Beneath the Dark (2010) User Reviews

Effective, but familiar

[jd7myers-1 · 5/10 · 28 November 2010]

This film begins like so many others of its genre -- namely, a young couple on their way to a far away destination pull into an eerie, almost deserted motel where things aren't what they seem.

If you think you've seen it before, likely you have. Beneath the Dark has strong echoes of the 2003 John Cusack film Identity, though it pales in comparison. Ahh, what to say about this movie? I enjoyed watching it, but then I am a fan of the suspense genre which has been in a serious state of drought lately. Is it a good movie? Not really. Is it a bad movie? No. The plot line does catch your interest as you watch the two very different back stories of the young traveler and the motel manager unfold. The narrative of the film makes the viewers expect the inevitable connection, which is mildly interesting once revealed. However the entire conceit of the movie is nearly immediately obvious. I suppose in a world where twisty thrillers have been around for so long, it is far more difficult to pull off true surprise. Yet I feel that the director/writer Chad Feehan missed the opportunities to misdirect the audience. One can only hope Chad was not trying for an M. Night Shyamalan production.

The film used so many clichés, that it could have been the product of a university class on the genre: the isolated motel in the Midwest and the slightly off motel manager are photocopied directly from Psycho. The jukebox that plays the same song over and over is also lifted. (Didn't we see that in a number of Rod Serling productions?). Yet all is not as grim as this review seems. Mr. Feehan studied well, and utilized these and other familiar elements effectively.

So a sense of mild suspense persists throughout the movie. The ending is a bit of a let down -- but the journey was fun.

Bottom line: If you like this genre, this movie is serviceable. I certainly wasn't sorry I watched it, although I thought that the motel manager needed to be cast with a stronger performer. If you have nothing to do on a Saturday afternoon, punch this one up. Keep your expectations low and you might enjoy it.

Expect suspense, not effects...

[Learningbywatching · 6/10 · 1 February 2011]

... then you shouldn't be disappointed.

A young couple in a hotel out in the desert somewhere close to LA. The Hotel office guy acts strangely, and so do all the other people the couple, mainly the guy, will meet during that night. Up to here it is an absolute cliché but this leads the viewer into the wrong direction.

Things are getting stranger and stranger but instead of hysterically screaming girls and bloody massacres, suspense keeps steadily up by clues to the reason why this is happening. But of course there is also a little screaming and blood. Even though this movie leads into a rather parallel World it is pretty reasonable.

So people who are able to find a movie mysterious enough without too much blood and bones, but rather by a good and also surprising story and characters should have a good one and a half hour with this one.

Engaging but Predictable Thriller

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 20 December 2014]

While crossing the Mojave Desert to go to a wedding in Los Angeles, Paul (Josh Stewart) and his girlfriend Adrienne (Jamie-Lynn Sigler) have a car accident. They decide to spend for the night into the Roy's Motel and Cafe and they check-in with a man called Frank (Chris Browning). Paul is uncomfortable to disclose a secret to Adrienne while Frank's wife Sandy (Angela Featherstone) has a hidden past that affects their lives. Along the night, weird and surreal things happen to Paul until a stranger help him to discover the truth and make a choice.

"Beneath the Dark" is an engaging but predictable thriller. The story is unoriginal and the mystery is easily disclosed still in the beginning. But anyway it is entertaining. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "A Escolha" ("The Choice")

Not in any kind of a hurry

[thekarmicnomad · 27 July 2011]

The plot for this movie is not exactly new but even with me saying that it will keep you guessing for a bit.

The production is great, the acting top notch, characters, direction all good.

The most notable quality of this movie though is the pace, it is very slow and considered. The characters are examined in massive detail but you never really get to know them. This is how the plot is disguised so well.

If you have patience and you don't mind a film that takes its time then this is definitely for you. For me it was a little slow and void of substance.

An uneventful thriller

[brodlimmel · 5/10 · 28 April 2011]

It starts out the old cliché of a couple driving in the middle of no where. Of course something happens and they have to stay in a creepy hotel. Nothing original here even the big twist at the end is just sad you see it coming. The movie is not boring and you get to feel for the character Frank (played by Chris Browning). The only good thing about this title is that it doesn't try to be this big suspenseful movie it knows it is a B movie. But besides that there really is nothing good about this film. I can just know of so many better movies to see besides this, because this is just one big cliché in a 1 hr 42 min movie.

Netflix Movie Review: Beneath the Dark

[Phillip_Tomasso · 5/10 · 1 December 2013]

So, this morning I watched the 2010 Chad Feehan as writer / director film, Beneath the Dark. The synopsis sounded good, but I tried it mostly because Jamie-Lynn Sigler beneath(Sopranos, Guys With Kids) was in it. The film also stars, Josh Stewart, who has been in a number of good films and TV shows as well.

Okay. The basic idea is that Paul (Stewart) and Adrienne (Sigler) are headed to a wedding. A guy from Paul's college frat is tying the knot. Growing weary on the way, and a little frisky, Paul runs the vehicle of the road. It's decided they will not push it and land a hotel room for the night.

The Roy Hotel is run by Frank (Chris Browning). He's a step-and-a-half above Anthony Perkins on a creepy-meter, and the hotel is slightly more modern than the Bates Motel. Once tucked away in a room, Adrienne is still frisky (and while there is no nudity, it is quite hot), only Paul has too much on his mind and cannot perform. Frustrated he heads to the connected diner for coffee where he meets a Man (Afemo Omilami) who claims to be the Son of God.

The Man certainly knows a lot about Paul, and Paul's soiled past, and aside from conversation, he tries to have Paul answer some simple questions . . . What Do You Believe In?

I can't forget Frank's wife, Sandy (Angela Featherstone). She is not a happy woman. Sandy stalks the bars looking for company. Isn't hard for her to find what she wants. Not bra-less in a thin white tank-top. She shows up here and there. (And is quite sensual in a barfly kind of way). Seems her sole (or soul) purpose is to torment the loser-ness of her husband.

There is always homemade cherry pie and fresh coffee. There is a jukebox–while outdated with its selection–that is always ready to play.

Beneath the Dark is nothing new. Sadly, I knew the end of the story at the very beginning of the movie. There have been a flood of "identical" big-screen and direct to DVD films with the same ending over the last four years. I could name them. But if you see one — then I have ruined the ending for the rest. I hate that. Hate it. Because the story was as solid as the acting. Both I enjoyed. The dialogue was crisp enough. The filming was simple but effective.

If I were to assume you saw none of the other films with the same ending — then this is an excellent movie. If not, then this is a mediocre film. Since the Beneath the Dark is from 2010 — and we are on the cusp of 2014, I am going to assume the ladder and for that, give the movie 5 out of 10 Stars.

Zombie Author Phillip Tomasso

http://www.philliptomasso.com

Dire beyond words - may contain spoilers

[spotlightne · 1/10 · 1 February 2011]

Movie starts off with a youngish (man and woman) couple (mid 30s) driving to a wedding.

It's late night, so the guy pulls up at a motel. He does this for two reasons. A) His girlfriend wants sex and B) He is tired. Signing in to their room, they encounter a nervous motel owner.

Later, on the bed, the couple try to have sex. He can't get an erection so he goes off to get a coffee. While he drinks his coffee he meets a black guy who goes on about stuff from the Bible.

We're now 25 minutes in. Bored yet? Because I was.

In between all this we see other characters. One older woman, one blonde woman late 30s, some other guy, and another guy who's a security guard. By the way we learn the security guard gets fired.

The movie still doesn't make any sense and we're already 45 minutes in.

Bored yet? Jeez, I was!! Back to the motel, this other blonde woman walks through the darkened bedroom while the couple are sleeping. Well, he's awake, his girlfriend is sleeping...

Who was the woman and why did she do that? No clues...

Still bored? YES! Because nothing of any interest in happening...

Over 55 minutes in, AT THIS STAGE I GAVE UP. Awful film, I skipped through to the end, and it still made no sense.

Probably one of the worst films of 2010. I can only guess all the 10s it's received have been from people involved in the movie.

AVOID!!

Average movie with many things you've seen before

[mario_c · 6/10 · 6 February 2013]

BENEATH THE DARK is a b-series mystery thriller that doesn't bring much novelties to the genre. It's an average movie, effective to create suspense and mystery, but it completely falls in all type of clichés! I knew from the beginning what kind of plot I would have, and many of the plot disclosures are predictable, but what I disliked the most was that pseudo morality about "sins which instigate other sins" (nice people die too if you know what I mean!); beside that it's an OK movie in its type. The acting could also be a little better, but it's not bad though. The setting is good, in spite of being one of the main clichés… I scored it 6/10, probably just because I'm fan of this type of cinema (mystery thrillers).

A murky but well-acted mess

[movieman_kev · 3/10 · 10 August 2012]

Paul (Josh Stewart of the FX TV show "Dirt") and adrienne (Jamie-Lynn Sigler of the much- better known Sopranos) are forced to divulge secrets after they stop at a peculiar motel in the middle of the Mojave Desert and meet some of it's weird denizens.

This movie was slow, uneventful, and while not boring, not particularly enjoyable. However the acting was decent and the soundtrack to the film was pretty good.The mystery behind some huge secret had my intrigued, but the pay-off for that wasn't really worth my investment in it.

Eye Candy: Angela Firestone gets topless

Where I Saw it: Showtime Extreme

Poor finish to an interesting slow burner.

[keeganmurray-19 · 6/10 · 9 August 2012]

Beneath The Dark starts well enough. A young couple pull up into a hotel, looking for a place to stay for the night. As in so many hotel horrors that went before it, the place is deserted and what little people that are around are incredibly sinister. Sound familiar? That's because it is. Imagine Reeker, Vacancy and The Shining (try spot the references) thrown into a blender. That's the impression Beneath The Dark makes early on, and it's a good 'un.

Slowly the movie unfolds a series of flashbacks which give an insight into the past of a few of the characters we have seen throughout the movie and into the secrets that their past holds.

Paul and Adrienne are a run of the mill young couple experiencing a few relationship problems (Vacancy anyone?) and Frank is the lonely hotel owner who is sinister in his overt friendliness. All sounding pretty run of the mill so far? Here's where it veers off.

Through the pre-mentioned flashbacks, and also the bizarre reveals we begin to realise there's a lot more going on in Paul's life than meets the eye, and from some reason, the events of the night seem to be unfolding around the mysterious secrets of his past. As the intensity of these bizarre incidents is cranked up the viewer begins to feel increasingly unsettled and also engrossed. The slow burning build-up beats every last inch of possible tension out of what is, in all fairness, a very lame script. Slowly Beneath The Dark appears to be building to something magnificent, and then boom, the end has happened. Where was our sensational denouement? Nowhere to be seen. In a finish that's likely to leave more questions than answers, and not in the good David Lynchian way, the viewer is left feeling somewhat ripped off.

You put up with the bad acting and poor dialogue for what appears to be an interesting plot and quite decent direction to be left feeling somewhat dumbfounded as to how the writer felt that to be an acceptable finish to the movie. Beneath The Dark as a result, appears to be a case of a writer biting off more than he can chew, but with some very blatant signs of potential for the future. All in all I give it 6/10.

Slowe burner with few concessions made to the audience.

[parry_na · 3/10 · 30 March 2019]

A fairly annoying couple Paul (Josh Stewart) and Adrienne (Jamie-Lynn Sigler) are driving to a wedding. He doesn't appear to be paying much attention to the road as he drives and she seems lazily determined to stimulate him into sex. They pull into the roadside 'Roy's Motel' where they meet weird Frank (Chris Browing) and his even stranger wife Sandy (Angela Featherstone). They decide that things are not quite as they seem.

Throughout the film, we learn more about why the characters are the way they are. We also meet an unblinking fellow guest who claims to be The Son of God (Afemo Omilami). Only I'm not sure things are even quite *that* simple.

The pace is extremely slow, and there is a murkiness to the effectively isolated location and the characters who stay within it. I get the impression that writer/director Chad Feehan isn't interesting in telling an ordinary, linear, or straightforward story and clearly feels the audience should share that viewpoint. There are no concessions to those who might want 'Beneath the Dark' to get on with whatever it is trying to say, and there are generally few standout moments - at least the cast are all very convincing and keep a certain interest. It takes far too long and too many unsavoury events for Paul to reason that he and Adrienne should leave, but again, that doesn't seem something we are encouraged to be bothered about. Perceived failings within the film's structure and pace seem to be a deliberate artistic decision.

The Quality of this Film is WAY above the 4.8 it has Here... Absolutely!

[lathe-of-heaven · 8/10 · 30 July 2012]

Wow, I just finished watching this and I cannot frigg'n believe that people only have rated it an average of 4.8. Geez... What the HELL do people wanna see these days anyway, I mean REALLY! I've commented on a few other Indie films recently where I felt they were rated way too low, but the average rating this one has REALLY burns my butt.

Okay, maybe the story is not completely original; and maybe people may be put off by the VERY MILD spiritual overtones. BUT... and it is a BIG BUT like Mariah Carey's... the film was very well directed and written, and it is one of the rare cases where it is acted even better. The main dude Josh was like a younger, milder version of Sean Pen; the guy was COOL personified. And the Black Dude, MAN! I don't know where they found him, but he was bloody PERFECT! The acting alone was so well done and blessedly NOT over the top or overdone in ANY way what so ever, that that alone merits a 7 or more. That is EXTREMELY rare these days; usually, the acting is one of THE worst parts of these kinds of films.

In my lowly and wretched opinion, many of these other Indie Horror films can be a bit rough and are DEEPLY into 'B' territory, but THIS baby here frigg'n ROCKED with much better quality than usual. I have to say that this is one particular case where I am truly disgusted with what people have rated this film; it really almost makes me lose total hope for the taste of the movie going / watching public. I'm not gonna add snide comments about how mindless people are who have rated this low or how horrible their taste is, etc., etc., like you usually hear all the time in cases like this. No... But, I WILL say that PLEASE remember that the purpose for reviewing and rating films here is NOT just to trash these films because of our individual little petty and pissy likes and dislikes. NO... The primary reason why I come here myself is to get an HONEST and OBJECTIVE view of the Quality of the film itself REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU COMPLETELY LIKED IT OR NOT. Man, it's like if a movie doesn't just make you explode in your pants, you're gonna give it a crap rating (of course, if a movie DOES indeed make you explode in your pants, that probably would merit a '10' : )

Let's remember here people that sometimes we may not personally like a film for one reason or another, but if it is well made and of high quality, it would really be appreciated if ones would temper their ratings and reviews and try to be a little more OBJECTIVE and include that information for those of us who just MIGHT damn well appreciate a movie that is well done like this, despite the fact that YOU didn't like it...

THAT is precisely why we come here...

More than The Twilight Zone!

[e-Liza1 · 6/10 · 19 March 2011]

I could easily review this film if I were to include spoilers - but in avoiding giving anything away there is so little I can say that I would like to say - this movie is shrouded in MYSTERY!

"Beneath The Dark" takes place at a desert motel ... a young man (Paul) and a young woman (Adrienne) who must rest, and so cannot continue their journey. So they stop at a motel that seems to welcome them. But there is something very strange about this place - watch closely, at the beginning of the film and you will see the Motel concierge, Frank, slipping a typed-note on an A4 sheet of paper into a "Gideon's Bible" and replacing it in the top drawer of a bedside chest of drawers in the room in which Paul and Adrienne are doomed to stay - "The Orchid Room". Now surely, that could not possibly be construed as a spoiler - yet I have to be so careful not to give anything away!

This is the mysterious rest-stop between two worlds that you have seen in so many episodes of "The Twilight Zone" ... but where in "The Twilight Zone" the story must be told in a brief introduction, two 11-minute acts, and s final short climax or dénouement, this story takes place over one and a half hours without ads. Apart from that, it is pretty much what you have been seeing on "The Twilight Zone" since 1959, and that is a compliment! (When television was influenced and employed theatre, when television was respectable and cared about the human condition!)

Without giving anything away, literally, I can say I would have given this movie more, but the concept that "law" is "truth" is a devilish lie, so I can only give it a 6 ... and if IMDb's rules would allow it, I would have given it a 6.66! What about the unparalleled intervention and interference in human affairs that is going on according to so-called "rules" and "laws" by those who put themselves in positions of so-called "authority" over us, make rules to force us to bend and submit to, and who corruptly judge us accordingly? What of the unimaginable enormity of the harm THEY do?! Perhaps that note in "The Gideon's Bible" should not have been inserted at "LEVITICUS", but at the place where it says: "Judge not and you shall not be judged!" Even wisdom turns to evil and maggots, when it is made into law as a subterfuge to rule over us from ABOVE and to deprive us of our universal, inalienable, un-God-given FREEDOM (which comes from BELOW)!!!

Turn down the lights, relax, and enjoy this film, but remember to temper the message at the end of this movie with a slice of raspberry pie! For ... you about to enter ... THE TWILIGHT ZONE!!!

Slow burner to begin with but a rewarding payoff in the end

[NewYorkRipper · 6/10 · 2 December 2011]

Rarely do I find a movie that I feel the need to write about.

While this is strictly B-movie material, it is still compelling viewing for those who like their suspense and mystery long and drawn out.

I went into this movie expecting something very different from what it delivered as I tried not to read too much into it beforehand. From what I did know about it, I thought it was probably going to be something very similar to "Identity" (2003) and hoped it wasn't simply going to rip it off completely. I am glad to say that it doesn't.

In the end, I was actually quite pleasantly surprised - as I felt the movie brought something new to quite a well-wrung out sub-genre (motel/diner in the middle of nowhere).

Until around the half-way mark, it ticks along rather slowly, building a background for things that are to be later revealed.

Around this point we then start to get a better feel for what the real truth behind the creepiness around the diner may be, but it isn't until around the last 15 minutes that the real truth is revealed and even at that, it is revealed in pieces - bit by bit until it reaches the very last scene. It really is rather clever. In many ways this technique actually reminded me of that used in the movie "Memento" (2000).

For those concerned about content, this movie could easily have passed for PG-13 had they left out a couple of scenes suggestive of sexual content and the handful of F-bombs which exist throughout it (mostly from the main character nonetheless), as overall this movie is aiming to be heavier in suspense, tension and mystery than trying to be dialogue heavy - though of what is spoken by the characters, if you ignore said profanities, only a select few are throwaway lines.

I would probably rate this in around 6.25 - 6.5 stars, except we can't give 1/4 or 1/2 stars here - but it's not quite worth a 7, so I had to go with 6 stars.

It's definitely not a popcorn movie, so your average teenager can stay well away - but for those who like these types of "mysterious" kinda flicks, it's worth a watch.

Not nearly as bad as the voters here would lead you to believe...

[MrGKB · 6/10 · 6 March 2012]

...although it's no "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge," either. What "Beneath the Dark" is, though, is an earnest attempt by writer/director/producer, Chad Feehan, to pay some dues and develop his chops, which--despite the weaknesses of the script--show much promise. With the aid of some nice camera-wrangling by Jason "Otis" Blount, apt music from Daniel "Dexter" Licht (and an excellent selection of pop tunes sprinkled throughout), some fine art/production design, and a perfectly capable cast (ignore the curmudgeons dissing them on this site), Feehan presents what is essentially a noir-ish episode of "The Twilight Zone." In a nutshell, a young couple decides to stop at a motel after a potentially calamitous accident, only to encounter strange people and disconcerting doings. There's a method to the mysteries, however, and that's what the story is about, and how our protagonist handles it all.

As mentioned, the script is still the weak point of the project; Syd Field would not be happy. Too much time is spent setting things up, and too much is spent delineating the backstory of the motel's current occupants (some of it quite relevant, but a good deal of it unnecessary--and at time confusing--filler). Some of the dialogue is, shall we say, uninspired and/or banal. These flaws are not helped by the occasional blackout segues that seem more intended for the insertion of commercial breaks than a stylistic choice. I'd hazard a guess that 15-20 minutes could have been shaved off the hour-forty running time with no loss of coherence. Nonetheless, and perhaps ironically, my attention was held for the duration, despite my tendency to enjoy a smoke-break intermission when watching DVDs, and despite a great deal of smoking going on in the movie itself. That's got to count for something, at least in my book.

No matter. Although I found his demeanor off-putting at first, Josh "The Collector" Stewart establishes and propels the lead quite nicely, Angela "The Wedding Singer" Featherstone stands out in support along with Chris "Cowboys & Aliens" Browning and Afemo "The Reaping" Omilami, and even Jamie-Lynn "The Sopranos" Sigler acquits herself well (and I don't mean to dis her; it's just that her role is really a cipher--she has no genuine character arc). Nor do I mean to dispense with the rest of the cast; they all do fine jobs. Eventually, though, the viewer realizes that this story is all about Stewart's character, which is why I mentioned the similarity to "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" in the first place.

To recap: not a great film, but shows much promise, and is certainly worth a watch for indie fans and genre buffs.

A great attempt

[dowisk · 8/10 · 20 July 2011]

I won't go into to much detail but this is a great mystery thriller nothing amazing and different tho.

It has a slow start and is somewhat predictable, although there where some unexpected twists at the end.

The low Ratings are unfair maybe viewers had there expectations to high.

Seems like people are struggling to appreciate a decent film these days.

What more do you want ? not every movie is going to be the best thing you've seen in years.

All round a good film.

Quite satisfying

[sedmak7 · 6/10 · 29 May 2013]

I actually watched this movie by accident, mistaking it for "Beneath the Darkness" with Dennis Quiad. I must say that I'm glad I watched this movie. It has a dark atmosphere, and it keeps itself a mystery until the end. I was bored at times, but all things considered i had a good time with this movie, though at the end I had a feeling of deja-vu. The atmosphere reminded me of "Identity" while the plot itself was actually a lot like 2003's "Dead End", but i liked that movie much more. It succeeds to create an atmosphere full of suspense, but at the end you will be left feeling like you've already seen it all somewhere else.

Good but suffered from a low budget.

[Dodge-Zombie · 6/10 · 19 June 2022]

This was a clever story and the use of a minimal cast was pretty good. It's a shame the production value was obviously quite low as it could of been great with some more work put into it.

I still enjoyed it and there are far worse movies out there so give it a try.

Much better than many similar attempts!

[justin-421 · 9/10 · 17 July 2011]

This is probably a good 7 Stars, but I've given it an extra few to try an outweigh the absolutely undeserved 1 Star. I know we all like or loathe different things but this is so far from bad that this review is entirely inaccurate. ***SPOILER START It was pretty obvious to me within 5 minutes that the lead characters were dead, ***FINISH; but for me, it made no difference, I was interested to see how, why, when etc, and I enjoyed getting there! The actors did a great job, with a stand out performance from Angela Featherstone, Although Jamie-Lynn Siglers effort was for me the least convincing. Some elements I have seen elsewhere, but in this case they were repeated well, and I didn't mind at all; in any case the stories pack was shuffled in such a way, that I wasn't quite sure which cards I was going to be dealt, but by the end there were a few unexpected aces in the Directors hand. I enjoyed the look and overall feel of the film, with a lovely 'sunset walking' shot at the end. Supernatural thrillers with big budgets & buckets of blood are ten a penny, and most are dreadful, but this one entertains on a fraction of their budgets, and succeeds where most of them have failed.

A pleasant surprise

[t-man17057 · 9/10 · 28 December 2012]

This was a very well done story of redemption and seeing the effects that the choices we have made can have on our lives, as well as others. I won't go into much detail, even though I've clicked the spoiler option, but this movie was well paced, and well acted, as well as being thoughtful and entertaining. This was one of those Netflix suggestions that was actually very accurate for my taste in movies.

If you like this style of suspense, don't miss this one. While it does take a while to get going, this gives us time to get to see each of the troubled individuals in the plot, and to understand what they are dealing with, and as the movie progresses we see why this is so important. In a way, this movie reminded me of the Butterfly Effect, just because of the theme it's selling.

********Do NOT continue if you haven't seen this yet!!!!!!******

[kaysild · 10/10 · 10 February 2013]

WARNING SPOILERS!!

I'm giving this an extra star bc it deserves better ratings!

OK so I usually never write reviews that have actual movie info but I can't help it on this film. Also I do NOT understand why this has low ratings bc It is a VERY VERY great movie! Well written, well acted and very intriguing. When Paul is in the café and the stranger offers him the smokes he likes I actually thought then that they didn't make it out of the crash. I have seen a different horror movie like this where they were trapped in a hotel and all being murdered and at the end they really had just been in a wreck, so very different movie but on a similar idea. However don't get me wrong, other than that similarity it is completely different. I REALLY liked the little twist at the end and was sad it ended! The fact that it was somewhat confusing at parts wasn't a negative thing, it actually kept my attention thru the somewhat slow beginning, so I have no complaints. I didn't think I was really going to enjoy this much when I began because of the awful reviews. The only reason I think it does have low ratings is due to the fact that most people OBVIOUSLY did NOT get the meaning & did not understand it whatsoever. It really made me think and I felt like the characters were really there and I wanted to know more about them! So very very well thought out movie with outstanding acting. I don't usually recommend movies to friends and family bc I'm more of a book reader, however this is one I will be going out of my way to suggest to everyone. I definitely recommend and you should have an open mind going into this and just hang in there, if you pay attention I know you will really enjoy it as well.

Surprisingly good movie

[michelle-k-1221 · 8/10 · 17 November 2012]

I can't believe the low ratings - what is the matter with you people?!?! Yeah, the story has been done before, but there is enough originality to hold my interest through the entire movie. The acting was awesome. There are enough twists and turns throughout to keep it interesting.

I love indie movies, and this is an example of why i love them so much. I watch a LOT of movies, so if come across one that can keep my attention through the entire thing, it's a big deal. This one kept my attention all the way to the end.

I think if you watch this without trying to compare it to something else and just enjoy the story, it is an enjoyable and interesting plot.

Camus' Choice

[aw1435 · 9/10 · 4 August 2012]

Since the majority of the critiques are ignorant of the truth I'm just going to spell this out for you. The film is a re-vamp of Albert Camus' short story The Guest. It's an existentialist piece... if you don't appreciate either the writer or the movement then this isn't for you. I loved both and thought it was well executed. The soundtrack was great to boot. I'll eventually try to add that on here as it's a shame it's not already done.

It's only when the prisoner is set free with the choice to make on his own that he suddenly finds peace with his solitude & meaning in a life where he too has freedom of choice, "In this vast landscape he had loved so much, he was alone". It's here we see three of the pillars of Camus' point –liberty, justice and happiness. Furthermore, Camus makes the prisoner a "Guest" to represent his assertions of brotherhood --the fourth pillar; "Men who share the same rooms, soldiers or prisoners, develop a strange alliance". This best illustrates that each person is alone in exile but sharing the planet with each other & in doing so makes us each alike in that regard. It comes across as a statement of liminality, like we are alone but with each other.

Liminality is an anthropological term used to describe political and cultural change as well as rituals. During liminal periods of all kinds, social hierarchies may be reversed or temporarily dissolved, continuity of tradition may become uncertain, and future outcomes once taken for granted may be thrown into doubt. ...tell me it's a spelling mistake :P