It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

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

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Blistering performances.

A pretty decent and entertaining movie. The story is engaging and so are its characters, the acting is decent to excellent (I would agree with another reviewer that Large turns in the weakest performance, but it's still not too bad, and perhaps his lack of "emoting" might even be considered "in character" [1]), and its done well technically. I found it entertaining.One thing that seemed slightly odd, though, is that at the end of the movie it seemed as if it had intended to surprise its audience with a "plot twist". Really? I do not necessarily pride myself as someone who can figure out plot twists way in advance---I knew something fishy was going down in the Sixth Sense but did not know what it was, and I did not see the twist in the Usual Suspects coming. But this one? C'mon, pretty early on the movie essentially sticks the audience's nose in it, and throughout there are those "hints" being dropped that point like neon signs to the solution. It really felt more like the movie was letting the audience in on the truth without any of the characters knowing it, until the end---the way it was shot just made sense if the director assumed that up to that point (a large part of) the audience was essentially unaware of what was going on. Which it might have been, if it was asleep or running for popcorn when it was all laid out, didn't speak the language, or had never seen a movie before.But even though it seems that the director slightly underestimates a modern audience, it's still an okay movie, and it remains interesting in spite of knowing the "solution"---I am not a great fan of movies whose only interest is in a gimmicky plot twist or the whodunnit anyway.[1] I guess one could say that Meat Loaf won't in all likelihood be remembered for his performance in this movie, either---but hey, he may not be a great actor, true, but it was cool to see him on screen, and he did what he could, and two out of three ain't bad!

Hey, for a million bucks, you can't work miracles these days. Sure,this is a B-grade Se7en but it's not as bad as some reviewers have indicated. The plot's a bit convoluted but, in the end I think you get the idea. Madsen is as good as always and the semi-high-key treatment is quite moody. The was an overly obvious give away (when the 'new' cops takes off his shirt and his back is full of bullet holes) which really did lessen the impact of the final reveal. Nevertheless the plot was intriguing and, unlike a number of other reviewers, I'm of the view that it doesn't really need to sew up every single question in the viewer's mind to be effective. Sometimes, in films like this, a little mystery at the end is OK as it's still satisfying enough for closure.

Chasing Ghosts is a low budget throw back to film noir flicks - lots of dead bodies,tough good guys and really nasty bad guys, convoluted subplots and scenes that don't quite make sense. Despite being a bit more confusing than it has to be, I found it fun to watch and intriguing. One of the best parts of the movie is the star, Micheal Madsen. He reminds me of one of my favorite actors, Robert Mitchum. He's got the world-weary tough guy character down and is fun to watch. The rest of the acting ranges from acceptable to downright bad (co-star Corey Large just doesn't work at all in this).The comments on the board about this movie seem a bit harsh to me. Most of the noir flicks were more about feeling and images than the actual story. And many of them had plot twists and character types in common with other movies. True, some editing would help the pacing here (that seems to be the case with so many movies these days, are the editors on strike?)and the acting could have been better but hey it was a low budget flick. Overall it reminds me of so many film noir flicks. It does a lot right and is more fun than many big budget movies out there today.

I'm sure we have all seen long movies we have enjoyed, but this one appears to be a 30 minute movie with 80 minutes of filling, it just has long pointless scenes, that add nothing to nor the movie or the characters, they are just there and you have to watch them. It even has characters that add nothing what so ever to the plot, they just appear do their stuff, say their lines and yes, you have to watch it.I must admit after watching the first 100 minutes, the movie has an interesting twist, probably thats why i didn't give it a 1, but even the most twisted of twists could not save 100 minutes of nothing.It has some pieces of action but for some strange reason the director might have thought you could get excited and he nicely inserted them in the form of flashbacks he could interrupt every 30 seconds and fit in a few minutes of reaction shots.To finish this off i promise i was trying hard to think something nice to say about the movie but it happens to be so long and so slow, that when you get to an action scene or to an important part of the story you are so bored from what happened before that they go unappreciated.