Lack of good storyline.

Excellent, a Must See

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Like the dude from Sweden wrote. I rented Cold Heart Canyon to watch with the GF. Thought it was going to be a movie that was a thriller with nudity. Nada on that. It failed at being a soft-core erotic movie or even D list thriller. All I can think is that the mind that made this movie was dazed and confused about what they wanted this movie to be. It was way obvious while watching this disjointed plot try to be interesting. It was so bad. There were no sexy parts. The plot was a joke. The lead star was not hot at all. I thought a rule when making thrillers was your main star should have sex appeal. Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct. Gina Gershon in Bound. Denise Richards in Wild Things. No sizzle only fizzle here. Not worth watching. Big pass on Cold Heart Canyon.

Cold Heart Canyon is an erotic thriller that's not very erotic or thrilling. Renting this one from Blockbuster I had expectations of a late night offering from Cinemax with steamy scenes. The sensual mood music from known composer Herman Beeftink could not save this one. His early music can be found on many late night Cinemax offerings that have simulated sex. I know this because I am a fan of well done erotic movies. The story itself was basic with a wife leaving her marriage after discovering her husbands infidelity. She moves to Laurel Canyon where she gets swept up in sexual situations. My problems with Cold Heart Canyon is the abuse recycled clips to stretch out the movie for no reason. There was not enough nudity in this one to be the erotic thriller is was most certainly was trying to be. It's hard to understand why Director and Writer Janine Gosselin would skimp on showing more skin. This story could not stand by itself as a thriller. The plot is too bland with no spice. I agree with reviewer Chas77 from Los Angeles who commented.....This isn't good enough for the worst Cinemax late night entry. There is a little nudity -- none by the South African hottie and, hilariously, none by lead Caldwell, which makes you wonder -- why bother making a pseudo-porn without the porn?Viewers can see this was made on video. To me the look of the movie was fine. cinematographer Blain Brown gave a worthy effort. Where the movie suffered was in direction and editing. Wonder if editor J.C. Beeftink is related to Herman Beeftink??? He had not other IMDb credits for editor. Guess we can cut him a break on this one.

Having seen the lead actor, Will Lupardus, in a superb short at a film festival in Boston ("Westsider"), I was looking forward to seeing this feature-length "erotic thriller" at my local Blockbuster, since I do not recall it being given a theatrical release (at least not here in a "small market" like Los Angeles).A director's talent or lack thereof, can be noticed immediately in this amateurish piece of digital video embarrassment. The film is about a woman (Aubrey Caldwell) leaving her cheating husband to "find herself" in some deserted location (supposedly the hip Laurel Canyon but it looks more like some hellish spot in Woodland Hills). Once there she meets a leering pool boy (whose point in the film is completely meaningless), and, more importantly to the plot, a kinky couple (Lupardus and sexy, South African girlfriend Lee Anne Davis).After a ménage à trois (implied but never shown) the much older (by at least 15-20 years) and not-so-good looking Aubrey makes a play for twenty-something Lupardus. Lupardus explains he is into her (why??) but she must respect his "special needs." None of this makes any sense. There is zero chemistry between the two leads. The actors look confused like they have no direction. The script does not help matters either as there is no dialog that explains the attraction.The end of the film (which I won't spoil because I'm sure you can't wait to check out this cinematic masterpiece), makes little sense as well. An effeminate male character from the beginning, who looks like he's reading lines off a cue card, makes another appearance which is supposed to explain things but only irritates. Maybe if the director bothered to shoot in more than two locations it might help. This isn't good enough for the worst Cinemax late night entry. There is a little nudity -- none by the South African hottie and, hilariously, none by lead Caldwell, which makes you wonder -- why bother making a pseudo-porn without the porn? For masochists only. Seriously. Don't judge Lupardus by this film. I've seen him in better work. Look out for "Westsider" which had a great script and a real director.

Oh dear lord, where to begin...Me and my girlfriend decided to watch this not in the expectations of a great movie, but perhaps as a mood enhancer, since it was rumored to contain some decent sex scenes.Boy were we wrong.I just had to rate this movie 1, it has absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever, The extremely thin plot was padded out with _alot_ of reused footage, hell they even reused stuff in the sex scenes themselves, which where sadly enough, as boring as the rest of the flick.I reckon the poor actors did their best with that they were given, at least their outstandingly wooden performances managed to hide some of the non-existent directing, but they still failed to produce any believability whatsoever.All in all, this movie is what happens when you let wannabe filmmakers lose on a set with second-rate porn actresses who are trying to make it big. Let this be a lesson to all of you aspiring movie makers out there: Friends don't let friends drink and drive editing machines.