Pluskylang
Great Film overall
Curapedi
I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.
Fairaher
The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.
Sebadonut
A cop investigating a string of deaths discovers a website seemingly haunted by a ghost seeking revenge on her killer. Upon visiting the site the visitor has 48 hours to find said killer or the vengeful spirit will kill them. At least, I think thats what happened. FeardotCom manages to take a very silly but simple storyline and make it both confusing and frustrating to watch, all whilst boring its audience half to death. About 50% of the film made me feel like I was watching a cheap, early 2000's music video for a Nine Inch Nails cover band. I think they may have been going for something similar to Se7en in tone but fell very, very short of the mark. The one redeeming feature of this film is its internet naivety - its set shortly before the whole Web 2.0 thing and because of this the titular scary website appears to be hosted on an angelfire or tripod site which I found amusing. No dancing baby gif's unfortunately. The C-list cast each delivers a suitably ropey performance and there is very little in the way of scares. Perhaps BoringdotCom might have been a more apt title.
Lady Persephone
I've watched this movie three times, and I really want to like it but I just can't. There's nothing redeemable in this movie, despite having the potential to be a great cinematic experience. My biggest pet peeve with this movie would be the focus of the supernatural element. Had they just worked the killer angle, this movie could have potentially been another 'Se7en' however, the writers/director felt it necessary to add the paranormal element. It was extremely misplaced in this movie, adding nothing to the plot line aside from confusion. The movie falls flat for a variety of other reasons as well: (a) The acting in this movie was horrible, particularly that of Natascha McElhone. (b) Alistair had the capacity to be an amazing and memorable character.but Stephen Rea didn't bring the passion and sadism to the role that this character desperately needed to standout. I'm not sure if it was Rea's acting skills (as he has done well in other roles) or if was poor writing. I tend to go with the latter. (c) The supernatural element just didn't work. I can't really put my finger on why. All I can say is it seemed superfluous and nonsensical. Additionally, incorporating any aspect of horror should create fear. There was nothing scary in this movie. It simply felt like the writers/director couldn't decide rather to do a thriller or a horror movie. They did a little bit of both, and it didn't work. (d) If they wanted to go with an internet-based entity, I feel like the theme would have worked better now as opposed to 2002 because of the relevancy in social media and social interactions in present day compared to the early 2000's. (e) This is a small gripe, but why is the website: www.feardotcom.com? Really?! It is a small detail, but the small details are so important to the overall story. There are various other flaws within this movie, but those are the ones that standout the most. Basically, I don't recommend this movie. I would love to see it be remade into the movie it was meant to be. I can see it having potential. But, alas, I'm sure that will never happen, so we are left with this atrocity.
videorama-759-859391
This dark and muddled movie almost gives a bad name to the internet. Underused actor Stephen 'Crying Game' Rea is completely wasted as a master psycho controller of a web site, which if you visit, shortly after, you die. The premise is interesting but is too unbelievable where there's a lot of dark slow moments. 'Power Of One' child actor Dorff puts the C in cool, in a strong and interesting 'tough guy' character performance, where a dim future awaits. He's accompanied by a very well played lead, where you hope, a sexual fling or relationship will develop. The film is ultimately bad and comes across as ludicrous, another malfunction of a film. There's hardly any violence on the whole, again a 'high level violence' warning as in how it's displayed, is a joke. The film comes up short on many things, and this one, on the latest view around, surprise surprise, I didn't like it anymore, as I liked it last time. Sadly it's Rea, who you only see in a number of scenes, who lucks out, in this with a genuine evil performance, with a voice to match. It's a performance that will go unnoticed or be forgotten, cause of the film's stuff ups or dislike for it. Yes, it's a site you don't want to visit, or the movie itself too.
lathe-of-heaven
(Zero out of 3 found this review helpful...? Really...? Well then, YOU guys clearly have not seen William Malone's movies. What you need to do is most gingerly and carefully, take your head out of your own @ss, wash your face & hair, and watch 'HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL {1999} and 'PARASOMNIA' {2008} And then, if you don't like them, I will gladly put MY head up my own @ss...)(Do we have a deal...?)(Man, I'm getting WAY too snarky here - too much caffeine or Crack I think; or maybe putting too much caffeine IN my crack, I don't know...)Geez, what a way to start... Well, this film is honestly no 'HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL' or 'PARASOMNIA', but I truly felt that Malone did a fairly decent job with it. Look, maybe I'm a bit biased, but I would watch a frigg'n LEXUS commercial if Malone directed it! (Well, that MIGHT be pushing it just a bit... :) It's been a while since I've read about this film, but I THINK I remember that it was the usual MINDLESS producers interfering with Malone's 'vision', if you will, that likely watered down the effectiveness of 'What Could Have Been' with this movie (how MANY times have we heard that?) Even the MASTER Del Toro got his frigg'n nuts handed to him the first time around by the ever-so-brilliant Weinstein Brothers when he directed his first excellent U.S. film 'MIMIC' - THANKFULLY, with his current stature, he was able to go back and re-edit it, so it is even better now. Even the great, ESTABLISHED Terry Gilliam had a creative board shoved up his @ss by the Weinsteins on the very entertaining 'BROTHERS GRIMM', but it still turned out pretty good despite their meddling.Anyway, back to THIS film, sorry... PLEASE try to give this movie a decent chance. Because, despite the Studio's interference and it's flaws, I honestly feel that Malone was able to do a lot in the way of creating effective visuals and a fairly decent mood that makes the movie just good enough to enjoy...
