VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

ActuallyGlimmer The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

jswindter01 My vote is that of one, single, lowly *star*.I am one who absolutely loves b-grade horror flicks to such a degree that even in some of the more crappy, lowest b-grade flicks I can still actually find entertainment value... but here, in this piece of "film" I can find zero, nil, nada, narry a single redeeming quality!!How is it that utter waste, such as this, somehow is able to make its way into production, post- production, and even distribution? Yet, true talent with original concepts/content, or at least a fresh spin, on horror plot points/characters.. they get back burnered, pushed aside, and many times even permanently shelved never to see the light of day???!!!! How is that when we have such all out, pathetic garbage thats not even worth a single dime, nor worth ANYONE'S TIME spent on a single viewing of this MESS!!!Unbelievable, it is, and it is exactly this type pure crap that gives the modern horror genre the stinking bad taste thats left in the viewers proverbial mouths from having witnessed such pathetic material.WoW! Bill Zebub your "original" name is a perfect indicator of what your capabilities are in the movie making business... $hit, IMO!1 pathetic star out of 10(and IMO, it doesn't even deserve 1 *star*)

Henry Tjernlund Could easily have been better. In fact maybe so much so that if the filmmaker hadn't tried even as hard as he did, it might have actually been better.On a good note. The lighting was reasonably okay. But pretty much everything else was lacking. Wobbly camera work. (Yeah, yeah, I know, that's supposed to be the style now.) Poorly recorded audio. And editing that looked like someone watched too many Ulli Lommel movies (which are some of the worst edited movies.) To sum it up, the movie seemed to be a rationalization for the director/writer/main-character to get some young women naked, put them in fake bondage, and grope them, while saying "menacing" things.

hocfocprod While I was watching this movie I never thought I'd be defending it. It's honest enough from the begininning about not having much of a plot. There's no real characters to latch onto except the killer. Some of the acting can be better, but most of it is capable.I know, a three out of ten isn't stellar, but there are reviews saying it was shot poorly and completely useless, etc. I think it set out to do what it's supposed to fairly well. The lighting is minimal at times, more natural than most audiences are used to, but it's supposed top look like a camcorder snuff film. In fact, at times the quality is probably still too high to be true to that, but nobody would make it through tne minutes of camera work that's truly that bad.It's not particularly scary, but it is disturbing at times. There are one or two characters who don't come across as believable at all and the soundtrack does get tiring at times, but overall it was put together cleaner than a lot of camcorder movies.

raymio17 This movie was absolute trash. The director and stars(?)should be banished from making movies forever. The paper-thin plot concerns a sleazy director played by the sleazy director (now thats acting) advertising on the internet for women to star in a snuff movie. There's no horror at all, the girls look strung-out and bored, the direction is pointless, the music is misplaced (heavy metal in a library scene?), and the lighting is awful. The director should have cashed in a couple more shopping carts full of aluminum cans and gotten a script, sober actors, and a few light bulbs. As it is, this is one disgusting, nasty, worthless mess of a movie.