Final Exam (1981) User Reviews (134)

How to make a slasher movie without really trying.

[dave13-1 · 4/10 · 25 November 2020]

Nobody but Hitchcock fans watch thrillers for the art. Everyone else is looking for actual thrills. The slasher cycle began with Halloween, and John Carpenter provided the blueprint for the imitations that followed - suspense, jump scares, false frights that turn out to be nothing, doom-laden musical notes... The mechanics of the low-budget thriller are familiar and easily achieved.

Final Exam borrows a few tried and true items from Halloween's box of tools. The killer is shot from the waist down or partially screened by trees to appear remote and menacing. Bright light glints off a bloody blade on an otherwise dark night. But the little here fails to actually generate suspense. The viewer is merely reminded that suspense-building is a necessary element of the process. The problem is that the building blocks of a slasher film are too thinly spread and separated by long stretches of time spent among poorly drawn and uninteresting characters. This is a common fault in slasher movies but one which can be at least partially offset by lively pacing and occasional action. Unfortunately, the film's pace is leaden and what little action occurs is so poorly staged that it fails to excite a viewer perpetually starved for distraction.

This is Final Exam's fatal fault. Nobody renting a slasher movie is expecting character interest on the level of The Big Chill or the epic sweep of The Godfather. The viewer's expectations are already modest. But providing more stimulation than what is minimally required to keep the viewer awake should not represent undue hardship for a slasher movie's creator.

No thriller worth the name should be this boring. Cinematic entertainment needs to be entertaining. Writer-director Jimmy Huston clearly slept through the lesson in film school that emphasized keeping things moving along.

"Final Exam" is a weak entry into the slasher genre

[ersinkdotcom · 4/10 · 2 May 2014]

For every good slasher film in the 1980s, there were ten that should've never seen the light of day. Some of those misfires have gained cult status over the years for one reason or another. It's tough to truly judge a movie in a genre that celebrates bad acting, cheesy dialogue, and nonsensical plots. 1981's "Final Exam" is a perfect example of one such film that is beloved by many today for, in my opinion, no good reason at all.

A serial killer walks the streets of Lanier College as the students prepare for a week of final exams and frat hazing. With no apparent motive or target demographic, the murderer hunts down both jocks and nerds without prejudice. Can anyone stop the madman before he takes his next victim?

I can appreciate what Writer/Director Jimmy Huston was trying to do with "Final Exam." He was attempting to make a film in the vein of "Halloween" using Hitchcock's sensibilities and techniques. Huston did his best to establish characters the audience would connect to. Unfortunately, the fact that none of the performers playing them could act annihilated any hopes of that happening.

It would've also helped if the murderer had ANY sort of motive for his killing spree. It's just some guy following college kids around and butchering them. B-O-R-I-N-G! Slasher movies either have to have one thing or another going for it. It has to be suspenseful or graphic and gory when it comes to the violence. "Final Exam" doesn't excel in either of these areas. The suspense is smothered by a lack of motivation and the kill scenes are absent of any real substance or bloodshed.

"Final Exam" is rated R for violence, language, adult situations, and nudity. Of course, there's the obligatory boob shot all slasher films must have. There's so little on screen gore that the movie quite possibly could air right after an episode of "Goosebumps" on Teen Nick. If made today without the one scene of nudity, it might earn a PG-13 rating for its content.

As far as slasher movies are concerned, "Final Exam" is a weak entry into the genre. I'm sure many fans of the film will disagree with me and they have every right to. I can't consider it an essential piece of horror history based on its lack of motivation, suspense, and gore. Without those elements, it's just another bland B-movie with bad acting.

Please put a mask on this killer.

[loomis78-815-989034 · 4/10 · 23 February 2014]

An unknown maniac is prowling a college campus stalking students the day before final exams. All the familiar slasher film characters are here. Courtney (Bagdadi) is the virginal one who becomes the final victim. The jock (Brown), the nerd (Rice), the slut (Deanna Robbins) and the Druggie (Fallon) are all present. Director Jimmy Huston makes a curious decision to show the killer's face several times. Unfortunately he never gets around to telling us, who he is, why he is killing everyone and what his motivation is. I guess in the year of the slasher film 1981, you just needed someone with a large knife killing people to make one of these films. The death scenes range from boring to inventive and there is some suspense present in the end scenes. A decent score helps, but "Final Exam" needed more true scares, better plotting, and perhaps a masked killer to have stood out. This is for die-hard slasher fans only.

Terminally boring.

[capkronos · 1/10 · 9 July 2003]

Is this an exposé on how juvenile mentality, hazing insensitivity and substance abuse plague college campuses around the country? Actually, no it's not. It's just a tame slasher film about bunch of worthless, blabbermouth college kids sitting around and behaving brain dead for an hour before the director shows us some mercy by throwing in a psychotic killer. No one has the patience to endure this notoriously boring exercise of false alarms, college hijinks, endless talk that amounts to nothing and dull murders.

Score: 1 out of 10

Inept,Clueless and Bloodless

[goreboy80 · 1/10 · 21 September 2001]

Apparently the fools that made this film (film? HAH)had ZERO idea of what makes a slasher film work.NO blood NO nudity(well,very brief nudity)and above all NO PAYOFF!!I spent 90 freakin minutes guessing and second guessing who the killer could be and his/her possible motive(i was shooting for a lame two-killer scream type ending).And what did i get for my troubles? Absolutely Jack Sh!t.Zip ,ziltch,nada,nothin.Just who the hell was that dude and what wild hair got up his butt??Im guessing that the killer must've escaped from a different movie set.The set up was ripe for a vengeful parent and or sibling hacking away for revenge of the girl that fell to her death that was mentioned briefly(ala Prom night,To all a good night etc..).But nooo,there was no rhyme or reason given as to who the hell he was and what provoked his bloodless rampage.I would give this a zero but for the gay guy that tries to act straight.He had me laughing my ass off.Plus he had Toolbox Murders and The Corpse grinders posters on his wall,which was a small bonus.Overall a pathetic,inept,dull and uninspiring DUD.1/10

If you want blood, look somewhere else.

[tuvey · 1/10 · 15 November 1998]

This movie is not worth the film it is printed on. There is little suspense, and no plot. Who is the killer? Why is he killing? These questions are not answered. Even if you watched this movie knowing it was bad and thought it might be a little humorous to watch innocent college kids die, you would be disappointed. After the first few minutes when a cute couple are killed, no one gets axed for another hour or so. The entire movie is a set-up for why each character will be in the room he or she gets killed in. The movie is pointless, and lacks the gore that can save a cheesy horror flick.

Failed

[fertilecelluloid · 14 January 2004]

Certainly one of the most wretched slasher movies ever made.

Timothy Raynor as the killer could not be worse.

The real blame for this turkey must be attributed to Jimmy Huston.

There is no gore, no suspense and no intelligence.

And it is slower than paint drying.

I saw this in 81 at the theater.

[WolfgangR5150 · 1/10 · 5 October 2009]

OK I was born in 1969 and I saw this movie in the theater in 81. So I was what 11 maybe 12 depending on the release date. Being a huge fan of slasher movies at an early age I had already been to see Friday The 13th, Halloween and many others. The movie poster seem to suggest this had something to do with Halloween or that it was at least in that vein. Well this movie had nothing to offer, no suspense, no good slashing nothing. As stated by another person there was no back story of the killer, not that it needed much but something come on. I mean when two pre-teen kids walk out of this movie saying it sucked you know you failed on every level there is to fail on. I guess it has always been a part of the industry. Make a quick buck on the backs of people that have creativity. Hands down this is one of the worst slasher films to date. Even a bad movie can be saved by some good creative kills scenes and good effects. This movie had none of that.

Tame slasher

[Tikkin · 3/10 · 24 February 2006]

I expected Final Exam to be much better than it was...sadly it turned out to be very boring and not at all gory. People say it's a Halloween rip-off, well some parts of it are but not many. If you want a Halloween rip-off then watch Offerings, a much better slasher film than Final Exam. The only decent part in this film is when the killer stabs the woman and her blood splatters over her artwork. This is also the closest to gory that this film gets. There is no mystery surrounding the killer whatsoever...in fact towards the end they just start showing his face without even trying to create a sense of mystery. It seems Final Exam was made by the type of people who think that having your killer walk around aimlessly will create suspense.

I would not recommend this to slasher fans because it's just too dull. Completists will want to see it, but if you're looking for entertainment then don't bother.

An alright slasher

[pizowell · 7/10 · 25 August 2001]

Final Exam is your average 80's slasher. It has some cool college pranks and all that tomfoolery that takes place at college campuses around the world(except Union). But this movie drowns in its own character development. It takes WAY too much time with its characters and totally forgets its a slasher flick. And the slashings aren't very good. I want gore with my slash! 6/10.

Not quite watchable C-Movie

[boredatwork · 1/10 · 14 September 2006]

B-Movies are watchable...they might have part of the package, such as perhaps ONE person who can pretend to act in a remotely entertaining way. I am a fan of terrible films but this one was absolute, utter agony to sit through, my friend was asleep within 5 minutes and I sat wondering why I subject myself to sitting through such crap, my finger getting ready to hit the ffwd button. Nothing happens in this film for the first hour or so...you watch it, you wait, nothing really happens...drive-in filler/fodder, avoid...better off re-watching horribly boring films you've seen with a few memorable blips of greatness...like Unhinged.

A Character Driven Slasher Film?

[martinscrimm · 8/10 · 10 May 2019]

Final Exam gets a bad rep. It's not gory, it's not terribly scary, and it takes about an hour to get to the slashing, but it's obvious that it was tying to do something a little different. Judging by most people's reactions, they didn't succeed, but I beg to differ.

Not once was I bored and that's more than I can say for a lot of other movies. The characters and performances were amusing and watchable, which kept me going until the bodies began to hit the floor. The killer could stand to be a bit more imposing and I do think, in this case, he should have worn some kind of a mask, but that's a small quibble.

I admire Final Exam for trying something new. On the surface, it seems like your run of the mill slasher film (which it turns into in its last half hour), but there's a uniquely humanist angle here that I like.

A Personal Fav for Personal Reasons

[FinalExamFella · 7/10 · 7 June 2003]

I realize I am biased on this one, but I own a copy of this '80s hack-'em-up and watch it regularly. Is it a great movie, on par with the original Halloween or Nightmare on Elm Street? Hell no. But I love it. Why? I must confess, I love it for the simple fact that the movie was filmed on the campus of the college I attended and graduated from. Yep, Limestone College in Gaffney, South Carolina can boast the honor of being the setting of this film. All the exteriors and most of the interiors(except for a couple shot on a sound stage somewhere in NC and the gym scenes shot at Garner Web College nearby)were shot at my college. As a huge horror fan, it gives me an extra little thrill to watch that film and recognize all the buildings and rooms that I walked daily for four years. And I do think the movie has some good points. It does admirably attempt to develop the characters(even though most of them are so uninteresting I could care less, unfortunately), and I waffle between my feelings on the movie not revealing the killer's motives. Part of me agrees with Billy in Scream(it is scarier when there's no motive, so random), but another part of me longs for the closure of knowing why... In any case, I don't think it's as dreadful a film as others(such as Dorm that Dripped Blood), and the fact that my alma mater hosted the film thrills me. Unfortunately, the school doesn't really advertise the fact. lol I think it should have plaques that announce that this building is where the killer killed the school tramp, and this building housed the final showdown between the killer and the school virgin. I keep hoping they'll come back and film a sequel. Keep your fingers crossed...

The Unbearable Lightness of a HALLOWEEN copy

[Maciste_Brother · 3/10 · 13 August 2003]

FINAL EXAM could have been much worst. I've seen much worse than this. But what's really odd about this HALLOWEEN copy is the fact that the producers copied almost everything about the John Carpenter film except for one major detail: the killer or the killer's reason for killing. Ooopps! Something tells me that after watching the film, the producers couldn't figure out exactly what they left out from HALLOWEEN. It's quite obvious from a horror fan's Point-of-View though. FINAL EXAM has some good moments, and even though it takes forever to get going, when the killer strikes, the film sorta becomes suspenseful. The problem is, we never know anything about why the murderer is going on this rampage, at this specific time, etc. They hint at a back-story (a girl committed suicide after she was refused by a sorority and we can assume that whoever's doing the killings must be a relative) but that's just not enough.

The thing that makes the original HALLOWEEN so great (forget the sequels) is that it builds a mystery around Michael Myers without telling us too much about him (which is the problem of the sequels). In FINAL EXAM, we know NOTHING about the killer. He looks like a prop guy who stood in for the killer. Had the producers actually written a reason for the killer's motivations, I think this would have a been a passable flick. As it is right now, it's just pointless.

The only really original aspect about FINAL EXAM is Radish, who's so annoying that he actually becomes fun to watch. What a uber geek! Without Radish, FINAL EXAM would have been completely forgettable or as anonymous as those no-name products you find in a supermarket.

Leave your brain at the door...

[Greg_Duryea · 13 July 2002]

"Final Exam" is your typical cheesy 80's slasher flick. Not that that's a bad thing, but if poor production values and horrid acting aren't your cup of tea, than this movie probably wouldn't appeal to you.

I discovered this one a few years back when I was going through my "watch every college-based 80's horror movie"-phase. I thought that it had a decent title, and the coverbox was very reminiscent of an early "Friday the 13th" cover, so I figured that it would be worth the $1 that I paid for it. I won't go into the plot details since they are readily available anywhere, but I will tell you what I thought could have been better.

First on the list of faults is that there is no "whodunit" aspect to the picture. I'm not ruining anything for you since you find out after about five minutes that it isn't one of the students hacking people up, but just some random murderer that decides to put his skills to the test at a North Caroline college. That's why I chose "Leave your brain at the door..." as my one-line summary, since there is no thought needed as you watch the "plot" unfold.

As a few others already pointed out there is the opening scene involving two students getting sliced-up in a convertible, and then about an hour of dead time(pardon the pun). For about an hour following that we got some lame attempt at characted development that leaves out any murders. I don't mind some exposition in a movie, but these are all throw-away characters delivering horrible dialouge in bad situations. The final third of the film is when the rest of the students get dispatched of, and when they do there is absolutely no blood. I do tip my hat to the director because he throws in more suspense than your average campus murderer movie, but the payoff just isn't worthy of the buildup.

There were only two characters in the flick(and sadly, no, the lead isn't one of them) that were memorable at all. Radish, who reminded me a little of Randy from the "Scream" series, was our straight-guy, but was just too out-there to actually give you anything to care about. The same thing goes for the character of Wildman, a whacky jock who is somewhat likeable, but his character's actions are too erratic for him to really hold any solid ground on my care-meter.

More Kids Killed on Campus

[dagonseve · 1/10 · 16 October 2010]

Final Exam was an attempt made by Jimmy Huston, the film's director, for creating a Slasher title that tried ignoring the obvious boundaries that haunt the genre. This was the same man that would later go on to create a more popular product in 1987's My Best Friend is a Vampire. Teamed up with Huston is Gary S. Scott who arranged some of the music featured on Fox's Funhouse (hosted by J.D. Roth) in 1988, and in that same year allowed his musical hand to complete 31 episodes of Freddy's Nightmares (1988-1990).

The film takes place at Lanier College and opens up with a murder at another campus. The killer is an unknown assailant who holds no ties to the cast in question; just a lunatic out for blood. The viewing audience is strung along on a 50-minute "heartfelt" exhibition of a "rigorous" college life. A second murder occurs in close proximity and poses a threat to the well-being of the young crowd as the remaining minutes display the disposal of the characters in a quick, albeit cheap, fashion.

My description of Final Exam is brief because there's not too much to say, honestly. Mockingly I mentioned the heartfelt moments contained within – so many, in fact, it'll cause you to feel as if you're watching an after-school special or an episode of Full House rather than a movie filled with dread. The director wanted to avoid the usual Slasher routine so instead he opted to focus more on character development. I wonder who told him that this was a good idea – sure, not enough character involvement is unwise and too much of it in a Slasher film is boring…why can't there be a balance of both? Is that such a cross to bear? "Ugh, toiling endlessly on creating a decent film for audiences to appreciate…such a burden," Huston says to himself in the waking hours of daybreak. I'm curious as to why the horror genre attracts so many foolish wannabes who have the urge to pick up a camera and start filming absolutely nothing; almost like a curse, a hex if you will, which I suppose would be rather fitting. Seriously, film-makers should create a movie about a director who thrives on creating sloppy films that contain no substance or value – oh wait, they already did, and they based it on Ed Wood.

Everything about this movie is dumb – which shouldn't be viewed as a wild accusation since the majority of films in the Slasher sub-genre are not only inadequate but also incompetent. The dialog alone should be a subject of ridicule with Oscar-rated material such as this to cleanse your palette:

"I leave in the morning for the big city. You're gonna be left with nothing' but that saggin' old wife of yours. *Laughs arrogantly* She must almost be 30 by now?"

Out of all the Slasher titles that involve students at a University or high school, I'd suggest watching those instead, more precisely, ANYTHING over Final Exam. Watching paint dry will become a favorite past time after experiencing the dregs of boredom that this movie invokes within its viewers. Final Exam executes the movement of a snail too perfectly and allows 1984's Girls Nite Out to look like a Masterpiece Theatre rendition of Julius Caesar.

Boring ... Even for a B horror film

[innerboyka · 2/10 · 17 October 2013]

The film is basically boring. Half of the film is non-action filler that does nothing for the film. The kill scenes are not gory, nor are they original or interesting.

Killer has no persona or screen presence: just a guy in an army jacket with a knife. Guess he is supposed to be like a Mike Myers, but w/o the mask or the scariness. Also there is no story or motivation behind the killings: he is just your generic killer.

The only good thing about the film is that the annoying students you have to put up with for half of the stupid film finally get offed.

Ending is not interesting and is abrupt. It is like a film student project almost. Don't waste your time.

following footsteps

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 30 March 2019]

It's the final exams at Lanier College and a young couple has been reported murdered at a neighboring college. Gun wielding masked men arrive at the school and start shooting. They drive away in their van with the bodies. It turns out to be frat prank but a real serial killer has arrived in his van.

After Halloween and Friday the 13th, there came a deluge of other slasher horrors that centered on a certain date or event following their predecessors' footsteps. This one is one of those except there is a little bit of difference. There is some blood but the gore special effects is not that big. It's a lot of stabbing motions. It opens with a young couple getting murdered and the first noticeable thing is the non-descript killer. He looks like a big henchman but lacks the iconic style of its compatriots. The man has no charisma and he has no iconic look. That may be the movie's fatal flaw. At least, he could have stayed faceless for as long as possible. The acting overall is amateurish but that is par for the course. The movie tries to set up these characters but the inferior acting skills limit the effectiveness. This is better than most of those small budget indies desperate to cash in but it fails to be one of those to spawn the needed franchise.

boring and tedious

[dien · 2/10 · 13 January 2013]

Being an 80s slasher fan, I've seen a lot of them. The good, the bad, the classics and the garbage. This one is somewhere between boring and uninteresting.

I read on Wikipedia that the director wanted to do a different slasher. One that focuses on character development rather than kills. While it may have sounded great as an idea, the outcome is poor.

If we don't count the first kill, the movie takes more than 50 minutes before anything slasher-related happens. The film spends so much time on the characters that it feels almost like a teen comedy. And one can only wish the characters were somewhat interesting, but they're not. They are as generic as they get. There are the obnoxious jocks, the computer nerd, the dumb blond who has an affair with a teacher and the "not so attractive, yet strong" final girl.

The killer is a chapter of its own. We never learn his motivation, or who he is. But we can clearly see his face from the very beginning. Also, he would absolutely need to have "serial killer super powers" in order to appear at certain places where there is no way he could get without someone noticing him. Simply impossible. I understand the writer wanted to go for something else in his film, but this decision was poor.

This film fails on pretty much every level. It's only recommended if you're a die hard genre fan.

Uninteresting, slow Halloween wannabe.

[paulclaassen · 3/10 · 28 December 2020]

'Final Exam' is trying so hard to be another 'Halloween', but just doesn't make the grade as a slasher movie.

A lot of screen time taken up by silly chatter, but I guess in a way it was for us to get to know the characters better. The film is filled with pranks and silly student behavior. Character-wize it had more substance than most slasher movies, but as a slasher horror movie, it was a snooze fest.

Courtney (Cecile Bagdadi) is supposed to be the heroin, but she's an insignificant character. There really is nothing special about her. I thought Radish was the most interesting character (well portrayed by Joel S. Rice). The rest of the characters are pretty standard.

The final act is formulaic slasher movie procedure. Who is the killer? There is no information or backstory on this person. No name. Noting. It's just a crazed killer for no reason, and nothing more than a stocky, uninteresting character. 'Final Exam' will go down as a forgettable movie (in my books, at least). There are far better and more interesting slasher movies out there.

Would I watch it again? No.

Will this film rise out of the grave?

[emm · 6/10 · 11 November 1998]

Based on the comments I looked at for FINAL EXAM, it appears that this once forgotten film may be getting a rebirth after nearly 18 years, thanks to SCREAM, BUFFY, and the return of the slasher-horror genre. FINAL EXAM does have some suspenseful chilling moments, including the finale where the girl meets the psycho atop the campus tower, plus a couple of gruesome mutilations. The best thought I had in viewing this one was that it's a simple basic average movie, as there was nothing new or groundbreaking. But with slasher's comeback, it may be worth checking out. Another movie I'd recommend is MADMAN, which is far more original and horrifying than FINAL EXAM, and because it has a special purpose in mind.

lousy largely bloodless low-body count slasher

[FieCrier · 3/10 · 24 December 2004]

Two students making out in their car on campus get killed. The scene is very dark, and they are killed in a medium-long shot so, really nothing is seen - which is what most of the relatively few deaths in this movie are like.

At a different campus, a sinister black van shows up. Relatively few students are left, since most students' final exams are over. During one of the exams, masked gunmen get out of a brown van and start firing. They pick up the two people they shot and speed away. This is just a fraternity prank which also makes the sheriff (who doesn't punish anyone!) less likely to show up later when he is needed.

Some more students get killed by the mystery killer, who is never given any character. A fraternity pledgee gets grabbed by "Wildman", who holds him close and seems to sniff his neck and nibble his ear: yuck. The scene turns even more perverse when they strip the pledge down to his underwear, tie him to a tree, spray him with whipped cream and fire extinguishers, pour ice on him, and fill his underwear with ice too. The campus security guard who shows up later pours some liquor from his flash into the pledge's underwear "on the rocks." Did Victor Salva direct this scene?

Some of the death scenes towards the end show a little blood, but really no creativity - something the whole film is lacking.

The Night He Came to Campus

[lianzantoro · 10/10 · 23 July 2019]

A shadowy figure randomly decides to stop at a small college campus and stalk the student body.

Final Exam is an anomaly of the early 80s slasher craze. It eschews blood, gore, and sex, in favor of characters and atmosphere. For me this film succeeds for all the reasons that most viewers consider it a failure. The character development actually works.

The characters are all stereotypes. The virgin, the tramp, the airhead, the nerd, the jock, and the preppy. But three of those characters are really memorable. Courtney the virgin, (Cecile Bagdadi), is so likeable and believable. Radish the nerd, (Joel S. Rice) is annoying yet endearing. Wildman the jock, (Ralph Brown) is a total goofball. I really enjoyed watching these people interact.

The killing doesn't commence until the last third of the film, but it's really atmospheric with the killer stalking his victims on the dark, deserted campus. Limestone College in Gaffney, SC where this was filmed was the perfect location and really adds to the atmosphere.

The killer having no motive actually works much better than having some convoluted motive. The killer not wearing a mask, but mostly being in the shadows is very effective. Roaming the campus wearing a mask when it's not even Halloween would've been kind of conspicuous.

If you want to time travel back to 1981 at the peak of the slasher craze, watch Final Exam. Then watch The Burning and The Prowler.

Why Is He Killing Everyone?

[kevinfbarker · 6/10 · 21 October 2020]

An unexplained killer kills college kids during final exam week because...the script told him to? If you thought Halloween was simplistic and threadbare in terms of plot, I give you Final Exam. The killer is just a nondescript man without a mask of any sort and there seems to be no motive to speak of. Thankfully, most of the college kids have enough personality to go around and, while it can be amusing to watch them go to the cafeteria, steal exams, and stage fake terrorist attacks to get out of taking exams (yes, this really does happen!), it takes a little too long to get to the slashing and, once they do, it's very light on gore.

Not Much Happens

[laurieanngermann · 5/10 · 4 October 2021]

At Lanier College, there's a murderer on the loose and you can never tell which students will make it to their final exams or not.

Final Exam is about 20% slashing and 80% college hijinx. If this appeals to you, I'd say check it out, but if you're in it for gore, stay far away. It tries to ape Halloween by relying more on suspense instead of gore, but it simply can't compete with the storytelling abilities of John Carpenter and Debra Hill. It does feature some likable and fun characters that aren't a total chore to spend time with and the finale does build a reasonable amount of suspense.