidnapped in London. None is very nice, except Kelly Brook and 'oirish' Father Michael Duffy (Hopper), and it takes less than 24 hours for the lot of them to crack up. The idea is that they should all kill each other, and the last man or woman left standing wins £5 million. Er, and that's it. No other explanation is given, least of all at the end (and the ending is something of a pseudo-significant cop-out) and along the way there is plenty of blood and mayhem. What there isn't, however, is any real sense of horror, any suspense or any slight reason to care what happens. As I say, Euro TV trash to the end. Having comprehensively dissed it, however, I would not discourage you from seeing it if it turns up on your TV channel one night and you have bugger all else to do. But neither would I encourage you. The thought which finally stays with me is: just what was Dennis Hopper doing getting involved in complete cobblers such as this? The pay cheque must have been worth it.