That was an excellent one.

Excellent but underrated film

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

David Morley writes and directs this horror flick. Sara(Meghan Heffern)and Frank(Adam MacDonald)return home from a date night out; with the baby at grandma's, this night has the possibility of getting heatedly romantic. Nothing really alarming to notice telling that the nice secluded home has been invaded. Check phone messages, put some music on and mix a couple of drinks. Frank gets excited about his wife upstairs putting on her old cheerleader outfit.Things get pretty damn tense when the intruder(Shaun Benson), wearing a dull, but scary mask and protective clothing, commences to torture and maim. Some of the violence is disturbingly graphic. Assuming Sara is the lead character...she is clueless and has no common sense. Let's say "shock and awe" does that to a person. The intruder becomes a methodical and deliberate killer. He goes about his horrid business like a mundane chore.HOME SWEET HOME leaves questions to be answered; but earns an R rating with suspense and bloody violence.

First the movie looked good, nice lighting, camera movement, and no damn shaky camera. But that is all the good I can say. Acting was a little above amateur middle school, especially the lead female. Making cutesy faces to the camera is not acting. The other actors really had limited screen time made the least of it. The cat was the best actor. The plot was just stupid and transparent. Clichés are OK in a movie if done right but even the clichés were awful in this one. SPOILERS - Female standing over the man with a loaded gun while he has a long sword. A person would either run away or shoot again or go see if she can help someone else. The entire basement scene was overly stupid. Man is upstairs with no way to come down except for stairs. You have a gun. So keep the lock on the gun and go up, no run up the stairs. This movie was really a waste of time. It cam be summed up with the observation of stressing the female in a cheerleader outfit - pretty enticing covering but empty underneath. Just like the movie. To the director - keep your day job.

This movie was one of the worst I've ever seen. Absolutely no thought went into making it; my five month old daughter has told me better stories and she doesn't even know how to speak. I can't imagine anyone got paid to make this, or made any money off it, but if they did, they should give it to charity. Granted, they had no budget, and only four actors, but that's no excuse. Clerks was paid for on a credit card and was actually entertaining. The only movie worse than this one is Mr. Hush, but at least that was so bad it made me laugh. Why did he put vasoline in his hair??? Yes, I asked why the killer put vasoline in his hair. That tells you all you need to know about this miserable waste of time. THe only way this movie would have been better is if the killer pulled the director out from behind the camera and began flaying his skin off while singing Yankee Doodle Dandy.

Let me say first off that I did think the movie was A solid little home invasion thriller. However the direction style is extremely contrived. What you have here is a director that wants to show us just how good he can be but in truth the film looks and feels like someone rented Halloween and The Shining and basically said "Hey, I could do that." (I mean come on,that ominous shot of the front door before the couple arrive home is just so Kubrick that it comes off a little hacky) What's sad is that just minutes into the film you can tell that the writer and director are one in the same because if it wasn't then either a few of his brutally long and over indulgent shots or some of the inept dialogue would have been left on the floor(seriously how bad were those phone messages). The acting is on par with the budget, with some lines tasting like cardboard and others doing just enough to move us along at a grueling, not suspenseful, irregular pace. The slight twist at the end was OK but honestly, all the best things about this film have been done before and much better. Carpenter and his generation are sometimes accused of going too Hitchcock and if that's true then this film maker proves that when you make a copy of a copy ..it's never as bright as the copy.