Fantastic!

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

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

When I sat down to watch the 2008 movie "100 Feet" it was solely for two reasons. The first being that Famke Janssen was in it, and the second being that it is a horror movie, of course.I hadn't heard about the movie prior to finding it by random luck. I didn't even read the synopsis, I just saw that it was a horror movie and saw Famke Janssen on the DVD front cover, and that was all I needed.It turned out that "100 Feet" was actually a rather enjoyable movie. There was a good flow to the storyline, with little useless scenes to serve as filler. Everything here served a purpose and was straight to the point.They had some really impressive effects in the movie, and I must admit that it really helped lift up the movie quite well. Especially the scene with the mauling in the bedroom. That was actually some of the most impressive special effects I have seen in a long, long time."100 Feet" was driven by a good storyline, but equally so by a rather good performance by the cast. And while they had a rather small cast, there was a bit more resting on the shoulders of the those performing. And I will say that both Famke Janssen and Bobby Cannavale carried themselves and the movie quite well.This is definitely a horror movie that is well worth taking the time and effort to sit down and watch. And there are some jump scares here and there throughout the movie.

omg cant believe their budget... the actors are prretty good the camera guys are not bad the script is ssshit and its an overall mess. there's plenty of stuff to be watching on TV really. its a waste of time and expectations.the bizarre food guy is much more exciting ...or flossing or whatever.

Another movie that is not great, nor horrible - like most movies! The premise is sort of original, actually, but it is not executed perfectly I'm afraid. Because I wasn't. Afraid. During the movie. Now, I don't get scared easily, but this is not a very scary movie either. One thing stands out, and that's a fantastically brutal violent scene. Don't think I've seen something quite like it before, actually.Missus Famke does an alright job, it's always nice to see known actors in horror. Not that she couldn't have been played by some one else, though. The movie has a couple of things going for it, but you're sort of left with the impression that this could have been a lot better. It has potential that it doesn't use all that well. It starts pretty good, but then dips down, and never becomes great. But you could do worse.

One wedding ring to rule them all, one wedding ring to find them, one wedding ring to bring them all to my house and torture them with my demonic super-powers.Yes, it's a silly movie. It starts off well enough, but the stupidity curve rises exponentially, until the Great Ring of Power destroys the evil demon.The movie's message is basically this: if you lead a wicked life, you will be rewarded by God in the after-life by being given demonic super-powers. Furthermore, you won't be sent to Hell, but get to stay in your house where you can do as you please with anyone who enters it. Famke's ex isn't a ghost; he is a demon. For all practical purposes, his ex has all the powers of Satan in "The Exorcist" times 100. The inevitable conclusion: if you're evil and you die violently trying to kill your long-suffering wife, you get REWARDED in the after-life by having more super-human strength than all the Marvel Comics clowns combined. Your husband beats you? Get the f*** out of the marriage. Leave him. Famke plays one of those masochist wives who endure their husbands' violent behavior for eons until they finally decide to do something about it. I have very little pity for such women. Sure, she eventually made a move to divorce him – which set off the chain of events that got her incarcerated. Nevertheless, any sane and/or smart woman will leave her hubby if he so much as hits her once. This especially goes for women who have no children with the sadist in question. Famke had no reason whatsoever (aside from latent masochism) to stay with the corrupt cop so long, so why should we the audience pity her? Not me.What truly made the movie laughable was the astonishing decision to turn the loot over to a CATHOLIC PRIEST – after which he spontaneously offered her that whole silly confession shtick with her (after which he went back home, got some beers out of the fridge, and Googled "yacht prices"). Rather than give the money to the richest and most powerful sect in the world, it would have made more sense for her to hand it over to that juvenile delinquent kid, help set him straight. Instead, she gets him killed. 100F breaks all the unwritten ghost rules. There is a REASON why ghosts don't behave like Rocky or Rambo and beat the living daylights out of their enemies: because it's stupid and banal. Famke's dead husband is in effect PHYSICALLY present in the house, not as a mere windy apparition but simply as a transparent human; that's what it boils down to, and it's pretty tacky. So death means becoming invisible – yet capable of physical interaction? Again, I am reminded of the movie's idiotic implication that criminals and sadists get REWARDED for their misdeeds rather than punished.Almost as laughable is that nonsense about Famke's "Ghost Ejection Manual" or whatever the hell it's called, and its instructions to "get rid of all the possessions of the deceased". Just one question: what EXACTLY constitutes "personal belongings" in the ghost world? Is the fork Famke's husband used to eat with considered a "personal possession"? The toilet seat? After all, both of them used it, so she should be ridding the house of the toilet seat as well, right? Where the hell do you draw the line between personal possessions and not-personal possessions? Are the walls of the house his personal possessions too?Speaking of which; when she realizes that she still has their wedding ring, she stupidly throws it in the sink – knowing full well he controls EVERYTHING in the house, including the machinery. Why not just throw it out the window or give it to the kid? Predictably (and I mean extremely predictably), getting rid of all that money does not get rid of the ghost, which makes Famke look pretty stupid - yet again.The ghost eventually kills the kid (in an unsuitably over-sadistic scene), and the cops raid the house at almost the EXACT moment the ghost finishes killing him. Great (Hollywood) timing, huh? Apparently, aside from having immense supernatural powers, ghosts of dead criminals also possess hypnotic abilities and send orders telepathically to law-enforcement officers.I find it interesting that Famke was able to simply catch a bus, surrounded by all these people who must have seen her face in the news. And yet, some way or other, she manages to abscond into obscurity. How very dumb. The movie's idiocy is relentless and follows us all the way to the end-credits. One of the dumbest haunted-house flicks ever made.