Best movie ever!

A very feeble attempt at affirmatie action

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

There are films and then there is cinema. This is cinema (still, I will call it a film herein).EFFECTS AND FRIGHTS: Where budget is lacking for effects, the filmmakers here use an extreme amount of tension, creepiness, and visual effects, including various cameras tricks, angles, lighting, and stroboscopic effects guaranteed to trigger an epileptic fit (I'm not kidding). There are several jump moments that scared me. SPOILERS: Not to mention a gritty though not gruesome hammer murder, and a bloody butcher-knife scene. Topping it off is the emotional ending that has you desiring one more moment.ACTION: Some have commented that nothing happens in this film - this is 100% incorrect . SPOILERS: There is a broken romance; a seriously broken friendship with consequences; a drug habit that leads to seeing things, including ghosts which lead our anti-hero to murder. Much of what could be described as meandering is setting the timing for tripping and the possibility of a true haunting. It's a mystery too, you see. Personally, I think the film is tight at 90 minutes, and the lack of family life exposition actually makes you think more about how secure Daniel really is, though of course at the very end you probably won't think so.PLOT: Daniel see ghosts. He takes pills. Is it connected? Is he seeing into another world? Why does he take pills? Apparently he has for some time but now it's increased due to his depression over his broken romance. Why is the romance broken? It could be any number of things, direct or indirect. The real question: is Daniel a good person or not? You'll have to make up your own mind.NEGATIVES: (1) The setting is dreary, and while this has its charm, it also gives it that cheap 1970's feel, which is not altogether bad. (2) The dialogue tends to mumbling, and only Jeff has any real speaking parts, mainly aggressive, but there is another side to Jeff, and that speaks to the decent writing here.

A pill addict (Lane Hughes) confronts ghosts in this artsy, independent film directed by Adam Wingard. Not unlike other Halo Eight releases (such as "Devil's Muse"), this will cater to the more cultured horror fan, not necessarily the splatter-gore fan. Those who need constant, fast-paced stimulation will be bored and likely quickly become distracted. This is not just entertainment, but art put to celluloid.Instead of giving a review -- really, what sums up this film is its beautiful vision and presentation, rather than a focus on the plot -- I wanted to clarify another review I read that says "Pop Skull" is for the viewer who "can remember your first heartache". Despite all the great things one can say about "Pop Skull", this review went over the top and needs a sense of grounding.Hughes is compared to Jack Nicholson in "Five Easy Pieces" and Marlon Brando in "Last Tango in Paris". That's some heavy praise. I would hold off on judging Mr. Hughes until his next role, though I concur that he was the man for the job here. The film itself is compared to "Easy Rider", another Nicholson film. Again, this may be a stretch. "Easy Rider" is today a classic... "Pop Skull" is unlikely to achieve this level, and I'd be interested in hearing the reviewer's opinion after a second viewing in a few years.The reviewer asks, rightly, "since when does conventional film-making imply superiority to something attempting to try something else?" This is a crucial question, both for this film and film in general. The formulaic structure of most movies and their film quality is accepted as the standard, but independent films need love, too, and often times the new concepts trump the tested methods. The reviewer craps on such so-called independent films as "Garden State" ("vapid") and "Saw" ("stupid"), which is unfair, in my opinion. These are both fine films, I think, just simply different from "Pop Skull". To dump on bigger budget indie films is just as discriminating as dumping on low budget indie films.That is all I have to say. If you like the artsy films and have come to like what you see from Halo Eight, get this one. Buy it. Support indie film.

"Pop Skull" should be an interesting film on many levels as it tells the story of alienation,depression and loneliness due to emotional breakdown.Daniel loses the one girl that he can't live without.She broke up with him to date an actor named Victor.His perception of reality is completely shattered as he trips on whatever he can get his hands on: over the counter drugs,prescriptions,tiny white pills,oblong pink ones.This results in the series of hallucinogenic nightmares...The main problem I have with "Pop Skull" is that it's pretty damn boring.The soundtrack is excellent,the acting is decent and the film leaves many questions unanswered.Admittedly the use of light and shadow is exceptional and there are some great filming techniques used,but the action is slow and lifeless.Just like a drug trip.I enjoyed Andrey Iskanov's similarly experimental "Visions of Suffering" more.5 out of 10.

Believe me, I saw lots of horror movies. But not even one compares to that waste of time that "Pop Skull" is. You thought "Haunted boat" or "Seven mummies" or "Chain reaction" are bad? Wait until you see this and bore yourself to death. Literally, with every passing minute of this movie you feel you life being sucked from you and you want to scream and scream again! I saw this at the cinema and half of the people just escaped from the theater after the first half, where nothing happened. Nothing happened in the second half either... And they call that horror, when there isn't a single scary moment in the whole movie!