one of my absolute favorites!

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

This was kind of re-watch, I saw this movies on TV years ago, I stay up watching, I didn't remember much from it, I know that fell sleep in some places. I saw this DVD in shop for 75p, so what the hell, So gave it another shot, I was hoping I would not fall a sleep, which very hard not too.As movie was far to mess, from annoying, unlikable people in the movie, you could not care less. I found this movie drag for to long, with nothing really happen in this movie for first hour! Then when things start to happen, they were kind of bland, the acting was very weak from most of the cast. I just found the whole movie really messy!2 out of 10

Six fools agree to live in one house for six months. They get a million dollars if they succeed. Does the desire for money overcome one's other obligations?Part of the proceedings occur in the Canadian winter, and the furnace breaks down.Are the crows and owls in the attic bad omens or just something one should expect (cold winter, relatively warm attic)?The packages from the outside tend to contain messages to the individuals. The six contestants always hope for food. During the film they get bricks (sad tale from the younger days of one of the women) and a letter notifying the death in the family of one of the contestants; the next package has champagne and a gun (gun violence in the past of one of the men).The 'bloody' hammer next to one of the women in bed one morning was a further shift.A visitor drops in who is an internet programmer. He's never heard of them. Not a good sign. Before leaving, the visitor steals a piece of Emma's underwear and hides it in Danny's room. Emma feels OK invading everyone else's space. Great stuff.Soon after the visitor leaves they find some of his gear near the drop site with blood on it.Emma keeps asserting his guilt; Danny hangs himself. Game over, according to the rules. They radio for help. No one responds.Rex cobbles together an internet connection. He cannot find any reference to their contest. Hence no subscribers. The company that planned the contest has a stub beta site with heavy encryption, or so it seems.Then they get to see the betting odds on each of their characters. As in many mysteries, it's 'follow the money.'----Scores----Cinematography: 7/10 Better than web-cam quality, but not always by much. Some of the exteriors were just fine. The split screens (multiple points of view) were sometimes interesting. The switches from narration filming (good, steady, well done) to the POV of the reality show camera people (so-so to poor web-cams) is a little jarring.Sound: 4/10 Bad microphone problems, but incidental sounds are much creepier than the oddly planned visuals.Acting: 5/10 Fine if you like twenty-somethings who still reside in the teen maturity range.Screenplay: 9/10 Initial objectives seem clear enough. The actual objectives take time to surface. It's an old theme (snuff films) updated to the Internet setting (online betting, current video).

"My Little Eye" first premiered around a decade ago. The internet had already become as common in average households as a refrigerator, reality shows had already broken into the public's notion, and the web- cam technology had already allowed to spice up chats with live moving image.This movie attempted to capitalize on all of these concepts in order to create an average-budget horror film, and in my opinion - has done a very good job.The movie started with the sweet nostalgic sound effect of a 56k modem connecting to the web, and the characters presenting themselves as they tried to explain why they would be good candidates for an online 24-7 reality show, much like Big Brother. Very nice artistic touch by screenwriter David Hilton.As the movie went on, we noticed some very interesting shooting angles and effects (including interesting 4-in-1s which resembled an online conference call, and night-vision shots) along with some original sound effects (sort of static noises like the ones coming from an ISDN cable instead of your usual heavy bass when something bad happens suddenly). Personally, I also loved the music used during the infamous sex scene (F*** the Pain Away by Peaches).The plot was original enough, but not brilliant... same goes for the "twist" and the ending. All in all the story wasn't more than OK, and the level of "horror" wasn't high enough to actually scare me, unfortunately. I did however like the characters very much, and would've loved to watch the original four hour version. Also, not much blood and gore, which is always a plus on my book!I recommend to every Horror fan who'd like to see some artistically surprising effects, and to anyone who's a fan of reality shows. This is not, however, a sufficiently frightening movie.

You spend 6 months in the house and you get $1,000,000. Sounds like another dull season of big brother is gracing our screens once more, but no, it appears somebody has turned one into a horror film.Now, you'd hope whoever wrote this would be original. Adding interesting twists, a solid script and a great cast. Instead they opted for a different route, a route that would encounter a script that sounds like its been written by a retard, taking a film idea with quite a lot of potential and writing it into a sloppy lazy 'snuff film' with twists that can be seen at least 30 minutes before they happen and acted by a rabble of nobodies with the collective talent of a chimp who has been taught to smoke.Now stretch this over 95 laborious painful minutes and you have this festering abortion of a film.I plead with you not to watch this film.