Pretty Good

Good concept, poorly executed.

Am I Missing Something?

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

The rating I gave this movie may not tell it, but the premise of this movie was excellent. The execution of it was awful. The 2 rating should give you a hint of just how poorly this movie was done if I'm admitting that they had a good concept.In 1991 a man named Ernie Bishop (Ben Cotton) captured two girls, tied them up and forced them to play a game. The game was: "If you want me to stop torturing you say 'kill her'" (i.e. kill the other captured girl). It is quite sinister and quite clever if you think about it. He doesn't ever kill anyone unless he has permission from the other captive. 15 years later mutilated bodies are popping up in the small town of Ovid and Joan (Angela Bettis) believes it's Ernie Bishop again.But let's talk about the execution of this movie because I have many complaints--though I will limit them to a few. From the beginning it had a T.V. movie feel to it--the cinematography, the sound, the sound track, the editing, the effects and the acting. It was all around a cheap production. Even as cheap as the production was I think they could've pulled it off with better acting (I know, I know, the acting is a byproduct of being low budget) and a tighter story.Throughout the movie we kept getting exposition through flashbacks from the main character, Joan. It was done to show how she narrowly escaped a serial killer and how she got her "scar". I put "scar" in quotes because it was barely noticeable. Never mind that it was significantly smaller than it should've been, but when they did bring attention to it the 15 year old scar looks days old. I mean, it's still red! Just to expound upon Angela Bettis and the job she did-- I hope they didn't pay her too much. She was very much the anti-heroine. The non-make up wearing, perpetually confused looking actress looked like she belonged in a methadone clinic. I know they were trying to sell us on the effects of her traumatic experience but it was all too convenient. You know, the one character that's paranoid and happens to be right--that was her.The exposition is all to set us up for what's happening in present day Ovid. Again, because of the obvious low budget the bloody scenes still took on a sanitized look. They weren't gritty like a "Hostel" or other films. It was more or less blood neatly placed or spattered around to give the effect of gore.Combine the low budget look and feel to the movie with the contrived methods used to push the story along and you get a low rating. There were some ridiculous events in this movie that were absurd even for a horror movie. It says a lot about your movie when you can make "Friday the 13th" look believable.

First, I want to state that I have only seen the 3D version; having said that, my reaction after the viewing was why was this shot in 3D? There is nothing visually attention grabbing or exceptional about the staging of this film; as a matter of fact, the cinematography is so featureless and unexciting that it might be useful to insomniacs. The flashback sequences begin immediately and make the storyline perplexing, especially since the writing and acting are so anemic. It doesn't take the viewer long to recognize who the killer is, but since the writer failed to develop any back story for him, we are forced to listen to him justify why he is killing as he is killing, which is very confusing and very far-fetched. The filmmakers attempted to imitate Saw, Hostel, and countless other films in the HORROR genre, with not much success. All they did was make a HORRIBLE movie. Most horror fans will yawn during this film and constantly check their wristwatch, and if they manage to get through the never-ending 78 minutes, feel swindled.

How far would you go to save your friend? After finally returning to her hometown after escaping a serial killer, Joan (Bettis) notices things that are all too familiar. This movie goes back and forth between flashbacks and present day. As a teen Joan and her best friend are taken and brutally tortured by a sadistic man. In order to get the torture to stop Joan must tell him to kill her friend. Upon returning to her hometown, Joan begins to witness dead bodies piling up and it seems all too familiar. She begins to wonder if the person she thought she killed years ago is actually dead. Honstly I expected this to be totally lame. It was not that bad. It was very gory, but it also had a plot, which doesn't always go hand-in-hand. The use of flashback is pretty well done. This is not an edge-of-your-seat type movie, but it will keep you watching until the end, as well as keep you entertained. This is another movie this week that surprised me. I give it a B-.

Saw it today, in Russia it is all over the theaters and to be honest, I wasn't disappointed. Do not expect suspense. Do not expect that much HORROR itself - there was gore, a god awful amount of gory torturing. Angela Bettis was surprisingly not as good as she usually is (May; Girl, Interrupted), but she fit the character pretty well. Bliss Blanton glows and shines, I've never seen her in a movie before, but she was extremely pretty. The plot.. well, it keeps you entertained. And, as I saw it in 3D, I was exited and pleased to see things actually look like they were in front of me, plus the titles and the cast in the intro flying right into your face is pretty spectacular - I found myself smiling as I didn't experience much of 3D action (Spy Kids were not as 3D as this one) and it was nice. Do not expect much, expect a good 3D (no full presence, for Christ's sake, they didn't have an opportunity to suddenly bring three-dimensional to a new absolutely amazing level), expect a gore fest (I found myself turning away in a few scenes, it was gorier than the "Saw" series was") and you won't be disappointed. No masterpiece, pretty enjoyable overall.