As Good As It Gets

Admirable film.

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Falling in line with "found-footage" thrillers comes a "true story" of a team of paranormal investigators spending the night at the site of serial killer John Wayne Gacy's former home. Gacy's house of horrors of course has long since been demolished with another house built on the same site. The anxious investigators begin setting up cameras and going room to room with hand-held cameras seeking out the spirit of Gacy. The group shudders as strange events let them know they are being introduced to the tortured souls of Gacy's thirty-three victims. Gacy's spirit may just be in hiding, but spirits that have been awaken are more than enough for the camera crew to handle.Not a total waste. There are some scary moments and mood music from Evanescence and Audioslave. In the cast: James Arthur Lewis, Rachel Riley, Michael Gaglio, Sylvia Panacione and Brett A. Newton.

Terrible acting, probably all inexperienced improv. Very unconvincing. Lots of repeated lines, indistinguishable cross-talk, insincere fear.. Actually, insincere everything. A lot of the time it just sounded like the actors didn't know what to say, which points to bad writing and directing. The "professor" seemed to be a man with a limited vocabulary, the "psychic" sounded like a canned phone-sex operator (which may actually be appropriate), and there was no apparent lead character. The psychic's lines were the only ones you could tell were written because it sounded like she was reading them. The guy in charge was kind of a douche... I think they were attempting to answer to question "what if the Ghost Hunters actually came across some ghosts?" The special effects were pretty much non-existent, and some of the coolest stuff they did was too subtle to notice (think Fight Club), and thus did not help the impact of the film. They spent a lot of time filming areas with no apparent activity (unless you were willing to move through each blank scene frame-by-frame), and they also did some jumping between irrelevant spaces. Sometimes it was difficult to tell where the footage was taking place, and the most interesting spot in the house (the crawl space) didn't actually get any meaningful air time. Maybe they really were afraid to go in there. That would've been a great place to find some bones or something. I honestly just looks like they lazily ripped off Paranormal Activity and the Ghost Hunter series simultaneously. Sad to say, though, it still wasn't worse than the worst movie I've seen (the name of which shall remain undisclosed). Apparently, they found a way to work in ripping a busty woman's shirt off, which is a plus. Well, not much of a plus because it 'exposed' the shallow nature of the filmmakers... but they WERE some great boobs. All in all, I'm not upset that I watched the movie.. after all, I sat through the entire Paranormal Activity movie series (and was surprised by the elaborate connectivity). However, if you get bored easily, stay far away from this one. I just kept waiting for something to happen...

This is the worst movie that I have ever watched. I am not usually a horror movie fan, because I am a huge wuss, and get scared more easily than a 5 year old little girl. That statement alone should send up a red flag about the quality of this movie. I watched this movie with my boyfriend for Halloween, expecting to scream and jump and then have to sleep with the lights on. What happened was, we spent the entire movie mocking its lack of originality, consistency, and just bad judgement call in writing and acting. They made some obvious consistency errors, such as an actor turning off a lamp that wasn't on when viewed in the camera shot beforehand. Also things like travelling alone into areas where accidents had happened - typical bad movie behaviour. We waited the entire movie to be scared, or maybe even startled, but it never came. I felt like I was watching a poorly made low-budget student film. I understand and like the idea behind the movie, but they went about it all wrong. I have never posted a review before, nor have been compelled to until now. That is how bad it was. It's not even good for a "bad movie" night, which I enjoy from time to time. Just don't watch it. Trust me, your time is better spent elsewhere.

As a (wannabe) filmmaker this is the kind of movie you pray you never make. It isn't just bad. Bad movies at least earn their audience for being bad. This isn't just bad. It commits a worse cinematic crime than that. It's boring. It's exceptionally boring.The writing seems almost improvised, but improvised by people at a table audition. There isn't enough actual scares here to make an episode of your basic A&E reality show. It seems like the most obvious line heard on this set was "we will fix it in post." The continuity and improbability of it don't help either. For example, the concept that the show is shot in a house built on the land where Gacy's old house was is faulty at best. This place should be BRAND NEW then. The house is at least 50 years old or more. Not 20 years old, not by a long shot. Then the goof at the end (look at the goofs so I don't have to write "spoiler" okay?) Just careless.Additionally, and this is an aside, I find using Gacy as a paranormal entity a bit... disturbing? It's gratuitous and feels off putting. Between the scares manufactured in editing, the complete lack of continuity and, let's face it, the gratuitousness of it make it for a terrible flick.