The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Blistering performances.

I watched this on Netflix VOD thinking it was a remake of the 1989 Scot Spiegel film. I didn't pay attention to the plot summary, and viewed if for the better part of ten minutes before realizing it bore no resemblance to the previous movie. In fairness, there are about ten movies called "Intruder" or "The Intruder" on IMDb, so I suppose it's my bad.This film was a curious entry into the slasher sub-genre. It had no budget and an unknown cast, but pulled off some nice, tense moments. There's a quirky suicide motif running through the movie that felt completely out of place and disjointed, but gave the movie an eerie feel that mislead me into thinking it was going to be smarter than it really was. Strange. Ultimately, Intruder (2008) is a slam dunk if you love those back of the shelf grade z blockbuster flicks, but be warned if you expect splashy effects and production value from your entertainment, as you will find neither.

To be honest, I'm not a horror genre\slasher film enthusiast but a student of mine recommended INTRUDER to me so during the most recent storm that buried the east coast I thought I'd stay home and give it a whirl. The first thing that struck me about INTRUDER was that it had a slick visual style to go along with solid editing. The film wasn't inundated with buckets of blood but rather kept my interest with its psychological motif. The acting was more accomplished than the usual low-budget horror film and it was clear to me that the director has talent. If you're going to give INTRUDER a go, keep an open mind because there is more beneath the surface of this film than the traditional low-budget horror works that get churned out on a daily basis. It was a very nice surprise.

First off, I LOVE no-budget indie films. Most of them suck, but occasionally you find a gem, or at least one dynamic enough to keep your interest. This film falls into that category.The masked killer genre typically caters to people in need of cinematic comfort food. It has to be simple, bland, and go down easy without too much of an aftertaste. With that in mind, Intruder may prove to be a tough sell for slasher fans. This Halloween-based thriller is not cinematic Doritos. It has a spook-factor I haven't experienced from a micro-cinema horror in a while, and revolves around an intriguing, if over-thought, protagonist. Occasionally, elements are introduced that seem out of place and disturbing, creating a disjointed feel that unnerved me. The performances are VERY STRONG, from the female lead to the supporting characters, many of whom leave in impression with only a single scene.In terms of kills, the film puts most of its eggs in the suspense basket, making the actual "money stuff" more of a period than an exclamation point. Intruder actually manages to ratchet up a considerable amount of tension; rare for a grade "z" indie. Yes, there certainly is a "cheese factor", and yes, the zero-budget seams are more than apparent, but that's inevitable in this sort of movie.Being that the film is (sorta) structured as a murder mystery, the "end twist" is a bit of a head-scratcher. However, it had an impact, unlike most horror film endings, which all too often fall into the paint-by-numbers category.The DVD supplements are excellent. The deleted scenes are intriguing, and the blooper reel is actually funny. There are two audio commentaries, both of which kept my interest and managed to avoid being self-congratulatory.Overall, I liked Intruder enough to pick up a copy from amazon after renting it. It's a thinking person's slasher (if that exists), and has a number of remarkable elements. If you can only tolerate well-budgeted spfx fests with name actors, you will not find much to enjoy, as this is a maiden effort with more than its share of flaws. If, on the other hand, you tend to give low-budget horrors a chance, you'll dig the atmosphere and scares, and find it worth a look.7 1/2 STARS.

In contrast to the "main" review on this movie with regard to the below average IMDb rating, I would have to strongly disagree.I find it very difficult to imagine how it's even scored 3.8 (current score at the time of writing this comment).This movie is the absolute definition of "amateur" in every sense (right down to the movie poster). The acting, if it can be called that, is terrible. The story / plot is none existent and I have seen much finer movies produced by young students.I could only manage to watch 20 minutes of this movie (and I try very hard to watch an entire film before forming an opinion). I fast forwarded beyond this and found no redeeming sections in the entire film.To the Director: Please "attempt" to learn your trade (Or employ someone who has) before attempting to release another movie. You will not make any friends with this, therefore I can only imagine you are out to either rip people off or make enemies (In the first case, shame on you, in the second, I hope you used a false name).