Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Holstra Boring, long, and too preachy.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

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

fedor8 A classic example of how to ruin a good set-up with a crappy finale worthy of a Bugs Bunny cartoon (provided those cartoons sucked caj*nes and were made by cretins). The first hour sets up an interesting mystery that touches vaguely on the haunted house genre, but when the villain reveals itself the movie falls apart like a badly stacked up deck of cards hit by a cyclone.The villain is none other than the old geezer from the building. Now a quick rundown of the shoddiness of the goofy finale: the old geezer is basically indestructible and insane (though not near insane enough to pull of a string of tricks and manipulations that would normally require a sound mind and a dozen people). Juliette Lewis who shows spunk and courage throughout the movie behaves like a little schoolgirl lost when faced with this non-formidable foe who is shorter than Tom Cruise and has the build of a 14 year-old kid. She gets knocked out by him - yet again (does he walk barefoot? float through air?) - and then it's time for Thrilleric Clicherama 101: she knocks him out with a rod, but instead of finishing him off she, very typically for thriller/horror victims, throws AWAY her weapon, turns her backhriller/horror victims, throws AWAY her weapon, turns her back to the predictably not-badly-injured villain and very predictably he gets up to resume chasing her and endangers her yet again. Wow. Why must victims in thrillers always be so damn stupid in crucial situations?WHY do people who fight for their lives - in dumb thrillers and horrors (obviously, not in real life, when everyone goes to much greater lengths to crush/bash/annihilate/destroy/pulverize/neutralize/bash the attacker) - never CONTINUE bashing the villain, just to make sure they're incapacitated, severely injured or thoroughly killed? Is this some unwritten-rule pacifist movie thing invented by left-wing writers whereby the hero can never be shown to be human i.e. justifiably vicious toward their attacker?Dumber still, the janitor (played conveniently by the "Saw" guy before "Saw" was written and released by random dweeby knuckleheads), can't manage to overpower this tiny little old man, in a scene so stupid it can compete with any horsepoop from "Saw" or the even more amazingly dumb "Copycat" - perhaps even an Argento thriller. And then William Hurt just happens to arrive, and even he struggles to get the old man to put down the weapon.The killer's motives for murdering so many building residents without anyone noticing they're missing or dead? Some gobbledygook about Ancient Egypt, the serenity of peace and what-not: it's not as if any of that stuff made enough sense for me to pay much attention to the killer's obligatory and very silly why-I-dood-it speech. We never find out WHY the stench of several corpses - plus the maggots - only manage to reach and bother Lewis. Nor do we quite understand how come NOBODY wants to believe Lewis despite the fact she has bundles of evidence. The nonsense reaches Hitchockian levels, because the overrated chubster also tended to use ridiculous plot-devices that ensured that nobody ever believed the protagonist.Furthermore, they couldn't resist make the conspiracy even sillier. The epilogue heavily hints that William Hurt was in cahoots with the old geezer, which throws the already inane and far-fetched plot squarely into totally absurd territory. Once Lewis's boyfriend is somehow involved, one can safely say that literally nothing ties up logically.It gets dumber. The "Saw" guy acts extremely suspiciously. In fact, what Lewis saw through the window in his apartment should have pegged him as a serial-killer, at the very least, and yet he turns out to be a helper in need. In fact, everyone is made to behave suspiciously or oddly, including Shelley Duvall and even Lewis's female colleague. Needless to say, the viewer is lied to and manipulated in the worst shoddy-plot-device way, and then "rewarded" for his time spent watching this dross by giving us the most laughable killer in years.You anyway won't be able to find this movie easily, because it's made-for-TV drivel.

Arlis Fuson Juliette Lewis takes over the lease on her dead aunts apt. only to find her neighbor below is a pain in the butt. The whole apt building is full of weird attendants and even her neighbors in the surrounding buildings freak her out as she watches them through her window. She suffers a lot before finding out the truth and getting to the bottom of things about the mysterious things that are going on around her.This movie is a thriller, but its not really that thrilling. It has a lot of dragging moments and you are sitting there wanting it to get the point already. It has some twists but has a lot of stuff you will be able to predict as well.The acting is good, Shelly DuVall and Juliette Lewis are amazing and William Hurt usually goes unnoticed and here is no exception, hes one of those bad actors that anyone could play his parts. Tobin Bell is great here too, a creepy old guy in a role years before Saw would make him famous.Nothing on the production side of this stood out, it was just basic. I would recommend it to anyone that likes these types of movies about creepy nosey neighbors and being alone and not feeling safe in your own house.Its not a horror movie as its often promoted as being, its just a straight up thriller/suspense/ drama.. you might like it if you like those types of things.

Mattias Petersson There are many problems with a movie like this one. First of all, you've seen it all before. A lone woman (or just lone person) moving into a flat in a building filled with psychos is a popular theme. Second of all, the story might work up until the end. Then it usually falls apart more or less completely, the way it does here.Juliette Lewis and William Hurt are both decent actors and they do a decent job here. The supporting actors have bigger problems with Shelley Duvall and Austin Pendleton both coming off as completely unbelievable characters, playing neighbors in the strange house.What i think worked well in this movie is first off the house itself. It's got a nice Gothic New York-feel to it, with seedy run-down interiors and huge staircases. Also like i said above Hurt and Lewis do their parts OK, although i feel Hurt almost always has something a bit unnatural about him. I don't know what it is, but his delivery is slow and contemplated, almost theater-like. It's not always fitting.The negative aspects are mostly the supporting actors, which have a hard time with the script giving them characters that are just too much to believe. The one that stands out especially though is Sabrina Grdevich as Lewis work colleague. She seems to be in a porno-movie or something of the kind, flirting with the camera no matter what she's saying. Also the script has other problems, mostly with plausibility. That is not unexpected though as these kinds of movies usually need a villain capable of extremely intricate measures for a very small potential gain.In the genre, this is not a disaster. I can't say i recommend it though. 5/10.

dead_doll00 This movie is a far cry from perfect. But then, few movies are nowadays and one has to learn not to be picky. If you're looking for some entertainment on a boring Saturday night, then this is a good way to go.Despite the whining of her weatherman boyfriend, Jane becomes the newest tenant of a rather creepy looking apartment building, having inherited the place from a dead aunt. Over time, Jane comes to meet the various people that make up the rest of the tenants. They include a snoopy, loopy old lady, a slightly unhinged superintendent, a mysterious but kind old man, a blind and deaf old couple, and a rather mean-spirited old woman. Not to mention the man across the way from her may be a murderer, but, hey, can't win 'em all, right? Amidst all this, Jane finds herself being attacked by the woman living one floor below, obsessing over the "oral disturbances" that Jane just can't seem to cut out.So yeah, rather a predictable, old plot, but still unique in a strange way. I own the movie and have watched it a few times already. Perhaps its the atmosphere and quirky, in some cases almost stereotyped characters that keep me coming back. Perhaps its the smooth, creepy music or use of scenery. Then again, it's probably Tobin Bell in his role as the Locksmith. Yeah, that could be it too...