Absolutely Brilliant!

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

The first must-see film of the year.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

New tenant to a decidedly run-down apartment, John Hare (Stuart Laing of Eastender & Holby City fame) soon realizes that he's not very welcome in the place that may indeed by haunted in this slow-moving low-budget British horror film.Now when I saw slow, I don't mean it's a slow-burner as that would imply that it was lot in the first place. No this film is slow in a clunky, meandering, go nowhere kind of way. Having seen the lamentable "Summers Moon", I can tell you that the writer does get better in his sophomore film as opposed to this one, if only marginally so. This one isn't interesting in the least and the acting is bad as well.

This film basically does to boarding houses what the Shining did to the hotel.Without really much to spoil I was pretty satisfied about this film. It wasn't overly gory or profanity (although it could have had less, but these English films). It was just creepy and scary. I really enjoyed the part with the little girl playing ball.The story is basically just a guy renting a cheap room, but strange spooky things keep happening that soon drive him insane. The only 2 people there are a crazy old estranged lady and a nice humble old land lord.What this film really reminded me of, was this TV series that had an episode called Dreams in the Witches House. It seemed exactly like that. If you've seen that and liked it, you'll want to see this.Only problem with this film is that, it kind of asks a bit of questions at the end (and the profanity IMO was just a bit heavy).One other thing though, there's a clip after the END CREDITS

This film was decent, certainly better than expected. The performances were strong and the directing was good. The setting really gave this film a nice feel.The pacing slowed toward the end however, just when I expected things to heat up. I was on the edge of my seat a couple of times, ready for a scare but the scare never really came. So while the film did a nice job of setting the tone and creating a frightening atmosphere, it never really punched it home.As far as the story is concerned, it never evolved, nor did it offer anything that you weren't already expecting. Furthermore, the characters didn't have any real history. Basically, nothing was fleshed out here. Granted, I realize you don't often get that sort of thing in a horror film but I thought this film could have benefited greatly from it.In terms of cinematography, it had sort of an amateur feel, no doubt a result of the low budget. However, this may have helped rather than hurt matters, as the film did not rely on special effects and gore to create suspense. Everything good in this film was earned. There was nothing cheap about it.For example, the greatest moments in the film come without the use of either special effects or gore - the first meeting with the old woman and the happenings concerning the old photograph on the wall.Overall, the film is worthwhile but you'll probably agree that it fizzles out in the end.

Well here's a movie that probably will be long forgotten before it properly hits the lowest shelves of second-class rental stores… "Lie Still", the debut film of Sean Hogan, simply hasn't got anything to offer that makes it memorable. Gorehounds will drop out instantly, as the film doesn't feature the slightest amount of action or excitement. Partly because there wasn't enough budget for special effects but mainly because Hogan clearly intended to bring an old-fashioned atmospheric and story-driven ghost story. Fine by me! I encourage the revival of intelligent suspense-horror, but the problem here is that the script of "Lie Still" is as superficial and basic as can be. After the painful break-up with his girlfriend, unemployed and soft drugs addicted John Hare moves into a cheap room of an ancient house. He hopes to take a fresh start, but the house soon turns out to be a haunted place where the restless spirits of previous residents still dwell around. A premise like this immediately reminds you of popular films like "The Others" or "The Devil's Backbone" and thus you begin to prepare yourself for a supernatural and totally unexpected twist in the end. The problem with "Lie Still" is that this particular twist never comes! Okay…so there are ghosts in the house and all this relates to the vicious history of the house's first owner who's buried in the backyard. That's it? Where's the climax? This movie ends exactly like it began: slow, uninteresting and anonymous. The only positive elements I can possibly mention are a handful of atmospheric sequences and only ONE ingenious finding (the people inside the television set). I picked up somewhere that the screenplay was written in only a couple of weeks (I believe that), but that it took another two years before the required budget was raised. What budget? I bet most of the money was spent on coffee & medication in order to keep cast and crew members awake during filming. The acting performances are fairly satisfying, though, and Hogan's inexperienced approach of the genre occasionally does look charming.