tankfreak

May be the unpopular opinion, but while I think the Wheatleys are great characters portrayed by excellent actors, I've felt like the story was just dragging on this season and am happy their arc has come to an end (again, maybe). Personally I think they should have given us a full season of buffer before bringing Richard back to enact his revenge. And I know they'll probably bring him back again, but hopefully much later on in the series. Meanwhile, I'm excited to see where the series goes from here.

Let me preface with I love low budget B and even Z movies and I knew going in this would be super low budget and that the acting would probably be bad, but wow...it may actually be THE most boring and absolutely pointless post-apocalyptic dystopian wasteland movie I've ever seen. The only saving grace is that it's short for a feature, but not short enough. It actually probably would have been decent as a short film or maybe part of an anthology with a 20-30min runtime, but even at a mere 71mins I was struggling and kept checking how much time was left.

The whole premise is that the family is running very low on food and with the father missing after going on a supply run, the mother starts plotting I guess what she thinks will be a Christmas mercy killing. Mind you, they still have food, they're very close to running out, but they're not exactly rationing as much as they could be, they aren't starving or sick and both she and her son look healthy (and remarkably clean!). And they probably could actually find some more food if they ventured out more than once. The whole scenario is pretty stupid, at least the way it's depicted here. I could understand if they were literally starving or had radiation sickness or injuries or didn't have a safe place to stay, but none of that applies. So we finally get down to the last 10mins of the movie just to have random gas-mask wearing murder Santa show up and throw in a shock/wtf ending that definitely doesn't make the other 65mins of the movie worth watching. Definitely the most skippable Christmas/Holiday horror flick I've seen in decades.

Despite a few good actors in the cast this movie is just terrible. I generally like B (and Z) movies because most of them are at least fun or have some redeeming quality. I wouldn't say this movie has either but one positive is that the creature looks surprisingly good, or it's head anyway. It's essentially just a silicone mask with some mechanized facial expressions, but for the budget it's not bad. And it's kind of amusing that it uses a spine as a weapon. Unfortunately you don't see enough of the makeup because the creature is wearing some cheap black hooded cloak that looks like a generic Halloween costume. Everything else is basically garbage though and I wouldn't say it's worth watching just to see brief glimpses of a cool alien mask/makeup. Even then you don't see enough of the makeup because the creature is wearing some cheap black hooded cloak that looks like a generic Halloween costume. As for the rest, the CG looks like Sega CD games from the 90s, the acting is beyond terrible, even from Devon Sawa and especially from Kevin Alejandro, the dialogue basically just fills space to pass the time, there really wasn't much of a plot, and it was horror trope soup. I'm giving it a 2 for the alien makeup and for somehow luring Devon Sawa into the cast.

I was honestly caught off guard by how much I liked this one. No, it's not a big budget film or even a B exploitation gorefest, but considering how many Halloween haunt/cornmaze/hayride movies are out there I thought Fear PHarm did a great job of setting itself apart. First off, it's got some pretty witty humor and a clever motive beyond the usual "we're crazy and like to kill people", but mostly it's the family slasher dynamic that hasn't really been seen since the early Texas Chainsaw Massacre movies. It's a fun watch, especially during the fall.

I wish I could say that Curse's production values and overall acting were better than its predecessor, The Legend of Halloween Jack, but I'd be lying. It's not very good, it's got a lot of bland dialogue which just creates more pacing issues on an 83min movie that somehow manages to drag.

That said, it's basically a low budget love letter to horror franchises. There's plenty of references to numerous John Carpenter movies, as well as other big horror movies, like the plot arc directly ripped from Jason Goes To Hell: The Final Friday or the badly recreated scene from A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master. So if you're a huge genre fan and catch the references, it can be a fun watch.

I have to agree with everyone else here about the score. If you have sensitive ears it's unbearable so unless you're planning to watch it on mute, then it doesn't matter if the movie is "good" or "bad".

Caitlin Stasey absolutely nails her role as the obsessed and disturbed Sadie, a woman suffering undiagnosed schizophrenia who will stop at nothing to get the sole attention of her older sister.

Initially Sadie comes off as just the wayward quirky young at heart sister returning home to her older sister Chloe and Chloe's teenage daughter Nichole after a year of no contact and presumably very little in the previous years. We learn Sadie and Chloe were very close growing up, with Sadie seeing Chloe as dual big sister but also as a substitute mother figure, at least until Chloe got pregnant at a young age and then devoted all her attention to her daughter, Nicole. Nicole herself looked up to Sadie and saw her as a combination cool aunt/older sister. Initially Sadie seems to want to fill that role for Nicole and become the cool confidant, however, it becomes increasingly clear that what Sadie really wants is for things to go back to the way they were before Nicole came into the picture. Through a series of manipulations and eventual violence, she will do whatever she can to get Chloe all to herself. Or at least, that's what part of Chloe wants.

Now, I'm seeing several reviews here saying the movie is completely unbelievable because nobody ever knew that Sadie was mentally ill previously. Granted, there are flashbacks that show she was, at the very least, jealous, if not "troubled" at a younger age, perhaps her early teens, however, it's actually fairly common that schizophrenics not be diagnosed until later in life. Adult onset schizophrenia in women usually occurs between mid to late 20s (and in men, between late teens to early 20s) and Sadie celebrates her 26th birthday during the film, so that's exactly the right age. Also, again, she's been out of her sister and niece's lives for at least a year and her more obvious symptoms could have started in that time and may have even been the factor that lead her to return to her childhood home.

When Sadie initially re-enters their lives it doesn't take long for the audience to see that some of her mannerisms are odd, and later flat out manipulative and violent, but that's because we're seeing everything she does. As for the other characters, there really aren't many hints because she's laying seeds and trusting none of them will talk to each other about things. 3 of the characters being manipulated are teens and you can't tell me high schoolers don't fall for gossip. That puts it all on Chloe to notice, except that Chloe hasn't spoken to Sadie in at least a year and she already has her attention divided between her troublemaker daughter, who has just been suspended from school, and the secret relationship she's been having with a man who happens to be the father of Nicole's best friend. And she apparently works full time at some high paying job to afford that Mercedes. So when would Chloe have noticed? She and Nicole's relationship is strained so they wouldn't have talked about Sadie, and Sadie takes advantage of that. There's maybe one or two scenes where Chloe starts to notice that Sadie's behavior is odd, but she said herself that Sadie has always been immature, she she likely didn't think much of it. And Sadie covers herself well. In fact, I'd say that's the one downside to the overall plot. It's not entirely clear whether Sadie is schizophrenic or if she's suffering dissociative identity disorder, but her dominant side (for lack of a better term) does seem to recover almost immediately whenever she does seem to regress into her childlike mindset. Plotwise, that's likely why no one has caught on to her mental issues, but it does seem a little convenient.

Anyway, this is way longer than I meant it to be but I will agree with everyone that the end needed some work. As has been mentioned, they gave this great tease for a less conventional ending, but then gave it a wham-bam Lifetime ending after all. And I'd actually be cool with that ending too, but it needed a little more build in the last 10mins to get us from what we think is the ending to the actual ending.

So overall, I'll give it a 6. Not Lucky McKee's best, but far from bad and had some gore elements I wasn't expecting from a Lifetime movie. Caitlin Stasey was brilliant though and absolutely this is worth watching for her performance. Sasha Frolova, Thora Birch, and Macon Blair were also very good in their roles, but Stasey really leads this one.

Honestly, I don't understand the 1s (or the 10s), but it certainly wasn't as bad as the average reviews here insinuate. At the same time, it's far from a 10, and definitely a one and done kind of flick.

It's absolutely more thriller than sci-fi and relies heavily on the "mystery" of what's going on, which means nobody can just talk straight about anything. As a result, Fonseca is just frog-hopping from pad to pad, clue by clue, until she gets to one big reveal, which at least solves enough mystery to know who she can/can't trust and where to go next which ultimately leads her to the final reveal, which of course is not entirely what she had predicted. The problem with that method of storytelling is the supporting characters start to get frustrating fast. You'd think at least "government agent guy" would be a little more straightforward and less lackey villain in a suit, but unfortunately he comes across as the latter for a good 90% of the film. Also as others have pointed out in their reviews, the token ally character is both written as rather bland and definitely portrayed that way. However, the overall mystery is decent and does wrap up in the end, although yes, it does leave you with questions assuming you were engaged in the first place. Overall, not bad, just doesn't really add anything new in terms of story mechanics/plot formula for the genre(s). Lyndsy Fonseca was great in the lead though, it's just a shame she has to carry most of the other cast too. And Linda Hamilton's role is tragically short and almost pointless except to put her name in the credits.

Nurses has a lot of the same creative team as Rookie Blue (also known as Copper) and Saving Hope, and much like those series, Nurses is a character driven series that happens to have a high stress "series worthy" profession as the backdrop/setting. Now admittedly, I have no idea what hospitals in Canada are like, but I definitely understand why US viewers are screaming about how unrealistic this is in terms of the job setting, especially when medical dramas are a dime a dozen and obviously there are plenty to choose from. If you're expecting Grey's Anatomy or Chicago Med but with nurses as the focal point, you won't find that here. However, if you want more of a, I hate to use 'soap opera', but a character drama about 5 newbie nurses, plus those they work with directly, that's mostly focused on their individual problems/struggles while both on/off the clock in what is apparently a very small more intimate hospital, then you might like this one.

I will say it took me about 3 or 4 episodes before I started to get invested in any of the main cast, and yes, I still have a hard time with the amount of on the clock free time all these people seem to have, but overall it's not quite as bad as all the 1 reviews lead me to believe. I am a bit disappointed that the one lesbian relationship seems to have zero chemistry so far and comes off more like a need to check a diversity box than because the writers had any good story ideas for those characters, which is a bummer since that's what piqued my interest in this show initially. Hopefully they do more as the series goes on, but as of the start of season 1 episode 6, those are the least developed characters.

I'm just going to preface this with, I generally like B movies. I think they're fun and entertaining and I rarely give scores under 4 or 5 as long as there was some effort and/or creativity and the movie is entertaining in some way. This one is just bad though. Honestly, I'm only giving it a 2 for the cast and I will spend the rest of the day wondering how this movie even got half these actors. But otherwise there's just nothing redeemable here, no reason to watch. The story isn't compelling or even vaguely original, the killer is obvious from the second they're introduced, none of the performances or dialogue stands out, cinematography and editing are film student 101 grade, even the score is bad. If it weren't for "Facespace" and a character having a Blackberry, I'd have been convinced the movie was made in 1998 rather than 2008, and actually the movie as a whole reminds me of late night junky Showtime/Cinemax movies of the 80s. Seriously, save yourself the 98mins of absolute boredom.

This was surprisingly good and definitely maintains tension throughout, both through the acting and situation as well as cinematography and editing.

Without giving away any specifics or being blatantly spoilery, what I really enjoyed is that the protagonist, Jessica, does mostly everything that any woman with common sense and a general concept of stranger danger would do. Her responses and reactions are 100% natural and believable rather than just being a walking horror movie trope that misses or ignores every hint of danger just for the sake of plot convenience. Very rarely did I find myself frustrated or rolling my eyes at her actions. Sure, she still finds herself in danger, but that's how actual life is. You can be suspicious and guarded around someone that's making you uncomfortable, avoid the more obvious potential traps, but still end up in danger anyway. As for the serial killer antagonist (who is simply credited as The Man) he's also quite believable in a non-horror trope way. Just a generic middle aged white guy, almost desperately plain looking, that you probably wouldn't even notice if you walked past him. He's very much "the serial killer next door" type.

Now, I will say if you're expecting a ton of action and violence, you're not going to get it out of this movie. I don't even think imdb has this one listed as horror anymore since it's actual release, although I do personally think it qualifies as survival horror. Mostly it's a cat and mouse suspense thriller that delivers believable characters in a realistic and frightening situation. Very well done for what I assume was a modest budget.

The brief synopsis is 2 couples consisting of 2 brothers and their significant others, all in their 30's, decide to spend a weekend together at an Air B&B type rental house. Once there, they immediately have friction with the landlord, but decide to brush it off and go on with their weekend plans of fun, recreational drug use, and other debauchery, at least until they get the distinct feeling they're being watched.

I'd definitely say it's not as bad as the average imdb review lead me to believe, but I'm also glad I rented it instead of doing a blind buy, which I had considered based on the cast. Some of the gripes don't make sense to me honestly. Multiple people have said the movie would have been better if the characters were all teens instead of adults because it would explain their drug use and poor decisions throughout...uhhhm...because adults can't do either of those things?? Clearly no one in their 30s does drugs, has anger and/or honesty issues, cheats, is at all immature, or fears calling police due to their illegalities and other poor decisions. Nope, only teens do that according to some of these reviews.

**Vague Spoilers Ahead** The other consistent gripe is apparently the lack of clear motive for the killer. This movie is another from what's starting to get dubbed the "hobby killer" subgenre. Basically a killer (or killers) who stalks/kills/taunts as a hobby or sport, without having any specific motive towards the individual victims/protagonists. Soooo, like actual serial killers. I honestly don't know why viewers have such a big problem with this subgenre (think movies like The Strangers and ATM). Granted, sometimes it doesn't work and the lack of any specific motive can make a movie feel absolutely pointless in the end (The Open House (2018), for example) especially if the progression of the film leads the viewer to expect a clear motive or at least the killer's identity in the end. However, I think if the movie is done well otherwise and is suspenseful/tense, then the antagonist's desire to frighten, terrorize, and/or kill, if for no other reason than just for their sick pleasure and the sake of getting away with it is enough motive on its own.

That's not to say this movie didn't have other issues though. What didn't really work for The Rental is some of the typical clichéd and tropey character actions, especially once they started piling up. I'm less concerned about the killer's overall motive than wondering why the protagonists are making their questionable decisions, and then doubling down on them, which other than just being typical horror movie character bad decision behavior, doesn't really make sense here. Unfortunately the script doesn't give enough character background or development to make their individual actions seem logical after a certain point, much less relatable. I suppose that's why some of the other reviewers thought this would be better suited as a teen driven horror movie.

Moving on, it's got some pacing issues throughout, the dialogue is bland more often than not, and it really lacks enough character development throughout to get you attached to most of the characters, much less to understand the choices they make once things start getting weird. On the upside, the cast is solid and the acting is good (particularly Sheila Vand and Dan Stevens), the production values are good all the way down the usual checklist (there's none of that it's so dark you can't see what's happening nonsense), and the dog survives. Overall it makes for a decent suspense thriller that turns a bit more slasher-esque in the 3rd act. I'd say if you're bored and you want a horror thriller you haven't seen yet, it's definitely watchable, but I wouldn't recommend going in with high expectations of something new for the genre. If Dave Franco does manage to pull a sequel out of this, hopefully he'll trim some of the tropes and work on better character development so the audience at least cares about the fates of the humans and not just the dog.

I stopped watching Arrow midway through the 4th season when it originally aired. The series started off strong enough, despite making Oliver Queen's personality more like Bruce Wayne's than his own, but it started to sink in season 3 and the first half of season 4 just proved repeatedly that the CW didn't care about the source material at all and was catering to fangirls and relationship drama instead. So when I heard the early spoilers of who on Team Arrow was getting killed off, I knew it was as good a time as any to dump the show.

Now, 4yrs later, after the show has (finally) ended, I've decided to watch it all from the beginning all the way through with the lowest possible expectations. I've made it up to the episode I've been avoiding for 4yrs that was the final straw for me and this series and to be blunt, I'm still just as angry about it as I was when the spoilers originally leaked, even knowing what comes later.

(4 y/o spoilers...) Not only does it fill me with anger and extreme disappointment that the CW killed off THE Black Canary, one of the most beloved and badass women in DC comics, for no reason than to cater to fangirls who wanted Oliver/Felicity to be a thing, but Laurel has had NO character development this whole season! What a complete waste! And because of that there's no real emotional impact to her death except from livid comic fans screaming "wtf did you just do?!" Laurel/Black Canary absolutely deserved better.

Obviously the CW later realized just how much they had angered fans and used a loophole to try to rectify this injustice to Black Canary fans, but the damage was done. I would say I'm surprised the show held on for another 4 years, but the CW loves beating a dead horse. If Amell hadn't wanted out, it would probably still be dragging on.

I haven't finished the second season yet, but honestly my only motivation to do so is that the seasons are short and I've come this far. I was intrigued by the idea of a Jeremiah meets Under The Dome with a side of Lord of the Flies scenario, but honestly, I can't get past the "acting", which is flat at best, and the fairly bland dialogue isn't helping either. Not to mention, in a season and a half, I've yet to find one character that's remotely redeeming or even that interesting. They're all cliché stereotypes, but I'd hoped they grow as the show went on...but not so much.

In the first season, all the male characters just run around threatening each other, beating each other up, threatening to or actively trying to kill each other, etc. Whether their overall motivation is selfish or altruistic or just trying to maintain their version of order, each one ultimately behaves exactly the same making it extremely difficult to like any of them. By the second season there's more character development, but it almost feels too little too late. I suppose the characters all being under the age of 21 explains the Degrassi: Apocalypse vibe, with a great deal of petty drama, but I guess I was hoping for more than that.

Again, the overall premise and story isn't bad at all, but it almost feels like a wasted concept and like the writer(s) are good at the big picture story, but terrible at characters and dialogue. I imagine a very worn "Writing An Apocalypse Series For Dummies" book in the writers room.

For the record, I'm not a film or series snob. I don't expect everything I watch to win awards. In fact, I watch a lot of B movies and I'm used to bad acting and bad dialogue, but I find both are more easily ignored in a 2hr movie than in a 12+ hr ongoing series. That's not to say the entire cast is dreadful, but unfortunately, there's very few in the main cast who can really deliver the emotional range required to carry this type of series.

I've seen a couple reviews here that call this a 28 Days Later ripoff, but honestly it's more of a UK ripoff of Resident Evil. It opens with a major corporation creating an enhancement drug that has the unfortunate side effect of turning people into zombies. So, while it's definitely not winning any points for originality, it still makes for an entertaining zombie action romp.

It has a really good and competent cast that includes Jaime Murray, Danny Dyer, MyAnna Burying, Colin Salmon (who was also in Resident Evil), and even a small bit for Sean Pertwee, the effects are good, production values are all fine, the dark scenes aren't so dark that you can't see what's happening, and it's got a decent amount of gore without going overboard. If you're looking for the a post-apocalyptic zombie drama, this probably isn't for you, and I'd instead suggest films like 28 Days Later, Open Grave, The Girl With All The Gifts, Here Alone, and anything from the Romero oeuvre, but if you want more of an action style survival horror zombie flick without getting wrapped into a big franchise, give this one a shot.

Despite the first act being trope after trope for the setup, I really enjoy this one. Personally I think going to a mall on Christmas Eve is horror enough on its own, but this is one of those situations that could happen to anyone. And make no mistake, guys like the antagonists in this movie, bored punks trying to prove how hard they can be or just getting off on harassing women, are literally everywhere, so the situation is highly believable and frankly, terrifying. But what I really like about this one, without blatant spoilers/details, is Della's (Basinger) character growth throughout. She goes from terrified victim of spousal abuse, just trying to put on a brave face for her children and fake it in front of friends, to this horrible situation where she is once again put into the role of victim, now fighting for her life and to get back to her children. As the film goes on we see her go from victim on the run to being forced to defend herself, unwilling to be a victim any longer. It cathartic. As for the details of the events throughout, yes, it sometimes feels a bit over the top and full of tropes and clichés, but guess what, it's a horror thriller, not a documentary.

This one was supposed to be released in 2016 initially as Naughty List and later as Lady Krampus, but when it finally got distribution, it was released under the title Mother Krampus 2: Slay Ride. It is NOT actually a sequel to Mother Krampus, it is a stand alone movie. And like Mother Krampus, has nothing to do with Krampus. It is queer and fabulous though.

**Brief Synopsis: The movie opens with a few people being hacked up by some axe wielding nutter in a mask on Christmas Eve. The next morning we jump to four girls, well, three girls and a drag queen (or maybe a trans woman?...I'm going with drag queen) who are on probation and have to finish up their community service on Christmas. First they have to help out in a kitchen for the homeless and then deliver meals to the elderly who can't get out on their own. When they come to their last stop (at the house where everyone was murdered the night before) the woman there doesn't seem to know anything about their delivery, but reluctantly invites them in anyway. Of course they soon realize that the woman isn't exactly who she appears to be as she begins getting more frustrated with her naughty visitors.**

As I said, this was originally titled The Naughty List (a much more fitting title), but it's since been retitled and distributed as a sequel to Mother Krampus. Otherwise, they're not connected, although like Mother Krampus it does vaguely use some actual holiday folklore. And I do mean vaguely...very very vaguely. Our Christmas psycho is sort of based on Grýla, an Icelandic giant who punishes bad children during the holidays and then makes a stew out of the naughty kids. But again it's a super vague reference, never actually mentioned in the movie. There's a stew and she gets grumpy about naughty behavior, that's about it.

It's a straight up B slasher horror flick, overflowing with all the usual tropes and ultimately plays out like most punish the naughty Christmas slasher movies. That said, B doesn't automatically mean bad. It gets points for gory deaths, however, I do wish they were more festive. But it has surprisingly good practical effects for the obviously low budget, which I was told was under $2k. Honestly I'm very impressed the filmmakers turned out such a good flick for such a low budget. As with most B movies, the acting could be better, but it could also definitely be worse (and usually is with B holiday horror movies). But I also appreciate that it's one of the few holiday horror movies with an LGBTQ+ character. Co-writer/actor Roger Conners was fabulous as Lady Athena. Overall I think it's a really fun flick and if you like B horror movies, you should give it a shot.

I don't usually write reviews unless I feel very strongly about the movie or I feel the other reviews are mostly nonsense from people who either didn't actually watch, pay attention, or understand the movie. Consider this the latter.

Discarnate was not at all difficult to follow or confusing in any way. If you actually pay attention, as another reviewer pointed out, the characters explain everything that they've set out to do as well as everything happening. Personally I thought the creature was very cool and creepy, however minimalist the overall look was, it was still effective.

The production values were fine. Obviously they didn't have a huge Hollywood budget, but it's far from B/low budget, mostly what you'd expect from an independent film. The cast, many of which are familiar faces to the horror genre, including Bex Taylor-Klaus, Josh Stewart, Thomas Kretschmann, and Chris Coy, all did a fine job with their roles. So while, yes, like 95% of horror films in existence, there were some clichés, tropes, and a stretch in believability from time to time, overall Discarnate was a pretty decent horror flick.

My advice, as with every movie, ignore all the reviews (including mine), watch for yourself, and form your own opinion.

I get that a lot of remakes/reboots want to change things up from the original so they can try to add in some new twists and surprises rather than making a carbon copy of the source material. One of the few exceptions, ironically, was the 1998 remake of Psycho, so I understand and have been 100% behind the series changing things up here and there to tell a slightly different story than what we've been given by the franchise so far. But while there were new characters added in and a lot of sidetracking for the sake of making an ongoing drama series, the series always felt like it was still heading in a direction that would ultimately lead up to the events in the movie. I had really hoped that the one thing they wouldn't change would be the Marion Crane storyline. If the whole series lead us up to Marion's arrival at the motel, that would have made a great series finale. Instead they decided to stick it in mid season to give the series its own ending. This I could also live with. But really there was absolutely no reason to change Marion's arc at all other than some writer deciding to mix things up a bit, which was frankly unnecessary. It's iconic and there was absolutely no reason to change the outcome. Honestly it severely detracts from an otherwise brilliant and compelling series.

I honestly don't get the bad reviews here. We have other super powered persons gone bad movies/series (Chronicle, Split, Glass, The Boys, etc), usually in the sci-fi, action, or drama genres, that delve into "why" the person turned villainous. Brightburn, however, gives us a straight up horror movie that's basically what if 12 year old Superman had the mental stability of The Good Son (or Mikey or The Children of the Corn or *insert sociopathic child movie here*)? And they don't pull any punches with the gore either.

And what I really appreciate about the script is that the character, Brandon, does come from a loving home and while he does experience some peer bullying, it's not excessive or violent. He really has no reason to lash out other than simply discovering his powers and deciding that he is superior. There is no trigger, there is no "bad day", there is no explanation of "evil". Much like Damien in the Omen films, Brandon just accepts that he is different, having abilities that others don't have. Unfortunately for everyone else, he uses those abilities for himself, not for truth, justice, and, well, you get the idea.

Not going to lie, I was disappointed in this. Not because it was bad necessarily, but like others I was expecting more of a budget and more traditional horror elements. That doesn't mean it was terrible, just that it didn't meet my initial expectations. Unfortunately I think a lot of people are going to end up hating this movie due to its budget restraints and 90s made for TV feel. Seems like with this generation low budget is fine for slasher boob and gore flicks, but not for movies that you actually have to pay attention to details to fully grasp the plot. This movie is more of an existential supernatural crossing of realities kind of story that just isn't going to hold viewers attention if they're going to get hung up on subpar effects and acting. That's not to say the acting is bad, but there are a few good performances (namely Amber Benson, Mieko Hillman, and Mat Devine) and a few that are really not. Admittedly the nots can be distracting while they're on screen though. And some of the writing and dialogue could definitely be better. It feels almost soap opera-ish at times.

But I think if you go in knowing the overall production value is going to be more like an episode of some 80s or 90s horror anthology series (think Amazing Stories, Ray Bradbury Theater, Twilight Zone, or Tales From The Darkside) then you'll be better off and more open minded about it. But don't go in expecting theater quality or even Netflix or cable budget. And don't expect anything fast paced either. It's definitely a slow burn psychological mystery thriller, but it does still qualify for the horror genre, just not the hack and slash, torture porn, or even jump scare supernatural that gets the most attention in the genre these days.

Sadly, (but not surprisingly) it would appear that most people reviewing this movie do not actually understand it, or didn't watch the whole thing.

As others have stated, there's a lot more to it than the standard exploitation revenge flick. But getting the basics out of the way first, it's well acted, the cinematography is nice, the music actually fits the tone of the film, and it manages to set itself apart from other films in the revenge horror genre. Unfortunately people really seem to be missing the latter, so, spoilers ahead...

Lu is simply a representation of some deep and, until now, hidden part of Shae's personality. The way a shy person may need to dig deep within in order to speak up about something or to someone. Not a split personality necessarily, although I can see why people may get that impression, but think of Lu more like the devil and angel on your shoulder. Lu is the strong confident outgoing independent take no s**t girl that Shae sometimes wishes she could be. So not surprisingly, it's when Shae has a string of bad events occur that Lu pops up.

Believing her older boyfriend to be separated from his wife, Shae is told he wants to patch things up with his wife on top of that, then reveals a daughter that he previously kept from Shae. The following day she actually sees him out with his family which hits her even harder. That night at work is when we the audience first meet Lu.

Depressed, Shae decides to step out of her comfort zone and go out clubbing (with Lu), presumably behaving in a manner that is not the norm for her as she tests the waters of being this new more confident and outgoing version of herself. Unfortunately, and through no fault of her own (or Lu's), the night ends up taking an even more tragic turn. Add to that another bad experience with the ex, and Lu reemerges when Shae needs the strength to go to the police station (which I *think* is the last actual real world event up until the end when we pick up on Shae in the bath).

From then on Shae relies on Lu, her inner bad girl, to get her through her current trauma by playing out a revenge fantasy. Fantasy being the operative word. The "duo's" actions throughout the movie are Shae, in a traumatized and depressed state, imagining what she'd like to do to the men who have hurt her. She does take joy in some of the events, while others she feels less comfortable with so Lu takes the lead. Scenes where the two are in opposition of each other are Shae wrestling with her emotions; the timid version of herself wishing she was stronger, but at the same time not wanting to lose herself completely or cutting herself off emotionally. Shae doesn't believe "all men" are the enemy, but the angry, bitter, and traumatized version of her, Lu, clearly does and that scares Shae just as much. The whole point of the movie is that Shae is wrestling with these emotions, imagining both the revenge fantasies that she enjoys, but also the dark and out of control road that could lead her down where she begins to distrust all men and harm the innocent people around her. Ultimately she must find a balance between the old version of herself and the stronger woman she sometimes wants to be in order to deal with her trauma and begin picking up the pieces.

Now, where the translation of all of this may be hazy is that even if the viewer does understand that Lu isn't real, it still may come across as a split personality scenario similar to Fight Club, leaving the viewer to believe that everything did actually happen. However, the film clearly shows the viewer all of the clean "crime scenes" at the end, proving that none of the revenge scenes actually took place. Likely these are all fantasies Shae had while at the police station or once she got home. I suppose that the director could have gone the extra step and given a clean cut between reality and fantasy, but until I started reading through previous reviews here I didn't really think it was necessary.

Seems like most of these "reviews" are people reviewing the other reviews rather than the movie itself, so I'll take a minute to throw in my 2¢.

(vague spoilers, but nothing that isn't revealed in the trailer)

I definitely wouldn't say it's the most original plot out there and at a glance it comes off as sort of Strangers On A Train meets Wild Things with a sprinkle of Single White Female. That said, it's actually a solid thriller with a solid cast, and has enough twists to make it worthwhile and keep the audience guessing.

The only place I think the movie fails is rushing into the murder plot before really giving the relationship and bonding between Amanda and Hayley enough time to develop. And I don't necessarily mean more physical intimacy between the two, just more time spent getting to know each other and building trust in general to maybe help with why Amanda would go along with Hayley's initial plan rather than just calling the police. Or perhaps we needed a little more on the police ignoring Amanda previously and her reluctance to trust them. Either way, something was missing in the first act. Otherwise I thought the pacing was fine, the movie does a good job of building tension, and the leads did an excellent job making their character's emotional state (trauma, fear, distrust, etc) believable. Overall it was a good thriller and definitely worth a watch if you enjoy the genre.

I'd been waiting all season to learn more about El/Eleven/Jane and when she finally gets a spotlight episode it ends up being like a bad Dark Angel rip off...so not even the usual 80's homage that the show is so well known for.

I love this series, but some of the dark/night shots are so dark you can't see what's happening at all. During key scenes it might as well be an audio book. Cinematographers need to find a balance between their shots being dark and moody in an artistic way for a purpose, but with enough light that viewers can at least make out what's happening on screen vs the shots being so dark the scenes are completely unwatchable.