AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

Candida It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Nitzan Havoc In 2008, two years before Nine Dead, Saw V offered a story frame almost identical to the one portrayed in this film. A bunch of abducted prisoners find themselves locked up and needing to figure out the connection between them in order to stay alive. The conclusion is of course different to a certain extent, but the points gained by Nine Dead for offering tribute to a spectacular film and part of the best series in psycho-thriller/horror history (in my opinion) are definitely lost for lack of plot originality.Nine Dead is not a bad film, I did not bluntly dislike it, I simply feel its shortcomings way outweigh its advantages. The great build- up leads to an anticlimactic and less than satisfactory conclusion; what aims to be a "plot twist" has too many clues towards it and is not as surprising as an actual plot twist should be; and the ending is a worthy competitor for the worst ending in cinema history. While aiming for "shocking" - screenwriter Patrick Mahoney got nothing more than "annoying" and "painfully disappointing".The terrible ending, the lack of an actual twist, the anticlimactic conclusion, the disguised banal message - all make Nine Dead mediocre at best. The dying career of Melissa Joan Hart has gained nothing from this film, and her role in a Horror film only added her to others (like Christian Slater in Playback) who "come here to die". Some of the acting was great (Chip Bent as Sully and Lawrence Turner as Coogan), some was okay (James Victor as Eddie and Edrick Browne as Leon), and some was simply low level (blunt overacting by William Lee Scott as Jackson, complete lack of charisma by Marc Macaulay as Father Francis). The rest leave very little impression, for better or for worst.Is Nine Dead a bad film? No. It simply isn't good. Could have been okay with a less preposterous ending, and let's be honest - the endings count for a lot in Psycho-Thriller/Horror. I can't in good conscience recommend this film, unless you want to compare it to Saw V for sports.

Michael O'Keefe Christopher Shadley directs a pressure cooker full of suspense. Nine strangers wake up in a spacious room, handcuffed to a pole only a few feet apart. These people are arranged in a semi-circle and obviously don't know why. Their capture enters the room and advises them that they all have a connection to each other and until someone figures out how...one of them dies every 10 minutes. One prisoner is an older Asian woman(Lucille Soong)who speaks no English at all. Other captives include a DA's office lawyer(Melissa Joan Hart), a pedophile(Lawrence Turner), an insurance claims adjuster(James Victor), a strip club owner(Chip Bent), a priest(Marc Macaulay), a common their(Edrick Brown), a bartender(John Cates) and a police officer played by William Lee Scott.There are few characters you feel for and plenty you couldn't care less about. The prisoners strain to figure how they should know each other. Chaotic profanity and wild accusations just take up precious time. There is very little redeemable; story is pretty predictable and acting is either horrible or hilariously over-the-top. My message to Hart: did they pay you enough?

MattyGibbs 9 people are kidnapped and tied up and told that unless they discover why they are there one of them will be killed every 10 minutes. It's a reasonably familiar tale but it's fun watching them try and discover why they are there. The film features the usual eclectic mix, drug dealer, cops, priest etc. These type of films rely heavily on having interesting characters to watch and although there are plenty of clichés on show, I found the characters pretty entertaining. There isn't any SAW like gore in this film and most of the violence is off screen. I was a bit surprised to see Melissa Joan Hart from Sabrina the Teenage Witch fame in this and she is pretty good in this. The rest of the cast also put in decent believable performances.As the captives piece together the puzzle and the numbers deplete it all winds down a bit to a slightly disappointing climax. The end scene being one of the most abrupt and unexplained I've ever seen. Overall I found this a fairly enjoyable if limited thriller and probably wouldn't rush to watch it again.

mrbobzima A "shooter" collects nine strangers that share a common life story thread. He locks those nine strangers in a room, handcuffed to a pole. The "shooter" advises the nine that their job, and thus their survival, is dependent upon their ability to discover the common thread that links all of them.The nine strangers run the gamut of society: thugs, a priest, a cop, a dork, a lawyer and older lady.My big issue with this movies is: none of these characters are interesting. As a viewer I cared less why they were in the room. The characters are card-board, cut-outs of people living with a deep secret. Wow! Refreshing. A revenge movie that holds people accountable for an indiscretion or two.As the shooter follows through on his promise to kill one of the nine every ten minutes the strangers and then as the bodies drop they get serious and the film turns into a SA (Sinner's Anonymous) meeting. There is too much pressure on the script to make the nine intriguing and build let alone maintain any suspense. The back stories are lame and faulty- motivational experiences that push the nine to their indiscretions for which they are now being held accountable.The only reason to keep watching at this point is to actually find out why, as the shooter asks, these nine people are in the room.I asked my self at the final credits: "Why Did I Watch?"