Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

Twilightfa Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

ActuallyGlimmer The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

rah122 This movie is exactly what you expect- a young girl alone on an island and creepy things happen as she has to survive for a few days to prove that she has what it takes to be a camp counselor. But, saying that, it is not a bad effort. I have seen hundreds of thriller/horror movies in my time and this is not as bad as others would tell you. Yes, some of it has been recycled and yes, there isn't much new or original here but there was something about the lead character, Gillian that I liked and I was appalled at some people commenting on her body size. What does that have to do with anything? It is a decent effort. It won't scare the life out of you, but there are some good twists and turns that you might be able to see coming. I am not going to give anything away, but I would give it a chance.It is worth a look.http://jigsawslair.blogspot.ie/

mskeidee This movie is way better than the one I previously reviewed, it at least knows how to execute the jumpy scenes fairly and will, at some point give you a slight thrill.The story plot may appear a bit common for people who loves the genre but most may agree that such stories doesn't easily get old specially if the direction is "at least" good. The music and camera shots are okay. (not super great but okay)The actors are also able to give justice to their characters and was able to give the convincing feel that they are actually involved in the scenes. In short, the movie is good enough for me to not give it a super flopping score. So if you can't think of something else better to do, I definitely recommend this movie to keep you busy.

ted-peterson Spoiler AlertThe music by composer Todor Kobakov is probably the best part of this movie and for budget fare, is quite good. The main actress (character is more apt because there is little acting here.) Nancy Clark is a teen possessed by demons of her dead sister. Oh my. Instead of therapy, let's go to a creepy camp as a counselor and willingly accept isolation on an island with a ghost? The movie is highly derivative but how can one not be in this genre? The acting is minimal and every actor accents the creepiness factor with little result. The camp director is more creepy than the exiled counselor/murderer. Richard Clarkin as "Fred" so overacts and mugs his scenes that it's almost comic. Maybe that's how he prepared for his wooden performance. He gets bonked on the head and dies where everyone else who gets bonked survives somehow. Oh Boy. The credits list a therapist (This person never appears in the movie.) and I have a feeling that the therapist was there for the actors coming to grips with minimal direction and guilt from mugging. Supposedly this Gillian (Clark) is forced, as some kind of camp hazing, to spend the night alone on an island. She's rarely alone on this island and the predictable players appear right on cue. She's damaged goods having been the cause of her sisters demise some years earlier in a pool drowning. But even with cutaway scenes, this part of the plot goes nowhere. Either does this movie. Productions values are high but I would find a better writer. Isaac Cravit creates some decent shots and there are some interesting camera angles but the writing, UGH! It's horrible and none of the elements presented in the exposition are worked out. Instead, we get new one as if we will be surprised. This is a major flaw and I mean major. When scenes are supposed to be suspenseful, you find your self thinking WTF? That could have been handled a lot better. I don't think a suspense movie is supposed to create the suspense for the next missed story or cinematic idea, We all know these movies are based on supposedly smart people doing stupid things and this movie is no exception. But here we have a stupid writer/director who got lost in his own brilliance or lack thereof. Also, his timing is off. some scenes end and but the shot continues. Others never find an overall rhythm . The editor, Adam Locke-Norton must have been pulling his hair out and arguing constantly to shorten some of the takes. Alas, he lost the arguments.

bob-larrance Let's face it, there are many terrible movies 'out there'. I have noticed over the last few years that one thing the contemporary terrible movies have in common is really poor production, in particular camera work. Oh, yes, the acting is bad, the stories are frequently undeveloped, the thrill is...gone, or maybe more like it was never there for the films I am referring to HOWEVER Solo is in a different class. I think the filming is very, very good! Other than Ms. Clark the acting doesn't even make it to average-bad, the plot is a poorly developed cliché, the casting clearly found some of the worst actors active and the ending is a relief but the camera work is great. It could well be worth one's time to invest 15 to 20 minutes, skip around from scene to scene, and take in the work of Stephen Chung. I hope he hooks up with a better film next time.